DOCSLIB.ORG

Replant Diseases of Apple in the Netherlands

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Replant Diseases of Apple in the Netherlands 634.11:632.2+632.651(492) MEDEDELINGEN LANDBOUWHOGESCHOOL WAGENINGEN • NEDERLAND • 68-13(1968 ) REPLANT DISEASES OF APPLE IN THE NETHERLANDS (Samenvatting: Herbeplantingsziekten bijappel in Nederland) H. HOESTRA Department of Nematology Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands Guestworker of TNO, The Hague (Received 25-VII-1968) H.VEENMA N & ZONEN N.V. - WAGENINGEN - 1968 CONTENTS 1. GENERAL 1 1.1. Introduction 1 1.2. Applegrowin gi nth eNetherland s 1 1.3. Replant diseases,introductio n andterm s 3 1.4. Theoccurrenc eo fappl ereplan t diseasesi nth eNetherland s 4 1.4.1. Generalobservation s 4 1.4.2. Factorsinvolve d 5 1.5. Outlineo fth eresearc hprogramm e 6 1.6. Materialsan dmethod s 6 1.7. Abbreviations 9 2. THE ROLE OF NEMATODES 10 2.1. Introduction 10 2.2. Symptoms 10 2.3. Occurrenceo fplan t parasiticnematode s inappl eorchard san dnurserie s ... 11 2.4. Importanceo fnematode s 13 2.5. Discussionan dconclusion s 17 3. SPECIFIC APPLE REPLANT DISEASE, GENERAL ASPECTS 20 3.1. Symptomsan dcharacteristic s 20 3.2. Experimental demonstration 25 3.3. Experimentalcharacterization , effect of various treatments 28 3.3.1. Introduction 28 3.3.2. Depth ofoccurrenc ei nth esoi l 28 3.3.3. Leachatesfro m applesoil s 29 3.3.4. Nutrient solutionsfro m mistculture so fappl e 30 3.3.5. Appleroot s 30 3.3.6. Phloridzin 31 3.3.7. Mixingsoil s 31 3.3.8. Soilmoistur econten t 33 3.3.9. Soiltemperatur e 34 3.3.10. SoilpH 34 3.3.11. Gibberellicacid 37 3.3.12. Summary ofresult s 38 4. CONTROL OF SPECIFIC APPLE REPLANT DISEASE 39 4.1. Introduction 39 4.2. Exploratorypo texperimen t 39 4.3. Field experiments 45 4.3.1. Introduction 45 4.3.2. Provinceo fNort h Holland 45 4.3.3. Therive rcla yare a 48 4.3.4. NorthEas tPolde r 56 4.3.5. South-Westernpar t ofth eNetherland s 58 4.3.6. SouthLimbur g 59 4.3.7. Easternpar to fth eNetherland s 60 4.4. Greenhousepot experiment s 60 4.4.1. Introduction 60 4.4.2. Dichloropropene-dichloropropanemixtur e 61 4.4.3. Chloropicrin 62 4.4.4. Methylisothiocyanat e 62 4.4.5. Otherfumigant s 64 4.4.6. Various chemicals 64 4.4.7. Organicamendment s 67 4.4.8. Heat 67 4.5. Conclusions on sections 4.3. and 4.4 68 4.6. Development ofa nadvisor ymetho d 69 4.6.1. Introduction 69 4.6.2. Materialsan d methods 69 4.6.3. Growth onfres h and applesoil s 70 4.6.4. Evaluation oftechnique s 71 4.6.4.1. Timeo ftakin gmeasurement s 71 4.6.4.2. Testplant s 72 4.6.5. Comparisono fresult so fpo t testsan dfield experiment s 73 4.6.6. Discussion 76 4.7. Noteso nth eapplicatio n ofchloropicri ni npractic e 79 5. GENERAL DISCUSSION 83 5.1. Introduction 83 5.2. Possiblecause so fspecifi c applereplan t disease 83 5.2.1. Requirements 83 5.2.2. Poor soilstructur e 84 5.2.3. Nutrient deficiencies 85 5.2.4. Toxins 86 5.2.5. Organisms 88 5.3. Practical aspects 92 6. SUMMARY 94 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 96 8. SAMENVATTING 97 9. REFERENCES 99 1. GENERAL 1.1. INTRODUCTION In 1957 the Nederlandse Fruittelers Organisatie (Netherlands Fruitgrowers Organization), called the attention of the Plantenziektenkundige Dienst (Plant Protection Service), Wageningen, to the difficulties which fruit growers fre­ quently meet when replanting apple orchards. At that timei t was already known that nematodes can damage young apple trees. Therefore in 1957 Dr.Oosten- brink visited the Bangert area near Hoorn where such replant problems were common and took a series of soil and root samples. The observations made and the nematodes found did not allow a conclusion to be drawn about the cause (cf. MEIJNEKE, 1959). It became clear that the problem was complicated and that a special research programme would be necessary to solve it. The Nationale Raad voor Landbouwkundig Onderzoek, TNO, The Hague (National Council for Agricultural Research) provided funds for this work. In this way the basis was laid for aresearc h programme with emphasis on thepractica l aspects of the pro­ blem. The work was started at the Plantenziektenkundige Dienst (Plant Protec­ tion Service) on 1Jul y 1959 and continued at the Landbouwhogeschool (Agri­ cultural University) from 1 July 1962 onwards. 1.2. APPLE GROWING IN THE NETHERLANDS The history of modern fruit growing in this country started with the founda­ tion in 1898 of a national organization of fruit growers, the Nederlandse Fruit­ telers Organisatie. The area under apple and other fruit treesincrease d gradually and was extended rapidly between 1930 and 1945. Later on the area became stable and was even reduced in recent years mainly due to grubbing, not fol­ lowed by replanting, of many old orchards on mixed farms. Fruit growing became more and more restricted to specialized fruit farms. The total area under pome fruit (apple, pear) and stone fruit (cherry, plum) was 47,874 ha in 1966 of which apples occupied about 33,000 ha, pears 10,000 ha, cherries 2,500 ha and plums 2,000 ha. Apple is therefore by far the most important fruit tree in the Netherlands. The average yield was about 300,000 tons of fruit a year in the period 1959t o 1965. Table 1give s particulars of the importance of apple growing in the main fruit centres. Fig. 1illustrate s the situation with regard to new plantings of apple and the total apple area, in the period 1939 to 1966. The apple area has rapidly been modernized in recent years by replacement of old orchards by newly planted ones. In 1963 only 35% of the total apple area was planted with trees more than 21 years old, and 24% with trees more than 27 years old (RIJNIERSE and VAN VEEN, 1966). The oldest orchards often have standard trees. This system is no longer economic because of the varieties, the costs of tending the trees Meded. Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen 68-13 (1968) 1 TABLE 1. Data on the main fruit growing regions in the Netherlands (1966). Total areas planted to pome and stone fruit after VAN WELY (1967); data on the importance of applegrowin gprovide d byCBS ,Th eHague . Pome and stone Planted to Regions fruit (ha) apple (%) Main soil type River clay area 19,776 70 river clay South-Western part of the Netherlands 9,897 69 seacla y 'Bangert',nea rHoorn , province ofNort h Holland, and adjoining areas 1,549 57 seaclay ,ol d South Limburg 5,564 55 loess South-East, excluding South Limburg 3,929 74 mixed,mostl y lightsoil s North East Polder (informe r Zuyderzee) 1,075 92 loam APPLE AREA(HA) TOTAL »EARLY NEW PLANTINGS 45.000 - 10.000 - -^x, 35.000 - ,^ "--. (A) 30.000 - 3.000 / 2.500 20.000 - 2.000 (B) 1.500 /V A 1.000 /' \-—\ ^./' 500 / v—^ 1956 YEARS FIG. 1. Totalappl eare a(A) ,an dyearl yne wplanting s(B )i nth eNetherlands , 1939-1966. and the productivity. The same is true for the somewhat younger orchards of bushtrees . Most plantings of 15-20 years old and younger are composed of dwarf pyramids and similar types of trees, which are planted at smaller distances than standard and bush trees. There has also been a tendency to reduce plant­ ing distances with the dwarf pyramid system in recent years. Nowadays in most cases more than 1000 trees per ha are planted at distances between therow s of4-4. 5 man d in therow s of 1.5-3 m. Other systems arebein g tried, for instance the 'Groesbeek' system with 3 m between the rows and 1 m in the 2 Meded. Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen 68-13(1968) row. VERHEY and DE VRIES(1966 )propos e the growing of treesi n beds with seve­ ral rows of closely planted trees (for example 2 X 1.5 m) alternated with alley­ ways of2. 5 m. The main reason for this interest in intensive planting systems is the need for economic production of large quantities of high quality fruit per ha, with pro­ duction starting in the 2nd-3rd year after planting. The new systems not only favour high and early production, but also help to reduce costs of spraying, picking, and pruning. Most fruit farms are small: about 80% have less than 10 ha. This situation also favours the tendency towards intensive systems of fruit growing. As regards the problems arising with replanting the following aspects of apple growingi n the Netherlands are of special importance: 1. Fruit growing is now mostly restricted to specialized farms on which apple isb y far the most important crop. 2. In most fruit growing regions it is difficult or impossible to find fresh land for new plantings, because suitable soils on the farm and its surround­ ingsar e already under apple. 3. The economic life span of densily planted modern apple orchards does not exceed 20years . Therefore it iseviden t that replanting isa frequent procedure in apple growing in the Netherlands and willb e soi n the future. 1.3. REPLANT DISEASES, INTRODUCTION AND TERMS Problems in cultivating plants on sites where the same species has been grown before, have long been recognized (WORLIDGE, 1698). The causes of the difficulties met in maintaining monocultures vary widely. Factors such as deterioration of soil structure, erosion, chemical exhaustion, and accumulation of parasites, have led to the abandoning of important centres of single crops, such as is illustrated by the history of tobacco growing in West Virginia (CRAVEN, 1965).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Non-Fumigant Alternative Soil Management Practices for Mitigating Replant Disease of Fruit Trees
    NON-FUMIGANT ALTERNATIVE SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MITIGATING REPLANT DISEASE OF FRUIT TREES: MECHANISMS CONTRIBUTING TO PRATYLENCHUS PENETRANS SUPPRESSION by Tristan Tanner Watson B.Sc. (Honours), The University of British Columbia, 2013 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE COLLEGE OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Biology) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Okanagan) April 2018 © Tristan Tanner Watson, 2018 The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the College of Graduate Studies for acceptance, a dissertation entitled: NON-FUMIGANT ALTERNATIVE SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MITIGATING REPLANT DISEASE OF FRUIT TREES: MECHANISMS CONTRIBUTING TO PRATYLENCHUS PENETRANS SUPPRESSION submitted by Tristan Tanner Watson in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy . Dr. Louise Nelson, Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences Co-supervisor Dr. Thomas Forge, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Co-supervisor Dr. Melanie Jones, Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences Supervisory Committee Member Dr. José Úrbez-Torres, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Supervisory Committee Member Dr. Paul Shipley, Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences University Examiner Dr. Mario Tenuta, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Manitoba External Examiner ii Abstract Replant disease presents a significant barrier to the reestablishment of orchards. In the Okanagan Valley, Canada, the root-lesion nematode, Pratylenchus penetrans, is widely distributed and implicated in poor growth of newly planted fruit trees. Restrictions on soil fumigants have generated interest in alternative management strategies for disease control. Using a combination of greenhouse and field experiments, this dissertation evaluated the effects of composts, bark chip mulch, biocontrol inoculation, and two different irrigation systems (drip emitter and microsprinkler) on the establishment of apple and sweet cherry trees in old orchard soil, P.
    [Show full text]
  • Apple Replant Disease – Theory Versus Practice, an Overview of Known Controlling Methods
    Apple Replant Disease – Theory versus practice, an overview of known controlling methods By H. Meints & A. Toma Summary In the past decades, several researchers focused their attention on identifying the causes of Apple Replant Disease, along with finding new strategies to prevent and control this important threat to fruit production. From leaving the land fallow, using rotation and control crops to soil fumigation and organic amendments, all has been considered over time. Nowadays, there is a visible tendency on using environmental friendly solutions, along with an increase in banning regulation regarding the chemical products used in EU agriculture sector. Therefore, solutions such as Brassica seed meal soil amendments developed by Mark Mazzola, or Herbie invented by Thatchtec in The Netherlands are the proof that alternatives exist and can be efficient. Field trials have resulted in an almost 100% pathogen suppression and significant yield increase. However, in the case of Herbie and particularly in the trials conducted at Fleuren Tree Nursery in Baarlo, experiments are pushed to their extremes trying to monitories the method’s efficiency and limitations, regarding time frames, larger range of temperature and dosage. What differentiate this later trial from the ones conducted by Mark Mazzola in the US, is that at Fleuren, testing lots are bigger. So far, the results obtained give a positive trend and special attention should be paid not only to the unpredictable weather conditions and temperature from the last period (that are obviously different from the usual values) that can affect the trials, but also try to observe and monitor the soil biodiversity along the tests, complementary to the plant behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • Growing Young Fruit Trees in Old Orchard Sites Introduction
    A P a c i f i c N o rt h west Ext e n s i o n Pu b I i c at i o n • WASHINGTON • IDAHO • OREGON • Mike Willett, Robert Stevens and Tim Smith Growing Young Fruit Trees in Old Orchard Sites Introduction The orchard replant problem is any situation in which the replanted trees do not grow to the grower's expectations. If you have lowered your expectations due to a previous lack of success, the replant problem may result in an unprofitable orchard. In Pacific Northwest orchards, the problem has been most obvious when apples were planted after apples. The apple replant problem has been identified in virtually every fruit growing region in the world and similar problems have been documented for many fruit crops. Moreover, throughout agricultural history there are cases where growth of a particular crop has been reduced or prevented by continuously cropping it in the same field. The reasons for these yield reductions or failures are the changes that the crop and its production practices cause in the soil. These include chemical, physical and biological changes. Some examples are toxic spray residues such as lead arsenate, low soil pH caused by nitrogen fertilizer application, soil compaction caused by heavy equipment, poor water management, buildup of soil organisms that damage tree roots or a combination of these. Older orchards have extensive root systems and are apparently more resistant to these soil changes. They show fewer ill effects than new trees. However, decline in the vigor and performance of older orchards has been attributed to some of these factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Determining the Occurrence of Replant Disease in British Columbia Orchard and Vineyard Soils by Pasteurization1 R.S
    . .. Canadian Plant Disease Survey 68:2,1988 149 Determining the occurrence of replant disease in British Columbia orchard and vineyard soils by pasteurization1 R.S. Utkhede and Thomas S.C. Li Experiments were conducted to determine by response to soil pasteurization what sequence of fruit trees or grapevines will grow without damage by replant disease after removing a particular fruit tree or grapevine crop. Apple seedlings developed replant disease in apple, peach, cherry, pear, and grape soils. Peach trees may be planted after any fruit tree or grapevine crop. Plums will grow normally when planted after grapes or any fruit trees except peach. Testing of orchard and vineyard soil is required for the proper diagnosis and treatment of replant disease. Can. Plant Dis. Surv. 68:2, 149- 151, 1988. On a realis6 des experiences afin de dbterminer, en se fondant sur la reaction B la pasteurisation du sol, quelle sequence d'arbres fruitiers ou de vignes ne serait pas endommagee par la maladie de la replanta- tion aprbs avoir bliminb une culture particulibre d'arbres fruitiers ou de vignes. Les plantules de pommiers plantees dans des sols ou l'on avait antbrieurement cultive des pommiers, des pachers, des cerisiers, des poiriers et des vignes ont Bt6 frappbes par la maladie de la replantation. En outre, les pachers peuvent 6tre plantes dans un sol ou a poussb n'importe quel arbre fruitier ou n'importe quelle vigne. Les pruniers croitront normalement s'ils sont plantbs apres des cultures de vignes ou d'un arbre fruitier, B I'exception du pacher. II est necessaire d'analyser les sols de vergers et de vignobles afin d'etablir un diagnostic exact et de determiner le traitement des plantes atteintes de la maladie de la replantation.
    [Show full text]
  • Pests and Diseases Guide
    Pests and Diseases Pests and Diseases - It used to be that you could look along rows upon rows of chemicals to kill or cure all manner of plant ills. This was a hangover from the second world war when anything that hindered the nation’s food supply had to be got rid of at any cost. Today thankfully we have woken up to the possible long term effect of indiscriminate use of chemicals and so our choice of product has been greatly reduced. If our arsenal of weapons against the onslaught of marauding pests and diseases has been so depleted you may well ask yourself what hope is there to have a healthy garden. Let us go back a step and think about dealing with the cause rather than the symptoms of plant health issues. First let us agree on the principle that nature abhors a void, so as one species or variety is displaced another comes in, sometimes more problematic to take its place. That would suggest that the compromise would be to have a balanced approach and to work towards creating a harmonious situation between our desires for perfection and natures vagaries. Why do plants suffer from pests and diseases? We might apply the same logic as we would do to ourselves. Sometimes it can be a genetic disposition to a certain illness but often in less severe cases it can be due to stress or failing to take adequate care of ourselves. So let us look at some possible causes before we reach for the chemicals. Stress Right from the onset are we working with nature or trying to persuade a plant that it must grow in a particular spot rather than considering whether it is suitable for such a growing position.
    [Show full text]
  • Prof. Dr. Hrotkó Károly Raising Grafts
    Raising grafts and trees in the nursery Aims of raising grafts . Propagation trees and shrubs difficult to propagate by autovegetative means . Production of composite plants with traits determined by more than one genom . Production of trees and shrubs with special growth habits (sphaeroid, compact, hanging, shrubs on high trunks, combi-trees, trained forms) Raising grafts Prof. Dr. Hrotkó Károly 2 Stages of graft raising . Raising of rootstock: until the required size - for bench grafting in previous years - grafting in root collar 6 – 12 month - for topworking 2-4 years . Creation the graft - during rootstock raising: budding in autumn, grafting in spring as the rootstock reached the required height - separate process: bench grafting on bareroot or potted rootstocks . Raising grafts until the required size and quality: Raising grafts Prof. Dr. Hrotkó Károly 3 Classification of fruit trees by ENA standards . One year grafted trees (maidens) . Feathered fruit tree (2-3 years) - minimum two years cultivation at wide spacing, - side branches may have been pruned appropriate to species/cvs . Pyramid fruit tree - pyramidal appearance, straight leading shoot - regularly distributed main branches not lower than 30 cm from graft . Bush fruit tree: same as pyramid but no leading shoot . Branched fruit tree (Knipboom) - one year graft cut back at min. 40 cm from soil level - well distributed 3-4 shoots on the new growth between 50-100 cm from soil level . Standard trees: dwarf, short, half, full standard . Trained forms: horizontal cordons (one or two arms), oblique palmet (single or two stage), single or double U, two stage U, horizontal espalier, fan. Raising grafts Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Riverside UC Riverside Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC Riverside UC Riverside Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Investigations into Peach Replant Disease and Nematophagous Fungi Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2249179h Author Yang, Jiue-in Publication Date 2012 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Investigations into Peach Replant Disease and Nematophagous Fungi A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Plant Pathology by Jiue-in Yang September 2012 Dissertation Committee: Dr. James Borneman, Chairperson Dr. Jörn Ole Becker Dr. Michael D. Coffey Copyright by Jiue-in Yang 2012 The Dissertation of Jiue-in Yang is approved: ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Investigations into Peach Replant Disease and Nematophagous Fungi by Jiue-in Yang Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in Plant Pathology University of California, Riverside, September 2012 Dr. James Borneman, Chairperson The research described in this dissertation examined peach replant disease and two nematode biological control systems using traditional plant pathology methods and molecular microbial ecology methods. In Chapter 1, the experiments identified microbes associated with peach replant disease in soils with various levels of disease symptoms. To identify bacteria, fungi and oomycetes associated with the replant disease, culture and culture-independent analyses were performed on DNA extracted from plant roots. Among the most abundant bacterial operational taxonomic units, 27 were negatively correlated with peach top weights while 10 were positively correlated. Among the most abundant fungi and oomycetes, negative and positive associations were identified between P.
    [Show full text]
  • Methodology and Viability of Re-Establishing Commercial Boronia Megastigma Plantations
    Methodology and viability of re-establishing commercial Boronia megastigma plantations A report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation by Doris Blaesing & Lee Peterson Serve-Ag Pty Ltd April 2002 RIRDC Publication No 02/007 RIRDC Project No: SAG-1A © 2002 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 0 642 58406 0 ISSN 1440-6845 Methodology and viability of re-establishing commercial Boronia megastigma plantations Publication No. 02/007 Project No. SAG-1A The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of persons consulted. RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report. This publication is copyright. However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Corporation is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186. Researcher Contact Details Dr Doris Blaesing Dr Lee Peterson Serve-Ag Pty Ltd Serve-Ag Pty Ltd PO Box 690, DEVONPORT, TAS 7310 PO Box 149, GLENORCHY, TAS 7010 Phone: 03 6427 0800 Phone: 03 6233 5522 Fax: 03 6427 0801 Fax: 03 6273 6688 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] In submitting this report, the researcher has agreed to RIRDC publishing this material in its edited form. RIRDC Contact Details Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Level 1, AMA House 42 Macquarie Street BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 02 6272 4539 Fax: 02 6272 5877 Email: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Causes and Control Measures of Apple Replant Problem
    Natural Resource Management Article AR2090 DOI: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.23910/1.2020.2090 International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management Print ISSN 0976-3988 June 2020 Online ISSN 0976-4038 IJBSM 2020, 11(3):246-257 Review Article Natural Resource Management Causes and Control Measures of Apple Replant Problem N. C. Sharma1*, Pramod Verma1, Niranjan Singh1 and Babita2 1Dept. of Fruit Science, Dr. Y S Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan- Himachal Pradesh (173 230), India 2Horticulture Development Officer, Government of Himachal Pradesh, India Abstract Open Access Corresponding Author Replant problem is a situation resulting in suppression of growth and poor productivity of the trees planted on old orchard sites and makes the plantations N. C. Sharma un-economical. It is a serious malady throughout the world in some fruit crops e-mail: [email protected] where the new plantations are done at the old orchard sites. Although replant problem is known to exist for many decades but greater attention was paid to Citation: Sharma et al., 2020. Causes and Control Measures of Apple Replant Problem-A Review. this phenomenon only when Thompson (1959) while working at East Malling International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Research Station, United Kingdom observed poor growth of apple and cherry Management 2020, 11(3), 246-257. HTTPS://DOI. on old plantation sites. This observation strongly stimulated replant research in ORG/10.23910/1.2020.2090. different parts of the world. Western Himalayan states of India are also facing the replant problem where majority of apple orchards have out lived their Copyright: © 2020 Sharma et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecologically Sound Soil Management of Tree Fruit Replant Disease
    IDENTIFICATION OF PHOSPHATE SOLUBILIZING BACTERIA AND EVALUATION OF THEIR APPLICATION WITH INSOLUBLE PHOSPHORUS FERTILIZERS TO SOILS FROM CERTIFIED ORGANIC ORCHARDS AFFECTED BY REPLANT DISEASE by MOLLY ADAIR THURSTON B.Sc., The University of Guelph, 2004 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE COLLEGE OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Biology) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Okanagan) August 2013 © Molly Adair Thurston, 2013 ABSTRACT Replant disease (RD) affects the growth and establishment of young fruit trees in old orchard soils. Organic management strategies are needed as an alternative to chemical controls. Improved phosphorus (P) nutrition to stimulate root growth and improve tree establishment is a well-established strategy; however, only insoluble Rock Phosphate (RP) and Bone Meal (BM) inputs are available to Canadian organic growers. The ability of specific plant growth promoting rhizobacteria to solubilize phosphate may improve P availability and its uptake in young apple trees, replanted into inoculated orchards. In this study, 101 bacteria isolated from the roots of legumes from Saskatchewan soils were screened for P solubilization. Thirty-four of these bacteria were positive for P solubilization as measured by halo diameter production on calcium phosphate medium. Twelve isolates showing the largest halo diameters and three known P solubilizing bacteria (PSB) were compared on three media: calcium phosphate, Pikovskaya (PVK) and PVK with bromophenol blue. All twelve isolates previously identified as Pseudomonas, Rhanella, Serratia and Klebsiella spp. solubilized P on all media, although the halo diameters varied among media. The isolates were tested in liquid culture, where a marked decrease in the pH of the solution was observed and six isolates were identified for further testing in growth pouch assays in the presence of insoluble P.
    [Show full text]
  • Methodology and Viability of Re-Establishing Commercial Boronia Megastigma Plantations
    Methodology and viability of re-establishing commercial Boronia megastigma plantations A report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation by Doris Blaesing & Lee Peterson Serve-Ag Pty Ltd April 2002 RIRDC Publication No 02/007 RIRDC Project No: SAG-1A © 2002 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 0 642 58406 0 ISSN 1440-6845 Methodology and viability of re-establishing commercial Boronia megastigma plantations Publication No. 02/007 Project No. SAG-1A The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of persons consulted. RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report. This publication is copyright. However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Corporation is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186. Researcher Contact Details Dr Doris Blaesing Dr Lee Peterson Serve-Ag Pty Ltd Serve-Ag Pty Ltd PO Box 690, DEVONPORT, TAS 7310 PO Box 149, GLENORCHY, TAS 7010 Phone: 03 6427 0800 Phone: 03 6233 5522 Fax: 03 6427 0801 Fax: 03 6273 6688 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] In submitting this report, the researcher has agreed to RIRDC publishing this material in its edited form. RIRDC Contact Details Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Level 1, AMA House 42 Macquarie Street BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 02 6272 4539 Fax: 02 6272 5877 Email: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Replant Disease-1
    Replant disease Why you need to control it Dr Gordon Brown Background of replant disease Replant disease is a debilitating soil problem affecting most orchards when they are replanted. Symptoms normally affect the entire orchard and include slow, uneven growth and poor tree performance. Due to the general nature of replant disease, it is easy to be unaware that it is present, or to blame the rootstock or nursery for poor tree performance. Replant disease affects most fruit crops including both Pome and Stone fruit. In Glasshouse trials, using soils from 10 Tasmanian apple orchards, it was found that they all had replant disease, which resulted in a 30-73% reduction in growth of young trees. Hence, this problem is extremely widespread and not isolated to individual orchards. The ramifications of replant disease need to be considered in light of the modern trend of rapid orchard replacement. Twenty years ago orchards were replanted every 20 - 50 years, with a tree density of around 600 trees per Ha or less. Modern orchards are potentially being replaced every 10 - 15 years, with up to 3000 trees per Ha. Considering the cost of replanting is between $40,000 and $60,000 per Ha, it is essential to have high early returns for the economic viability of the orchard and replant disease makes this task more difficult. This article concentrates on apples, although many of the aspects discussed will be equally relevant to the stone fruit industry, which also encounters replant diseases. It is commonly accepted that there are two forms of replant disease; specific and non-specific.
    [Show full text]