DOCSLIB.ORG

NE Small Fruit Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NE Small Fruit Guide New England SMALL FRUIT PEST MANAGEMENT Guide MANAGING DISEASES, INSECTS AND WEEDS IN SMALL FRUIT CROPS 2010-2011 New England Vegetable & Berry Growers Association University of Connecticut University of Maine University of Massachusetts University of New Hampshire University of Rhode Island University of Vermont United States Department of Agriculture cooperating NEW ENGLAND SMALL FRUIT PEST MANAGEMENT GUIDE 2010-2011 Published in partnership with the New England Vegetable & Berry Growers Association EDITOR Sonia Schloemann, UMass Amherst REVIEWERS: Richard Bonanno - UMass Amherst Frank Caruso - UMass Amherst Lorraine Los - University of Connecticut David Handley - University of Maine Ann Hazelrigg - University of Vermont Becky Grube - University of New Hampshire Alan Eaton - University of New Hampshire Cheryl Smith - University of New Hampshsire George Hamilton - University of New Hampshire Heather Faubert - University of Rhode Island New England Extension Deans and Directors Nancy Bull, Associate Director Nancy Fey-Yensan, Interim Dean & Director UConn Cooperative Extension URI Cooperative Extension Service University of Connecticut University of Rhode Island Storrs, CT 06269 Kingston, RI 02881 John E. Pike, Dean & Director Nancy Garrabrants, Director UNH Cooperative Extension UMass Extension University of New Hampshire University of Massachusetts Durham, NH 03824 Amherst, MA 01003 John Rebar, Director Douglas Lantagne, Dean & Director Cooperative Extension UVM Extension System University of Maine University of Vermont Orono, ME 04469 Burlington VT 05405 The Cooperative Extension Service, these universities, and the United States Department of Agriculture offer education and employment without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, or handicap. Issued in furtherance of Coopera- tive Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the USDA. Contents GENERAL INFORMATION .................................................................................................................... 1 Soil Fertility Management ......................................................................................................................... 1 Plant Nutrients— major and minor ............................................................................................................ 3 Soil Organic Matter .................................................................................................................................. 6 Cover Crops and Green Manures .............................................................................................................. 7 Guidelines for Organic Fertilization ............................................................................................................ 9 Organic Certification .............................................................................................................................. 10 About Pest Management ........................................................................................................................ 10 Integrated Pest Management (IPM) ........................................................................................................ 12 BioRATIONAL PESTICIDES ..................................................................................................................... 15 BIOLOGICAL CONTROLS ........................................................................................................................ 16 Pesticide Safety and Use ........................................................................................................................ 18 Owners/Crop Advisors/Commercial Handlers ........................................................................................... 22 Water ................................................................................................................................................... 22 Fumigation: Materials and Risks ............................................................................................................. 27 Weed Management General Notice ......................................................................................................... 27 STRAWBERRIES ................................................................................................................................. 30 General Information .............................................................................................................................. 30 Diseases ............................................................................................................................................... 31 Insects ................................................................................................................................................. 36 Table 22. Strawberry Pest Management Schedule ............................................................................ 43 Weeds .................................................................................................................................................. 49 Table 23. Weed Management in Strawberries ................................................................................. 50 HIGHBUSH BLUEBERRIES ................................................................................................................. 60 General Information .............................................................................................................................. 60 Diseases ............................................................................................................................................... 61 Insects ................................................................................................................................................. 67 Vertebrate Pests .................................................................................................................................... 70 Table 33. Highbush Blueberry Pest Management Schedule. ............................................................... 72 Weeds .................................................................................................................................................. 75 Table 34. Weed Management for Highbush Blueberries . .................................................................. 76 BRAMBLES ......................................................................................................................................... 75 General Information .............................................................................................................................. 75 Diseases ............................................................................................................................................... 75 Viruses ................................................................................................................................................. 80 Insects ................................................................................................................................................. 80 Table 40. Summer Bearing Bramble Pest Management Schedule. ...................................................... 83 Table 41. Fall Bearing (primocane fruiting) Bramble Pest Management Schedule. ................................. 86 Weeds .................................................................................................................................................. 87 Table 42. Weed Management in Brambles. ........................................................................................ 88 CURRANTS AND GOOSEBERRIES .................................................................................................... 91 General Information .............................................................................................................................. 91 Diseases ............................................................................................................................................... 92 Insects ................................................................................................................................................. 93 Table 43. Currant and Gooseberry Pest Management Schedule. ........................................................ 94 Weeds .................................................................................................................................................. 96 Table 44. Weed Management in Currants and Gooseberries . ............................................................ 96 GRAPES .............................................................................................................................................. 97 General Information ............................................................................................................................. 97 Diseases .............................................................................................................................................. 97 Insects ...............................................................................................................................................100 Table 51. Grape Pest Management Schedule ..................................................................................105 Weeds ................................................................................................................................................111
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Safe Movement of Small Fruit Germplasm
    FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION INTERNATIONAL PLANT OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENETIC RESOURCES INSTITUTE FAO/IPGRI TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE SAFE MOVEMENT OF SMALL FRUIT GERMPLASM Edited by M. Diekmann, E.A. Frison and T. Putter In collaboration with the Small Fruit Virus Working Group of the International Society for Horticultural Science 2 CONTENTS Introduction 4 2.Strawberrygreenpetal 31 3. Witches-broom and multiplier Contributors 6 disease 33 Prokaryoticdiseases-bacteria 35 General Recommendations 8 1.Strawberryangular leaf spot 35 2.Strawberrybacterialwilt 36 Technical Recommendations 8 3. Marginal chlorosis of strawberry 37 A. Pollen 8 Fungal diseases 38 B. Seed 9 1. Alternaria leaf spot 38 C. In vitro material 9 2 Anthracnose 39 D. Vegetative propagules 9 3. Fusarium wilt 40 E. Disease indexing 10 4.Phytophthoracrownrot 41 F. Therapy 11 5.Strawberry black root rot 42 6. Strawberry red stele (red core) 43 Descriptions of Pests 13 7. Verticillium wilt 44 Fragaria spp. (strawberry) 13 Ribesspp.(currant,gooseberry) 45 Viruses 13 Viruses 45 1. Ilarviruses 13 1.Alfalfamosaicvirus(AMV) 45 2. Nepoviruses 14 2. Cucumber mosaic virus (CMV) 46 3. Pallidosis 15 3. Gooseberry vein banding virus 4. Strawberry crinkle virus (SCrV) 17 (GVBV) 48 5. Strawberry latent C virus (SLCV) 18 4. Nepoviruses 50 6.Strawberry mildyellow-edge 19 5.Tobacco rattlevirus(TRV) 51 7. Strawberry mottle virus (SMoV) 21 Diseasesofunknownetiology 53 8. Strawberry pseudo mild 1. Black currant yellows 53 yellow-edgevirus(SPMYEV) 22 2. Reversion of red and black currant 54 9. Strawberry vein banding 3.Wildfireof blackcurrant 56 virus (SVBV) 23 4.Yellow leaf spotofcurrant 57 Diseasesofunknownetiology 25 Prokaryotic disease 58 1.
    [Show full text]
  • BÖĞÜRTLEN PASI Kuehneola Uredinis (Link) Arth.’ E KARŞI KLASİK VE ORGANİK İLAÇLAMA PROGRAMLARININ ETKİNLİĞİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR
    BÖĞÜRTLEN PASI Kuehneola uredinis (Link) Arth.’ E KARŞI KLASİK VE ORGANİK İLAÇLAMA PROGRAMLARININ ETKİNLİĞİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR Ayşegül KARSLI T.C. ULUDAĞ ÜNİVERSİTESİ FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ BÖĞÜRTLEN PASI Kuehneola uredinis (Link) Arth.’ E KARŞI KLASİK VE ORGANİK İLAÇLAMA PROGRAMLARININ ETKİNLİĞİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR Ayşegül KARSLI Doç. Dr. Himmet TEZCAN (Danışman) YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ BİTKİ KORUMA ANABİLİMDALI Bursa – 2016 Her Hakkı Saklıdır Bilimsel Etik Bildirim Sayfası U.Ü. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, tez yazım kurallarına uygun olarak hazırladığım bu tez çalışmasında; - tez içindeki bütün bilgi ve belgeleri akademik kurallar çerçevesinde elde ettiğimi, - görsel, işitsel ve yazılı tüm bilgi ve sonuçları bilimsel ahlak kurallarına uygun olarak sunduğumu, - başkalarının eserlerinden yararlanılması durumunda ilgili eserlere bilimsel normlara uygun olarak atıfta bulunduğumu, - atıfta bulunduğum eserlerin tümünü kaynak olarak gösterdiğimi, - kullanılan verilerde herhangi bir tahrifat yapmadığımı, - ve bu tezin herhangi bir bölümünü bu üniversite veya başka bir üniversitede başka bir tez çalışması olarak sunmadığımı beyan ederim. ..../..../2016 İmza Ayşegül KARSLI 4 ÖZET Yüksek Lisans Tezi BÖĞÜRTLEN PASI Kuehneola uredinis (Link) Arth.’ E KARŞI KLASİK VE ORGANİK İLAÇLAMA PROGRAMLARININ ETKİNLİĞİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR Ayşegül KARSLI Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Bitki Koruma Anabilim Dalı Danışman: Doç. Dr. Himmet TEZCAN İnsan sağlığı üzerine olumlu etkileri olduğunu ortaya koyan çalışmalar ve ayrıca taşıdığı tat ve aroması nedeniyle son yıllarda hem sofralık olarak tüketim hem de gıda sanayi alanında Böğürtlen (Rubus fruticocus L.) meyvesine olan talep artmaktadır. Ülkemizde de ürüne artan taleple birlikte böğürtlen üretimine eğilimin arttığı görülmektedir. Ülkemizde böğürtlenin yaklaşık % 84’ü Bursa ilinde üretilmektedir. Böğürtlen üretiminde fungal hastalıklar verimi etkileyen en önemli faktör olmakla birlikte ülkemizde bu hastalıkların mücadelesinde ruhsatlı bir fungisit bulunmamaktadır.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes, Outline and Divergence Times of Basidiomycota
    Fungal Diversity (2019) 99:105–367 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-019-00435-4 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,- volV) Notes, outline and divergence times of Basidiomycota 1,2,3 1,4 3 5 5 Mao-Qiang He • Rui-Lin Zhao • Kevin D. Hyde • Dominik Begerow • Martin Kemler • 6 7 8,9 10 11 Andrey Yurkov • Eric H. C. McKenzie • Olivier Raspe´ • Makoto Kakishima • Santiago Sa´nchez-Ramı´rez • 12 13 14 15 16 Else C. Vellinga • Roy Halling • Viktor Papp • Ivan V. Zmitrovich • Bart Buyck • 8,9 3 17 18 1 Damien Ertz • Nalin N. Wijayawardene • Bao-Kai Cui • Nathan Schoutteten • Xin-Zhan Liu • 19 1 1,3 1 1 1 Tai-Hui Li • Yi-Jian Yao • Xin-Yu Zhu • An-Qi Liu • Guo-Jie Li • Ming-Zhe Zhang • 1 1 20 21,22 23 Zhi-Lin Ling • Bin Cao • Vladimı´r Antonı´n • Teun Boekhout • Bianca Denise Barbosa da Silva • 18 24 25 26 27 Eske De Crop • Cony Decock • Ba´lint Dima • Arun Kumar Dutta • Jack W. Fell • 28 29 30 31 Jo´ zsef Geml • Masoomeh Ghobad-Nejhad • Admir J. Giachini • Tatiana B. Gibertoni • 32 33,34 17 35 Sergio P. Gorjo´ n • Danny Haelewaters • Shuang-Hui He • Brendan P. Hodkinson • 36 37 38 39 40,41 Egon Horak • Tamotsu Hoshino • Alfredo Justo • Young Woon Lim • Nelson Menolli Jr. • 42 43,44 45 46 47 Armin Mesˇic´ • Jean-Marc Moncalvo • Gregory M. Mueller • La´szlo´ G. Nagy • R. Henrik Nilsson • 48 48 49 2 Machiel Noordeloos • Jorinde Nuytinck • Takamichi Orihara • Cheewangkoon Ratchadawan • 50,51 52 53 Mario Rajchenberg • Alexandre G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parasite: Orange Rust Light Microscopy Observations
    LEARN BY DOING: MICROSCOPIC STUDIES OF A PLANT PARASITE, ORANGE RUST, GYMNOCONIA SP. (PHRAGMIDIACEAE) Marcello A. Monterrosa and Camelia Maier Department of Biology Abstract The Host: Mock Strawberry Results Microscopy is an exciting, hands-on, active learning resource for students that can inspire a lifelong interest in science. As part of the Quality Mock Strawberry (Duchesnea indica, Fig. 2) of the Rose family Enhancement Plan entitled ‘Pioneering Pathways: Learn by Doing’ at our (Rosaceae) is an introduced perennial plant consisting of trifoliate basal SEM Observations University, an ecology class project was developed for use of different forms leaves with long petioles that develop from a crown of roots. The of microscopy to study the ecological relationships between Mock petioles have appressed white hairs. Each blunt-tipped leaflet is strawberry and its parasite. Orange rust is a common disease of both wild broadly ovate or obovate, spanning about 1½" in length and 1" across. A B C D and cultivated Rosaceae. Samples of Mock strawberry leaves infected with The middle leaflet is wedge-shaped at the base. The margins of these the fungus were observed using light and electron microscopes. Microscopy leaflets are coarsely crenate-serrate, and they have conspicuous analyses revealed the presence of spores with spiky surfaces in leaf lesions. pinnate venation. The upper leaflet surfaces are medium to dark green This project helped me 1) develop scanning electron microscopy skill and 2) and hairless. Occasionally, light green to reddish purple stolons develop understand the adaptations of Orange rust for dissemination and the from the crown that are long and slender.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterising Plant Pathogen Communities and Their Environmental Drivers at a National Scale
    Lincoln University Digital Thesis Copyright Statement The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). This thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: you will use the copy only for the purposes of research or private study you will recognise the author's right to be identified as the author of the thesis and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate you will obtain the author's permission before publishing any material from the thesis. Characterising plant pathogen communities and their environmental drivers at a national scale A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Lincoln University by Andreas Makiola Lincoln University, New Zealand 2019 General abstract Plant pathogens play a critical role for global food security, conservation of natural ecosystems and future resilience and sustainability of ecosystem services in general. Thus, it is crucial to understand the large-scale processes that shape plant pathogen communities. The recent drop in DNA sequencing costs offers, for the first time, the opportunity to study multiple plant pathogens simultaneously in their naturally occurring environment effectively at large scale. In this thesis, my aims were (1) to employ next-generation sequencing (NGS) based metabarcoding for the detection and identification of plant pathogens at the ecosystem scale in New Zealand, (2) to characterise plant pathogen communities, and (3) to determine the environmental drivers of these communities. First, I investigated the suitability of NGS for the detection, identification and quantification of plant pathogens using rust fungi as a model system.
    [Show full text]
  • Crop Profile for Brambles in Tennessee
    Crop Profile for Brambles in Tennessee Prepared: August, 2006 General Production Information ● Tennessee is not ranked in U.S. bramble production. ● Currently, Tennessee only produces a minor amount of brambles and produces less than one percent of total U.S. product. ● The total bramble acreage grown in Tennessee consists of: ❍ Blackberries: 250 acres ❍ Raspberries: 50 acres ● Value of brambles to Tennessee’s economy during 2005 was: ❍ Blackberries: $1.5 million ❍ Raspberries: $250,000 ● Bramble production within Tennessee is scattered across the state. Raspberries and Blackberries both belong to the genus Rubus of the family Rosaceae. There are several species of both. Raspberries can be distinguished from blackberries because the fruit of the raspberry can be readily removed from the receptacle when ripe (the white, cone-shaped base of the fruit bearing stem). The fruit of the blackberry is not easily removed. Most species of raspberries are edible, although a few are nearly inedible because they are dry and insipid (have little flavor). Commercial raspberries belong to two species; red raspberries and black raspberries. Black raspberries should not be confused with blackberries, a different group of species. Commercially produced blackberries may be thorned or thornless types. Thorned blackberry varieties generally yield from 10,000 to 11,000 lbs per acre with thorneless types yielding from 8,000 to 10,000 lbs per acre. Shawnee is a thorned type which is super sensitive to rosette disease. Apache, Navahoe, Triple Crown and Black Satin are thornless types. Navahoe is sensitive to orange rust, where Black Satin is resistant to anthracnose. Generally, raspberries grown in Tennessee yield from 4,000 to 5,000 lbs per acre.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 National Plant Biosecurity Status Report
    The National Plant Biosecurity Status Report 2017 © Plant Health Australia 2018 Disclaimer: This publication is published by Plant Health Australia for information purposes only. Information in the document is drawn from a variety of sources outside Plant Health This work is copyright. Apart from any use as Australia. Although reasonable care was taken in its preparation, Plant Health Australia does permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part not warrant the accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency of the information, or its may be reproduced by any process without prior usefulness in achieving any purpose. permission from Plant Health Australia. Given that there are continuous changes in trade patterns, pest distributions, control measures Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights and agricultural practices, this report can only provide a snapshot in time. Therefore, all should be addressed to: information contained in this report has been collected for the 12 month period from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2017, and should be validated and confirmed with the relevant Communications Manager organisations/authorities before being used. A list of contact details (including websites) is Plant Health Australia provided in the Appendices. 1/1 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Plant Health Australia will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred in or arising by reason of any person relying on the ISSN 1838-8116 information in this publication. Readers should make and rely on their own assessment and An electronic version of this report is available for enquiries to verify the accuracy of the information provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report: 07-IG-11272177-051
    Final report: 07-IG-11272177-051 Preliminary exploration for natural enemies of Rubus ellipticus in China By Jianqing Ding, Kai Wu & Jialiang Zhang Invasion Biology and Biocontrol Lab Wuhan Botanical Institute Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, Hubei Province, 430074 China Email: [email protected] In collaboration with Tracy Johnson Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station P.O. Box 236, Volcano, Hawaii 96785 Ph: 808-967-7122 Fax: 808-967-7158 E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The Yellow Himalayan Raspberry, Rubus ellipticus, is an invasive plant in Hawaii. As chemical, physical and manual controls are expensive and difficult to implement against this plant, biological control is being considered. The collaboration between China and the U.S. for finding potential biological control agents in the native range of R. ellipticus was recently reinitiated in 2006. Here, we report 60 arthropod species in 30 families that were directly collected on Rubus ellipticus in field surveys in 2006-2008. We also provide a review of the potential agents, including 49 species of arthropods in 16 families and 65 species of fungi in 3 phyla and 19 families, from literature or online data. Among these species, the warty beetles Chlamisus setosus (Bowditch) and Chlamisus spp., the flea beetles Chaetoenema, an unidentified stem borer, the leaf-rolling moth Epinotia spp. and an unidentified sawfly were the most promising potential agents. Preliminary lab tests indicated that the warty beetles Chlamisus spp., the flea beetles Chaetoenema, may have narrow host range. We recommend further screening of these organisms to investigate their impacts on the target plant, host specificity, and the risk of undesired effects in Hawaiian ecosystems.
    [Show full text]
  • Raspberryprofile-2007 1
    Crop Profile for Raspberries in New England 2007 Compiled for the New England Pest Management Network by Sonia Schloemann University of Massachusetts Address: 22 West Experiment Station/UMass Amherst, MA 01003 Telephone: (413) 545-4347 Email: [email protected] Compiled: January 2008. Note: This profile is a comprehensive list of pests that may be encountered by New England raspberry growers, and the approved pesticides that may be used to control them. Only a few pests actually require treatment on an individual farm in a single year. For each pest all of the available effective options are listed. If treatment is needed, only one of those options would be used per application. Some pests require multiple applications for control, others only require a single application. 1 The Crop Profile/PMSP database, including this document, is supported by USDA NIFA. Table of Contents Introduction I. Basic Commodity Information ..........................................................................4 Production statistics Cultural practices Worker Activities II. Insect and Mite Pests ........................................................................................10 Group A - identified by survey as most important Japanese Beetle (Popillia japonica) Tarnished Plant Bug (Lygus lineolaris) Raspberry/Red Necked Cane Borer (Oberea bimaculata and Agrilus ruficollis) Potato Leaf hopper (Empoasca fabae) Group B - identified by survey as significant problems in some years Yellow Jackets (Paravespula spp., Vespa spp.,and Vespula spp.) Raspberry Crown Borer (Pennisetia marginata) Raspberry Fruit Worm (Byturus unicolor) Group C - identified by survey as infrequent problems Two-spotted Spider Mite (Tetranychus urticae) Raspberry Aphids (Amphorophora agathonica, A. sensoriata and Aphis rubicola) Strawberry Sap Beetle/Picnic Beetle (Stelidota geminata and Glischrochilus spp.) Strawberry Bud Weevil (Anthonomus signatus) III.
    [Show full text]
  • An Inventory of Fungal Diversity in Ohio Research Thesis Presented In
    An Inventory of Fungal Diversity in Ohio Research Thesis Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with research distinction in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University by Django Grootmyers The Ohio State University April 2021 1 ABSTRACT Fungi are a large and diverse group of eukaryotic organisms that play important roles in nutrient cycling in ecosystems worldwide. Fungi are poorly documented compared to plants in Ohio despite 197 years of collecting activity, and an attempt to compile all the species of fungi known from Ohio has not been completed since 1894. This paper compiles the species of fungi currently known from Ohio based on vouchered fungal collections available in digitized form at the Mycology Collections Portal (MyCoPortal) and other online collections databases and new collections by the author. All groups of fungi are treated, including lichens and microfungi. 69,795 total records of Ohio fungi were processed, resulting in a list of 4,865 total species-level taxa. 250 of these taxa are newly reported from Ohio in this work. 229 of the taxa known from Ohio are species that were originally described from Ohio. A number of potentially novel fungal species were discovered over the course of this study and will be described in future publications. The insights gained from this work will be useful in facilitating future research on Ohio fungi, developing more comprehensive and modern guides to Ohio fungi, and beginning to investigate the possibility of fungal conservation in Ohio. INTRODUCTION Fungi are a large and very diverse group of organisms that play a variety of vital roles in natural and agricultural ecosystems: as decomposers (Lindahl, Taylor and Finlay 2002), mycorrhizal partners of plant species (Van Der Heijden et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Raspberry and Blackberry Production Guide
    Fair Use of this PDF file of Raspberry and Blackberry Production Guide for the Northeast, Midwest, and Eastern Canada, NRAES-35 Lori Bushway, Marvin Pritts, and David Handley, technical editors Published by NRAES, May 2008 This PDF file is for viewing only. If a paper copy is needed, we encourage you to purchase a copy as described below. Be aware that practices, recommendations, and economic data may have changed since this book was published. Text can be copied. The book, authors, and NRAES should be acknowledged. Here is a sample acknowledgement: ---- From Raspberry and Blackberry Production Guide for the Northeast, Midwest, and Eastern Canada, NRAES-35, Lori Bushway, Marvin Pritts, and David Handley, technical editors, and published by NRAES (2008).---- No use of the PDF should diminish the marketability of the printed version. This PDF should not be used to make copies of the book for sale or distribution. If you have questions about fair use of this PDF, contact NRAES. Purchasing the Book You can purchase printed copies on NRAES’ secure web site, www.nraes.org, or by calling (607) 255-7654. Quantity discounts are available. NRAES PO Box 4557 Ithaca, NY 14852-4557 Phone: (607) 255-7654 Fax: (607) 254-8770 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nraes.org More information on NRAES is included at the end of this PDF. NRAES is sponsored by these Land Grant Universities University of Connecticut University of Delaware University of the District of Columbia University of Maine University of Maryland University of New Hampshire Rutgers University Cornell University University of Vermont Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University West Virginia University For more information about NRAES, see the inside back cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Molecular and Phenotypic Tools to Characterize Flesh Texture
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2015 Applying Molecular and Phenotypic Tools to Characterize Flesh Texture and Acidity Traits in the Arkansas Peach Breeding Program and Understanding the Crispy Texture in the Arkansas Blackberry Breeding Program Alejandra Andrea Salgado Rojas University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Fruit Science Commons, and the Plant Breeding and Genetics Commons Recommended Citation Salgado Rojas, Alejandra Andrea, "Applying Molecular and Phenotypic Tools to Characterize Flesh Texture and Acidity Traits in the Arkansas Peach Breeding Program and Understanding the Crispy Texture in the Arkansas Blackberry Breeding Program" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 1346. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1346 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Applying Molecular and Phenotypic Tools to Characterize Flesh Texture and Acidity Traits in the Arkansas Peach Breeding Program and Understanding the Crispy Texture in the Arkansas Blackberry Breeding Program A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Plant Science by Alejandra Salgado Rojas Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Bachelor in Agricultural Science and Natural Resources, 2008 Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Master in Agricultural Science, 2011 December 2015 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ______________________________ Dr. John R. Clark Dissertation Director ______________________________ ______________________________ Dr. M. Elena Garcia Dr.
    [Show full text]