Apple-Crop: Re: a question about bud terminology
The discussion about TRV has been most interesting, but I have another question about bud terminology. Within the Rose family, we have crops that have differing types of flower-containing buds: - a single flower, no shoots -- Apricot, peach, and nectarine (plus some individual buds on plum) - multiple flowers, no shoots -- sweet tart cherry (+ other cherries), plums (most buds) - multiple flowers + shoot initial -- apples pears The first category, I believe, is termed a simple bud. The third category, I believe, is a type of compound bud termed a mixed bud But what is the plant anatomical / horticultural term for the second category? I had viewed it as a compound bud because of the multiple flower initials, but the typical example used for a compound bud is grape (Vitaceae) which has a primary, secondary, and tertiary bud all enclosed within the bud scales at each node. I have NOT been able to find any source of reference with a term for the cherry and plum type of complex bud. Any ideas / references out there??? I have been putting together an Extension document on evaluating cold injury damage to fruit buds and the evaluation process differs between the bud types. So use of some terms would be helpful in shortening it. The intent is to have it both in printed form and as a PDF document on the web. So I'd really like to have the terminology to be correct! Thanks much! Harold L. -- Dr. Harold Larsen, Interim Manager - WCRC Res. Pathologist Ext. Fruit Dis. Specialist Colo. St. Univ., WCRC - Orchard Mesa 3168 B 1/2 Road Grand Junction, CO 81503-9621 Ph: (970) 434-3264, x-205 FAX: (970) 434-1035 EMail: harold.lar...@colostate.edu -- The 'Apple-Crop' LISTSERV is sponsored by the Virtual Orchard http://www.virtualorchard.net and managed by Win Cowgill and Jon Clements webmas...@virtualorchard.net. Apple-Crop is not moderated. Therefore, the statements do not represent official opinions and the Virtual Orchard takes no responsibility for the content.
Re: Apple-Crop: Re: a question about bud terminology
Harold: I was too quick in hitting the Send button. I should have taken the time to discover Zielinski included also, classification of buds, on page 79. It evidently does not recognize shoot initials in apple and pear as components of their buds: Classification of Buds 1. Wood or leaf buds, which develop into leafy shoots. 2. Fruit buds, which are of 2 kinds: a. Simple buds, which develop into one flower (peach, apricot, almond) or several flowers (cherry, plum). b. Mixed buds, which develop into a cluster of leaves and flowers together (apple, pear). David Kollas On Jan 17, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Harold J. Larsen wrote: The discussion about TRV has been most interesting, but I have another question about bud terminology. Within the Rose family, we have crops that have differing types of flower-containing buds: - a single flower, no shoots -- Apricot, peach, and nectarine (plus some individual buds on plum) - multiple flowers, no shoots -- sweet tart cherry (+ other cherries), plums (most buds) - multiple flowers + shoot initial -- apples pears The first category, I believe, is termed a simple bud. The third category, I believe, is a type of compound bud termed a mixed bud But what is the plant anatomical / horticultural term for the second category? I had viewed it as a compound bud because of the multiple flower initials, but the typical example used for a compound bud is grape (Vitaceae) which has a primary, secondary, and tertiary bud all enclosed within the bud scales at each node. I have NOT been able to find any source of reference with a term for the cherry and plum type of complex bud. Any ideas / references out there??? I have been putting together an Extension document on evaluating cold injury damage to fruit buds and the evaluation process differs between the bud types. So use of some terms would be helpful in shortening it. The intent is to have it both in printed form and as a PDF document on the web. So I'd really like to have the terminology to be correct! Thanks much! Harold L. -- Dr. Harold Larsen, Interim Manager - WCRC Res. Pathologist Ext. Fruit Dis. Specialist Colo. St. Univ., WCRC - Orchard Mesa 3168 B 1/2 Road Grand Junction, CO 81503-9621 Ph: (970) 434-3264, x-205 FAX: (970) 434-1035 EMail: harold.lar...@colostate.edu -- The 'Apple-Crop' LISTSERV is sponsored by the Virtual Orchard http://www.virtualorchard.net and managed by Win Cowgill and Jon Clements webmas...@virtualorchard.net. Apple-Crop is not moderated. Therefore, the statements do not represent official opinions and the Virtual Orchard takes no responsibility for the content. -- The 'Apple-Crop' LISTSERV is sponsored by the Virtual Orchard http://www.virtualorchard.net and managed by Win Cowgill and Jon Clements webmas...@virtualorchard.net. Apple-Crop is not moderated. Therefore, the statements do not represent official opinions and the Virtual Orchard takes no responsibility for the content.
RE: Apple-Crop: For Discussion: Pesticide Applications Rates and Tree Row Vol...
Jim. Fair enough to say forget TRV, but I'm wondering if you actually do adjust rate per acre in a different way. When you have sprayer set up for 50 or 100 gallons per acre then move from block of larger trees to smaller trees do you keep the same set of nozzles firing, or do you shut down nozzles when you move to smaller trees? Or do you really apply 50 gallons actual spray per acre to larger trees then apply same tankmix with different sprayer settings at 50 gallons actual water per acre to small trees? I guess a third alternative is making no adjustment to the sprayer at all between blocks of different size trees and just overshoot the smaller trees. Or I suppose every block could have similar size trees so question about changes between blocks is a moot point, but that would not apply for most orchards which have trees of different rootstock, trainings system and age leading to different blocks with different sized trees. Glen Koehler University of Maine Cooperative Extension Pest Management Office 491 College Avenue, Orono, ME 04473 Tel: 207-581-3882 Email: gkoeh...@umext.maine.edu blocked::mailto:gkoeh...@umext.maine.edu Web: http://pmo.umext.maine.edu/apple/ http://pmo.umext.maine.edu/apple/ Fax: 207-581-3881 From: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net [mailto:apple-c...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of Jim Bittner Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 4:09 PM To: 'Apple-Crop' Subject: RE: Apple-Crop: For Discussion: Pesticide Applications Rates and Tree Row Vol... My experience is to forget TRV. It has gotten me in alot of trouble on smaller trees.. We apply at products on a per acre basis and it works fine. The other thing we do is either apply 50 or 100 gal of water per acre. 50 for most things. 100 gal for thinners, leaf roller, mites and oil. From: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net [mailto:apple-c...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of kborcha...@aol.com Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 1:27 PM To: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net Subject: Re: Apple-Crop: For Discussion: Pesticide Applications Rates and Tree Row Vol... I would think that because apple maggot over winter on the ground that reduction of amount applied per acre in theory would result in a less than proper amount of active material applied to control the pest. The small to large house would not be as important as the fact that each was on a one acre lot. Just my opinion and experience. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.139/2620 - Release Date: 01/15/10 02:35:00
RE: Apple-Crop: For Discussion: Pesticide Applications Rates and Tree Row Vol...
Say it ain't so Dave! Do you really want to leave it at: Thus, for the majority of apple growers, and especially when using newer products, the safest bet will be to apply the recommended amount of product/A regardless of tree size. You really advise apple growers to put on same amount of pesticide per acre to 23 feet tall 20 feet wide trees as 8 feet tall slender spindle? I'm with you about reduced spray capture on slender spindle putting brakes on how far you can go with TRV, but using a minimum 150-200 gpa threshold seems to address that. I don't get the part about leaves being 4 times closer together than they used to be. While canopies have shrunk I don't think the density of leaves has changed. That generates question of then how do apple trees grow so many more fruit per unit leaf area than 30 years ago. My assumption is that dwarf apple trees spend less energy (and thus leaf area) growing wood. Thus, a higher portion of the reduced leaf area is contributing to fruit growth. Way out of my league here. I guess I'm still stuck on the idea that if fixed rate per acre is needed for smallest trees, then it would seem to be under-dosing for much larger trees, or more likely, that dose needed for huge canopy volume trees is more than needed for smallest trees. I'm willing to believe that the weirdness that comes out of quantum physics is actually really true because it happens in a realm beyond my ability to observe, but standing in an orchard I have a hard time believing that a block of giganto trees and dwarf trees need the same amount of pesticide, especially fungicides. Insects move around enough that I could be hypnotized into believing that the same rate of pesticide applies regardless of tree size. But laying down captan to make leaf surface inhospitable to a landing scab spore seems inherently related to the amount of leaf area per acre. This all makes me wonder if/how different body size affects human pharmaceutical dosage. People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along? - Rodney King, 1992 - Glen Glen Koehler University of Maine Cooperative Extension Pest Management Office 491 College Avenue, Orono, ME 04473 Tel: 207-581-3882 Email: gkoeh...@umext.maine.edu Web: http://pmo.umext.maine.edu/apple/ Fax: 207-581-3881 -Original Message- From: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net [mailto:apple-c...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of Dave Rosenberger Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 5:12 PM To: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net Subject: Re: Apple-Crop: For Discussion: Pesticide Applications Rates and Tree Row Vol... Hi, Dave -- Intimidation may by too strong a word, and I certainly have never felt any sense of intimidation concerning my expression of opinions or my selection of research projects. However, I think that all of us are just a bit reluctant to back away from cherished concepts that we viewed for many years as points of progress toward common goals (i.e., IPM, minimizing pesticide use, environmental progress, etc.). As a result, we may be too slow to admit when some of these strategies no longer work as intended. I probably should not have use the PC terminology to express this concern, but there is some of that involved. Ultimately, there can be little doubt that universities are backing away from the kind of applied research that is needed to address complex problems in agriculture. That fact is clearly illustrated by recognizing that Andrew Landers' program is perhaps the only university-supported program in northeastern United States that deals with issues of spray deposition despite the fact that virtually all other research on agricultural pest controls (whether biological, biorational, or traditional pesticides) are ultimately dependent on effective methods for getting the pesticide applied to the target. I think public universities are the locus of origin and propagation of much that has become politically correct in American culture, yet I am surprised by the suggestion (at the end of Dave Rosenberger's useful observations) that unspoken intimidation may now influence the content of university publications on spray recommendations. There could be no enterprise in which unbiased science is more essential than in its application to commercial tree-fruit culture. David Kollas Kollas Orchard Tolland, CT On Jan 16, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Dave Rosenberger wrote: Tree-row volume is a complex subject that always generates widely divergent reactions. I'll add my personal perspectives to further muddy the water. First, as I recall, the TRV concept was introduced by horticulturists looking for a way to reduce variability in results when they applied chemical thinners, and it helped them to meet that objective. However, sprays applied to adjust crop load are different than pest control sprays because, with chemical thinners, there are significant economic
