Re: [apple-crop] Research

[David A. Rosenberger]

UV light does not penetrate surfaces, so it could only kill what is on the 
surface and only what receives the required UV dosage.   Any bacterial in 
shadows created by limbs, leaves, branches, or flower parts would remain 
untreated, and in the case of fire blight, the rapid multiplication of the 
cells that escape would probably negate the value of the treatment pretty 
quickly.   I’m not an expert on UV, but I don’t see how it could be made 
practical in an orchard.  UV works best on clear liquids (as water or thin 
layers of apple juice going by UV treatment lamps) or on flat surfaces where 
shadowing is not an issue.

Also, from the Wikipedia article about UV-C, which is generally the most 
effective for killing microbes:  "For human beings, skin exposure to germicidal 
wavelengths of UV light can produce rapid sunburn and skin 
cancer. Exposure of the eyes to this 
UV radiation can produce extremely painful inflammation of the 
cornea and temporary or permanent vision 
impairment, up to and 
including blindness in some cases. UV 
can damage the retina of the eye."

Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060


On Apr 19, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Hugh Thomas 
> wrote:

A couple of ideas for you PhD/research types. How about using UV light to kill 
frost nucleating bacteria, or UV to kill the fire blight bacteria?  A light 
bank could be towed behind a tractor and the trees could be irradiated by UV 
light.
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Liquid Lime Sulfur?

[David A. Rosenberger]

I’m surprised that your graphic (and I think I heard the same from Marc 
Trapman) suggests that in Europe they recommend using LLS only on wet leaves 
whereas the old info from Burrell suggested that it should NOT be applied to 
wet leaves.  Any explanation?
> On Apr 7, 2016, at 5:31 PM, Vincent Philion  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
>>  I heard at the Hudson Valley RIMpro meeting last
>> month that bicarbonate is used in Europe during rainfall
> 
>> That would seem to necessitate repeated applications during an infections 
>> period. Does it have no after-infection value?
> 
> In replicated tests over the years, we saw value in using bicarbonate in a 
> “short” post-infection window. (250DH). However, If spraying your orchard 
> takes more than 12 hours, these “soft” molecules are not for you. In the same 
> tests, Inspire Super or Fontelis or Aprovia are better. No question.
> 
> 
> We use RIMpro to time bicarbonate in order to clean up spores ejected 
> typically the day before. Timed properly, you don’t “usually” need multiple 
> sprays. We adjust to risk (RIM value). If conditions dictate an additional 
> spray, then we advise it.
> 
> 
> We know enough about spore ejection dynamics to spray it “when it hurts”. 
> 
> Granted, Infections that extend for many days can be tricky. But usually, 
> bicarbonate is tank mixed with sulfur so you are getting dual action = some 
> kick back and protection for spores to come. 
> 
> Not sure the picture will be sent via Apple Crop. But I attached one slide I 
> use with growers (from Trapman)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> apple-crop mailing list
> apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
> http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Liquid Lime Sulfur?

[David A. Rosenberger]

Art Burrell, working in the Champlain Valley of NY where spring temperatures 
are often cool, would agree with you.  The sentences after the section that I 
quoted in the previous post says:
 “We have a period up to 60 or 70 hours, after the start of theinfection 
period, during which a heavy application of lime sulfur may prevent the 
appearance of lesions. Inevitably there will be some injury from the use of 
lime sulfur. Even in the absence of visible scorch, food manufacture by leaves 
is cut down for a few days by lime sulfur. This apperas to be chiefly from that 
part of the spray that reaches the lower survaces of the leaves. The injury is 
worst under high temperature, slow drying conditions, and on sensitive 
varieties such as Baldwins. Low-vigor trees have poor ability to recover from 
lime sulfur injury.”

I thought that I had read elsewhere that liquid-lime sulfur might provide up to 
4 days (96-hr) of post-infection activity, but perhaps that was a figment of my 
imagination.  On the other hand, you might eliminate scab on young leaves if 
you spray lime sulfur with a bit of oil while leaves are still wet, thereby 
causing enough burn to make the scab-infected leaves (and a probably a lot of 
other leaves) fall off of the tree before scab can begin sporulate :)

Incidentally, a product called Sulforix is being promoted as an alternative to 
liquid lime sulfur, but so far as I know it will not be any safer or reach back 
any futher than the old lime sulfur that Art Burrell was using in the 1940’s.

On Apr 7, 2016, at 1:18 PM, Vincent Philion 
> wrote:

If you worry about Captan phytotoxicity, then you should also worry about LLS 
being phytotoxic under the same conditions. Liquid lime sulfur is a ’normal’ 
(ie not emergency) choice for post infection (kickback). However, I wouldn’t 
trust it 96 hours after beginning of rain, unless the temperature was very low.

Typically, we use DH (degree-hours) to describe the post infection efficacy.

In Celsius, we consider LLS good for 250 DH, meaning 25 hours at 10°C. This is 
calculated once the infection is started.

If you calculate from the beginning of the rain, then about 400DH (40 hours at 
10, or 80 hours at 5°C)

hope this helps.

Vincent


Le 7 avr. 2016 à 12:56, David Kollas 
> a écrit :


Does anyone have enough experience with liquid lime sulfur to comment on it as 
an emergency
choice for application before rains have stopped during the current long 
infection period?  It is listed as
having 72-96 hours back-action in the New England Tree Fruits Management Guide.
In my particular situation, Half-Inch Green stage tissues were exposed many 
hours during two of
the previous three nights to 18-20 degrees F, and are probably extra sensitive 
to captan penetration
and phytotoxicity.

David Kollas
Kollas Orchard
Connecticut

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop






Vincent Philion, agr., M.Sc.
Microbiologiste/Phytopathologiste (pomiculture)

Institut de recherche et de développement en agro-environnement
Research and Development Institute for the Agri-Environment

www.irda.qc.ca

Centre de recherche
335, Rang des Vingt-Cinq Est
Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville (Québec)  J3V 0G7

vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca

Bureau: 450 653-7368 poste 350
Cellulaire: 514-623-8275
Skype: VENTURIA
Télécopie: 450 653-1927

Verger expérimental
330, Rang des vingt-cinq Est
Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville (Québec)  J3V 4P6
Téléphone et télécopieur : 450 653-8375
Local pesticide: 450-653-7608


___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Liquid Lime Sulfur?

[David A. Rosenberger]

Sorry if this is a duplication: I tried attaching Art Burrell’s discussion of 
sulfur sprays with the following message, but I think that made the message 
size too large for this list-serve.

I can only reprint what Dr. Art Burrell said in 1945 at the 90th Annual Meeting 
of the New York State Horticultural Society:  “Let us assume that, when the 
weather has cleared and the trees have blown dry, we find on Mills’ chart that 
they have been wet long enough to have permitted scab infection, and we still 
have trees that were not protected [by sulfur sprays discussed earlier]. This 
is where lime sulfur 2-100 comes in. We must wait until the leaves have become 
dry, because in a soaked condition, they are especially subject to burning.”


Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Cell: 845-594-3060


On Apr 7, 2016, at 12:56 PM, David Kollas 
> wrote:


Does anyone have enough experience with liquid lime sulfur to comment on it as 
an emergency
choice for application before rains have stopped during the current long 
infection period?  It is listed as
having 72-96 hours back-action in the New England Tree Fruits Management Guide.
In my particular situation, Half-Inch Green stage tissues were exposed many 
hours during two of
the previous three nights to 18-20 degrees F, and are probably extra sensitive 
to captan penetration
and phytotoxicity.

David Kollas
Kollas Orchard
Connecticut

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

[apple-crop] "Father of 1-MCP"

[David A. Rosenberger]

A colleague at NC State, Dr. David Ritchie, passed along the following info 
that I thought would be of interest to the group.


 Ed Sisler, "the father of 1-MCP” , died recently.

https://biochem.ncsu.edu/images/highlight/2006%20Father%20of%201-MCP.pdf

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/newsobserver/obituary.aspx?page=lifestory=177743594


___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] New Technology in Apple Scab and Fire Blight Management

[David A. Rosenberger]

It is not yet clear to me (or perhaps to anyone??) if the MateoBlue forecast 
available for an additional fee in 2016 will be an improvement over the 
Norwegian forecast (yr.no<http://yr.no>) that was used during my evaluations of 
RIMpro over the past two years. Although RIMpro was using yr.no<http://yr.no> 
for it weather forecasts, I frequently compared their predictions last year 
with those of Accuweather and of the US National Weather Service. I did not 
attempt to document similarities or differences (and the three forecast 
services often had somewhat different predictions), but my impression is that 
none of the three were very good in predicting wetting periods for the lower 
part of the Hudson Valley.  Thus, MateoBlue may or may not be an improvement 
over yr.no<http://yr.no> in terms of weather forecasts that can be linked to 
RIMpro, but I don’t really expect it to make a huge difference because I doubt 
that anyone anywhere has perfected weather algorithms enough to accurately 
predict shower activity in localized areas.

The weather algorithms used by most forecasters do petty well when there is a 
warm front or cold front that is clearly going to move through the area where 
you live. In those situations the predicted timing  4 days in advance may be 
slightly wrong, but the predicted events usually do occur, albeit sometimes 
sooner than the 4-day forecast predicted and sometimes later than the 4-day 
forecast predicted.  Forecasters do less well with the 4-day and even the 2-day 
forecasts for locations that are on the boundary areas between two moving 
fronts, and/or when wetting periods are ultimately attributable to “scattered 
showers.” Growers who need 2 or 3 days of advance warning to apply protective 
fungicide covers across all of their acreage generally will be looking at the 
4-day or 3-day forecast to make their decisions, especially if some days have 
windy conditions that interfere with spraying. Thus, I maintain that inaccurate 
weather forecasts during the prebloom period remain the primary cause for 
thousands of dollars in wasted fungicide sprays in the Hudson Valley and 
probably elsewhere.

On Feb 14, 2016, at 2:59 PM, Jon Clements 
<jon.cleme...@umass.edu<mailto:jon.cleme...@umass.edu>> wrote:

Yes, and interestingly, RIMpro has plans to offer an "enhanced" weather 
forecast option (meteoblue.com<http://meteoblue.com/>) in 2016 vs. the base 
forecast (yr.no<http://yr.no/>) included with RIMpro. The enhanced version will 
cost 50 euros (which is in addition to the base $200 euro RIMpro subscription). 
Users will also have the option for using meteoblue for historical as well as 
forecast data, alleviating the need for a hardware on-site weather station. My 
understanding all this is in the works, and should be available by early March 
on the RIMpro site, rimpro.eu<http://rimpro.eu/>.

Jon

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:53 PM, David A. Rosenberger 
<da...@cornell.edu<mailto:da...@cornell.edu>> wrote:
You can access a brief description of RIMpro in the blog commentary that I 
posted at http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog/ on Jan 21.  The blog post 
provides a link to a PDF file that contains a 3-page description of RIMpro 
along with my impressions of the program after evaluating it for two seasons.

RIMpro is a rather complex program that is not easily described in a short 
document.  If you are like me, you will have difficulty understanding how 
useful it is until you actually use it for a year or two.  It sounds simplistic 
when you you just look at a few printouts, but I found that it was really 
useful for estimating how critical the next predicted wetting period might be 
as we move through the primary apple scab season.

The RIMpro program has several weaknesses (in my opinion) which are described 
in the PDF file noted above.  The biggest problem is that RIMpro predictions 
for ascospore releases are based on weather forecasts, and the accuracy of the 
4-day or even 2-day weather forecasts in my region in spring has been dismal. 
RIMpro will provide you with an estimate of spore release that is likely to 
occur with rains predicted over the next 4-5 days, but that spore-release 
prediction will jump around as the rains approach because the weather forecasts 
jump around, sometimes in the extreme.  I found RIMpro to be a very useful 
tool, but won’t be a really great tool until weather forecasts become more 
accurate.

It is possible that in some regions, forecasts are more accurate than in the 
Hudson Valley.  Over the past few years, we seem to frequently be at the 
interface of storms that come up the coast, but then just miss us because we 
are a bit too far north and storms that come across the Great Lakes but then 
just miss us because we are a bit too far south.  As a result, over the past 
five years (roughly) we have gotten frequent predictions for major rain storms 
and spore dis

Re: [apple-crop] New Technology in Apple Scab and Fire Blight Management

[David A. Rosenberger]

You can access a brief description of RIMpro in the blog commentary that I 
posted at http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog/ on Jan 21.  The blog post 
provides a link to a PDF file that contains a 3-page description of RIMpro 
along with my impressions of the program after evaluating it for two seasons.  

RIMpro is a rather complex program that is not easily described in a short 
document.  If you are like me, you will have difficulty understanding how 
useful it is until you actually use it for a year or two.  It sounds simplistic 
when you you just look at a few printouts, but I found that it was really 
useful for estimating how critical the next predicted wetting period might be 
as we move through the primary apple scab season.  

The RIMpro program has several weaknesses (in my opinion) which are described 
in the PDF file noted above.  The biggest problem is that RIMpro predictions 
for ascospore releases are based on weather forecasts, and the accuracy of the 
4-day or even 2-day weather forecasts in my region in spring has been dismal. 
RIMpro will provide you with an estimate of spore release that is likely to 
occur with rains predicted over the next 4-5 days, but that spore-release 
prediction will jump around as the rains approach because the weather forecasts 
jump around, sometimes in the extreme.  I found RIMpro to be a very useful 
tool, but won’t be a really great tool until weather forecasts become more 
accurate.  

It is possible that in some regions, forecasts are more accurate than in the 
Hudson Valley.  Over the past few years, we seem to frequently be at the 
interface of storms that come up the coast, but then just miss us because we 
are a bit too far north and storms that come across the Great Lakes but then 
just miss us because we are a bit too far south.  As a result, over the past 
five years (roughly) we have gotten frequent predictions for major rain storms 
and spore discharge events during the prebloom period only to have the storms 
muss us completely.  Growers apply fungicides based on the forecasts, but then 
find that those sprays served no purpose because it remains dry.  RIMpro will 
not resolve that kind of problem, but it will tell you what might happen if the 
forecasters get it right.

Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060


> On Feb 13, 2016, at 2:59 PM, Dennis Norton  
> wrote:
> 
> Jon,
> 
> Being int he Midwest, I will not be able to attend the Summit. Where can we 
> get more information on the RIMpro Cloud Service other than the web site, or 
> should we set up an account to learn more?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Dennis Norton
> IPM Specialist/Certified Nurseryman
> Royal Oak Farm Orchard
> 15908 Hebron Rd.
> Harvard, IL 60033-9357
> Office (815) 648-4467
> Mobile (815) 228-2174
> Fax (609) 228-2174
> http://www.royaloakfarmorchard.com
> http://www.royaloakfarmorchard.blogspot.com
> https://www.facebook.com/royaloakfarmorchard/
> 
> On 2/12/2016 11:07 AM, Jon Clements wrote:
>> RIMpro Cloud Service
> 
> ___
> apple-crop mailing list
> apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
> http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] wind chill

[David A. Rosenberger]

So far as I know, wind chill is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to plants 
and other life forms that are not warm-blooded creatures.  Wind-chilll provides 
an estimate of how we perceive the cold, but the measured temperature on the 
thermometer is still  the temperature experienced by trees.  Winds can affect 
plants by increasing desiccation, especially if winds persist over long periods 
of time, but I don’t think a single night of very low wind chills will have 
much impact on dormant trees.  With very cold nights and high winds, I suppose 
there could eventually be some freeze-drying effects, but I don’t think I’ve 
ever heard much about that kind of damage on trees?

Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060


On Feb 13, 2016, at 9:53 PM, Arthur Kelly 
> wrote:

Does anyone have a handle on how wind chill relates to fruit bud critical 
temps.  We are expecting -11F tonight with a wind chill effect of around -30 F.

--
Art Kelly
Kelly Orchards
Acton, ME
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Apple skin disorder

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hello, David —

Did you apply any postharvest treatments to the affected fruit?  Do the spots 
appear at points of fruit contact in the boxes as the fruit come out of 
storage? If answers to these two questions are positive, then  toxicity from 
postharvest treatment solutions due to slow drying at contact points might be 
involved.  If answers to the first two questions are negative, then my final 
question is whether you applied calcium sprays in the field during late summer? 
 

As you can tell, I don’t know the cause of the damage shown in your photos.  
However, I have received or been sent photos of similar problems from many 
growers and consultants over the past 5 to 8 years.  As you indicted, I have 
frequently noted what appears to be damage originating from a lenticel but then 
spreading to kill epidermal cells  around the affected lenticel. In those 
cases, I suspect (but cannot prove) that the damage resulted from uptake via 
the lenticels of some toxicant (calcium, captan, other pesticide, air 
pollutants?) that weakened but did not immediately kill the cells around the 
lenticel.  However these weakened cells later died during storage, resulting in 
blackened lenticels. And I suspect that diffusion of the toxicant from the 
lenticel entry point slowly killed other epidermal cells around that lenticel. 
In some cases, the toxicant may have been applied in a postharvest treatment, 
but I suspect that most damage of this kind is initiated in the field.  Your 
photos, especially the one showing damage on the calyx points of the fruit, 
suggests that sprayed product may have pooled at the low points of the fruit 
during a preharvest spray, thereby allowing for excessive uptake that 
contributed to subsequent cell death during storage.  In some cases, I have 
wondered if fruit that are too close to a sprayer nozzle during late season 
sprays may end up with lenticels that are damaged by direct exposure to the 
high-pressure output from passing nozzles, but I doubt that was the case for 
your fruit where single lesions seem to predominate. 

I wish we knew what the offending toxicants and/or contributing factors really 
are.   Or, if anyone has a better explanation for the damage in the photos, I 
would love to hear it.


Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528


> On Nov 28, 2015, at 2:16 PM, David Kollas  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> The two photos here show a skin-deep discoloration now appearing in several 
> varieties of our stored fruit
> (32-36F, air).  In most cases I can distinguish a circular lighter-colored 
> zone centered on a lenticel, but this often merges into similar tan-colored 
> skin beyond the single lenticel.  None of the spots I have seen is larger 
> than the
> the diameter of a 5-cent coin.  Affected skin is not different than normal 
> skin to the touch. There is no pitting or
> depression in the affected area.  Note that in one of the Mutsu fruits shown, 
> discoloration is limited to the calyx-end points.
> 
> In several years I have seen scald symptoms near the end of storage season 
> (late February, March), but 
> now in mid-November, I don't expect to see superficial scald. I am wondering 
> whether others have seen
> similar symptoms.  
> 
> 
> David Kollas
> Kollas Orchard
> Tolland, Connecticut; USA
> 
> 
> ___
> apple-crop mailing list
> apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
> http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] apple-crop Digest, Vol 56, Issue 8

[David A. Rosenberger]

Strep is extremely stable if it is kept dry and out of direct light (e.g., in a 
closed cardboard drum or foil package).  It does break down in sunlight. I 
don’t know if other components in the formulations might “age out” and become 
less effective (e.g., less surfactant activity), but the strep itself should 
remain stable. 

Strep sprays are NOT a waste of money IF  (1) inoculum is present at bloom, and 
(2) weather conditions favor flower infection during bloom.  Unfortunately, 
none of the available models can predict whether or not inoculum is present in 
any give orchard, so we end up spraying orchards that really would not need 
protection if we had a way of knowing that they were free of  inoculum AND that 
that no inoculum would be brought to the orchard throughout the remainder of 
the bloom period. Lacking such a tool, strep provides valuable protection even 
though it may not be needed in many cases where it is applied. Of course, strep 
applied during bloom does not prevent shoot blight if inoculum arrives in the 
orchard only AFTER bloom is over, but shoot blight is generally far more severe 
in orchards where there was at least a bit of blossom blight.

Bottom line is that strep does not resolve all problems with fire blight, but 
without strep we would have a lot more orchards being bulldozed every year due 
to fire blight epidemics. There are some relatively new alternatives to strep, 
but all of them are either more expensive, less reliable, or (usually) both. 
And the fact that I am promoting the value of strep sprays does not negate the 
possibility that increasing copper nutrition could be beneficial.  In fact, 
applying a low rate of copper in all spring sprays as Lee Elliot has suggested 
could be really beneficial in terms of reducing blight inoculum within the 
orchard before and during bloom. However, I also suspect that in some years and 
with some cultivars, those in-season copper sprays will cause at least a bit of 
fruit russetting. Just because copper russetting has not be noted this year or 
last year or even for the past five years, one cannot be certain that it will 
NEVER be a problem.


Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060


 On Aug 18, 2015, at 10:58 AM, Fleming, William w...@montana.edu wrote:
 
 Lee, can't help you on reading your date but we had a 35 lb. drum of strep 
 dated 1972 that I didn't trust. Had the guys in the lab plate it out, it 
 killed all the bacteria they introduced it to.
 The drum had been stored in a cool dry place
 
 Bill Fleming
 Montana State University
 Western Ag Research Center
 580 Quast Lane
 Corvallis, MT 59828
 
 -Original Message-
 From: apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
 [mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of lee elliott
 Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 5:52 AM
 To: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apple-crop Digest, Vol 56, Issue 8
 
 Just my personal experience, dont know if any studies made, I think a lot of 
 the problem is copper deficiancy, after doing leaf analysis, my copper levels 
 were in the bottom of the scale, alsso in soil analysis, added Kocide 3000 to 
 dormant spray, and small amount (2oz per 100 gal) in spring sprays, also 
 copper added to herbicide spray, copper levels in leaf analysis came up but 
 stil not normal, I have less  FB and can see the difference. Also, nothing 
 beats staying on top of the situation by walking the orchard every morning 
 and cut it out before it spreads, this works well for small orchards like 
 mine. Most of my FB is shoot blight, I think strep sprays are a waste of $$$. 
 This my be because the strep is old, does anyone know how to read date of 
 manufacture  on the bag?? Lee Elliott,  Apple Hill/ Upstart Nursery, 
 Winchester, Illinois
 
 On Sat, 8/15/15, apple-crop-requ...@virtualorchard.net 
 apple-crop-requ...@virtualorchard.net wrote:
 
 Subject: apple-crop Digest, Vol 56, Issue 8
 To: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 Date: Saturday, August 15, 2015, 11:00 AM
 
 Send apple-crop mailing list
 submissions to
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help'
 to
 apple-crop-requ...@virtualorchard.net
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at
 apple-crop-ow...@virtualorchard.net
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more  specific  than 
 Re: Contents of apple-crop digest...
 
 
 Today's Topics:
 
1. Re: Looking for comments on fire blight  management
   (Weinzierl, Richard A)
 
 
 --
 
 Message: 1
 Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 21:26:58 +
 From: 

Re: [apple-crop] Weed Flamer

[David A. Rosenberger]

I’ve never used a flame weeder, but I’ve been on a number of tours where they 
were either demonstrated or discussed.  Folks who have actually worked with 
them are probably either retired or too busy to comment, so I’ve summarized my 
recollections from those tours below.  If my memory is faulty, then hopefully 
someone submit corrections and some additional info.
  1.  Flame weeders seem to work well only on very small weeds/grasses (e.g., 
up to 3-6 inches tall) and therefore the flaming must be done frequently (about 
every 2 or 3 weeks?) in warm wet climates if no herbicides are used to inhibit 
seed germination.
  2.  As I recall, one group indicated that flame weeders actually work best if 
there is a bit of dew or moisture on the weeds: the flames heated the surface 
water to destroy the plants.  Although the weeds didn’t look “burned” after the 
flamer passed, they were actually “cooked” and died rapidly thereafter.
  3. At one very large apple and cherry operation in WA state where a 
significant portion of the acreage committed to organic production, the farm 
manager told our tour group that flame weeding “involved a significant learning 
curve.” In their case, as I recall, the learning curve included incineration of 
several tractors when flames got out of control.  Seems that would be less 
likely under eastern conditions where we are unlikely to accumulate a lot of 
dry debris under trees, but then anything is possible.
  4. Finally one warning that my Pennsylvania Dutch grandmother gave to me and 
my cousins when we were small:  Boys who play with fire will wet their beds!


Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060


On Monday, June 1, 2015, Matt Pellerin 
m...@treworgyorchards.commailto:m...@treworgyorchards.com wrote:
I am interested in the concept of using a weed flamer as a burndown option in 
my apple orchard.  Has anyone had experience using these with fruit trees?  
What would be the pros/cons?

Thanks,
--
Matthew Pellerin
Agricultural Manager
Treworgy Family Orchards
3876 Union St
Levant, ME 04456
www.treworgyorchards.comhttp://www.treworgyorchards.com/
207-884-8354
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] 2. Re: Arctic Apples again - (Craig Tanner)

[David A. Rosenberger]

Based on what i think I know (and someone correct me if I’ve missed something), 
GMO pollen carried by bees to your apple orchards will NOT generate GMO content 
in your apples unless you actually test the apple seeds that form inside the 
fruit.  Unlike corn, wheat, and other grain crops where we eat the seeds, 
apples seeds generally are not consumer.  While cross-pollination is required 
to make apples grow, the pollen carried to fruit in your orchards only affects 
the seeds. The fruit grow from the base of the flower, and that tissue would 
not be changed as a result of pollination with a GMO apple.  If the DNA of the 
fruit themselves changed depending on the pollen source, then we would end up 
with a wild mixture of fruit sizes, shapes, colors, etc. on every tree every 
year.

Thus, the question  then might be whether testing for GMO  apples will involve 
testing of the fruit that people actually eat, or of the seeds within that 
fruit despite the fact that seeds are discarded when apples are eaten?  I 
suppose some folks might be concerned about “contaminating” their compost heap 
with apple seeds that might have a small percentage of GMO in the seed DNA.  I 
suspect that those would be the same folks who reported (in a SARE study many 
years ago), that they felt better when wearing a sweater made from the wool of 
organically raised sheep. 

Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060
 http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog-2014/


 On Mar 30, 2015, at 9:17 PM, Arthur Harvey arthurhar...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
 If my apple trees are close enough to a GMO orchard such that bees carry GMO 
 pollen
 to my trees, that will contaminate my crop in two ways:  1) if my trees are 
 certified organic,
 and testing reveals a GMO presence higher than a regulatory threshold (in 
 Europe, .9 %),
 then my certification  for that crop will be revoked.  2) if not organic, and 
 I wish to export
 to Europe then the apples will be rejected if over .9%  However, organic 
 certification for
 my farm will not be affected so long as I take measures to prevent further 
 contamination
 after a cooling=off period of 3 years.  At present, I do not believe USDA has 
 fixed the 
 threshold for this type of contamination yet, but if Arctics are in the 
 market, they will
 be obliged to.
 
 On Mon, 3/30/15, apple-crop-requ...@virtualorchard.net 
 apple-crop-requ...@virtualorchard.net wrote:
 
 Subject: apple-crop Digest, Vol 51, Issue 24
 To: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 Date: Monday, March 30, 2015, 4:31 PM
 
 Send apple-crop mailing list
 submissions to
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help'
 to
 apple-crop-requ...@virtualorchard.net
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at
 apple-crop-ow...@virtualorchard.net
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
 specific
 than Re: Contents of apple-crop digest...
 
 
 Today's Topics:
 
1. non-GMO non-browning apples (David
 Doud)
2. Re: Arctic Apples again - (Craig
 Tanner)
 
 
 --
 
 Message: 1
 Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 12:41:42 -0400
 From: David Doud david_d...@me.com
 To: Apple-Crop apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 Subject: [apple-crop] non-GMO non-browning apples
 Message-ID: 8e35364e-e8ba-43ce-b4d4-39feb897f...@me.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 
 If anyone has a need for an apple that doesn't brown, I'd be
 happy to send a stick or three of 'Sweet Emma', a chance
 seedling from grandfathers farm - white flesh that doesn't
 ever even hint of turning brown even while it dries to a
 crisp - a little flattened, red, 2.75, ripe early Oct, mild
 sweet crisp like a RD would dream of being -  vigorous
 tree, early blooming, very scab susceptible, doesn't fill
 bins like Melrose or Mutsu, loses quality in six weeks
 (would probably respond well to 'Smart-Fresh') - I sell
 quite a few between Oct 5 and Thanksgiving - 
 
 No charge - no obligation - 
 David Doud
 
 
 
 
 --
 
 Message: 2
 Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 15:25:06 -0500
 From: Craig Tanner cr...@tannersorchard.com
 To: 'Apple-crop discussion list' apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 Subject: Re: [apple-crop] Arctic Apples again -
 Message-ID: B9C45958024149E6BC95EB5CA7D78B52@CraigTannerPC
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 
 GMO apples may contaminate nearby organic and conventional
 apple orchards
 and could potentially cause valuable export markets to
 reject U.S. apples as
 happened in past when wheat and rice crops were found to be
 contaminated by
 GMOs. A - See more at:
 

Re: [apple-crop] Airblast Sprayer for Tall Spindle?

[David A. Rosenberger]

I agree with Peter Werts' comments.  At the Hudson Valley Lab, Peter Jentsch 
and I set up a tall spindle orchard (3 ft X 11 Ft) about 5 years ago.  We 
decided to spray it with a home-made vertical boom attached to a 3-pt hitch 
Pac-Tank sprayer, using air-induction nozzles as Peter Werts suggested.  When 
we looked at coverage following applications of Surround, it appeared that we 
were getting pretty decent coverage on 3 and 4 year old trees.  However, the 
reason that I would not recommend this to others is that effective coverage 
without the air-assist is dependent on using water rather than air as the 
propellant. Because we need to maintain high pressure at the nozzles to get a 
decent trajectory of the spray droplets, we found that we needed a minimum of 
150 to 200 gallons of water per acre, depending on travel speed of the sprayer. 
 Even on small blocks of 3 to 5 acres, the need to refill the sprayer so 
frequently is a real disadvantage.  As I recall, at the time we built our 
sprayer, the air induction nozzles had a some limitations that meant we could 
not set them up to deliver really small quantities per minute, and that  limit 
along with the need for pressure to create a droplet trajectory, made it 
impossible to develop a low-volume boom sprayer for the tall spindle spacing. 
We might have been able to use less water if we used conventional nozzles to 
create a mist, but then the small spray droplets would not have had enough mass 
to penetrate the tree canopy.

I much prefer to spray our small orchard blocks with our 3-pt hitch TurboTeuton 
mist blower  which we have calibrated to deliver 50 gal of spray per acre, 
although one could deliver much higher volumes if desired. The tank on our 
model holds about 130 gal of water, but the same kind of sprayer design is 
available in a trailer-mounted design. (I’m sure that there are many other 
sprayers that could be set up to accomplish the same things that I have 
described above.  I’m not trying to promote any one brand, just relating 
personal experience.) The advantages of this sprayer (from my perspective) are 
that
  (1) it is a tower sprayer with an infinite number of adjustments for 
height, angles of air delivery, nozzle arrangements, etc..
  (2) We can maintain uniform output and nozzle pressure at relatively low 
fan speeds. That means we can use lower PTO speeds while maintaining 
calibration so long as we use higher gears to maintain ground speed.  I found 
that I can operate this sprayer at three different gear/RPM settings while 
maintaining 3 mph ground speed. The lower RPM is very useful for small trees on 
a calm morning whereas higher RPM is necessary to fight wind or cover larger 
trees.
 (3) The sprayer is relatively quiet compared to most air blast sprayers, 
and that is a real advantage for orchards that are close to neighbors. I wish 
we had a standard comparison of sprayer decibel  levels when the sprayers are 
operating at comparable RPMs because small growers with noise-sensitive 
neighbors should certainly consider the noise factor when purchasing a sprayer.

The disadvantage of the TurboTeuton that we have is that it does not move 
enough air to fight winds greater than about 6-8 mph, and for that reason it 
will not work well on large trees or in orchards with rows more than about 
15-18 ft apart.However, I am convinced that tower sprayers are essential 
for spraying tall spindle orchards with minimal drift.


Dave Rosenberger, Plant Pathologist,
Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Cell: 845-594-3060
 http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog-2014/


On Mar 27, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Peter Werts 
pwe...@ipminstitute.orgmailto:pwe...@ipminstitute.org wrote:

Hi Tatum,

I have calibrated 20+ airblast sprayers in Minnesota and Wisconsin over the 
last two years, many for growers with tall spindle systems.  I still think the 
airblast sprayer is still the way to go.  There is much you can do with sprayer 
calibration to improve performance and accuracy of pesticide deposition.  I 
received my training from seminars led by Dr. Andrew Landers, Ag engineer at 
Cornell.  I think his work is right on target to address your questions.  If 
you have the time to research and read about your options I would get his book, 
“Effective Vineyard Spraying”, http://effectivespraying.com/.  This publication 
offers an in-depth review of all sorts of sprayer technology and how to select 
for your production system.

A couple considerations could include:
1. Look for an airblast sprayer with an adjustable fan speed or a lower fan 
speed.  Reducing the fan speed will help you keep your sprays on target!  I 
know AgTec makes a vineyard sprayer with a lower fan speed.  The AgTec’s have 
been real popular in the upper Midwest, though I don’t think they are the 
standard in New England or Mid Atlantic.  This 

Re: [apple-crop] Kasugamycin for fire blight

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hello, Vincent —

I believe that the problem Brian had in the year where 6 step sprays were 
required was lack of chilling hours to complete dormancy.  If apples do not get 
enough chilling, they produce flower buds over a very long interval, and new 
flowers just keep opening.

Concerning comments about Blossom Protect as a substitute for strep, there are 
still major differences that make strep a much more logical choice:
  1.  Blossom Protect is ridiculously expensive compared to strep.
  2.  BP must be used prophylactically to get populations of the biocontrol it 
contains established on the stigmas before Ea gets there.  So far as I can 
tell, that pretty much negates the value of our blossom blight models and 
ensures that the Blossom Protect folks will sell at least three applications 
per year regardless of weather conditions.  We might get better at timing BP 
spray with more experience, but we’re not there yet.
  3. As noted on the Blossom Protect label, it is not compatible with most of 
our commonly used fungicides, so you get to pick whether your prefer scab or 
fire blight.  Yes, I know that you have a few fungicide options that are 
compatible with BP, but without mancozeb and captan most folks will run into 
trouble.
  4. As the BP label notes, applications after mid bloom may cause russetting 
on russet sensitive cultivars, yet in some years applications during late bloom 
may be essential for controlling fire blight. Thus, growers of SweeTango, and 
to a lesser extent Golden Delicious, which is less blight sensitive, will also 
have the choice between blight or russet.  And I know that that label warnings 
are valid because in 2013 we ran a trial where applications of BP at late bloom 
did cause russetting on Golden Delicious.  I was pleased to learn that those 
same applications did not cause russet on Redcort or Jerseymac that were 
sprayed on the same schedule.  Thus, the warning on the label is perfectly 
on-target, but that still means that BP will present problems for blight 
control on some cultivars.
  5.  BP, like oxytet, prevents bacterial multiplication but does not kill 
bacteria that contact it.  As I recall, George Sundin presented some 
interesting data at IFTA in Nova Scotia showing how a strep alternative (I 
think is was oxytet) provided blossom blight control equivalent to strep, but 
then the trees treated with the alternative developed much more shoot blight 
than the trees that had been treated with strep during bloom, presumably 
because EA populations had been suppressed but not killed by the strep 
substitute.

Until we get much, much more published data that validates alternatives, I’ll 
continue to put my trust in strep.  I don’t doubt that one could survive 
without strep, but at this point I don’t see the incentive to do so.  Human 
health risks from using strep or other antibiotics during bloom on apples and 
pears is virtually undetectable compared to the risks from the continued and 
legal use of antibiotics in animal production, especially in chickens. Thus, I 
would argue that food safety folks looking at agriculture have much bigger fish 
to fry than the trivial amount of strep that is applied in apples.

Now to open another can of worms, how many folks are aware that the World 
Health Organization (WHO) just issues a report in which they suggest that they 
have enough data to indict glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen?

On Mar 24, 2015, at 4:41 PM, Vincent Philion 
vincent.phil...@irda.qc.camailto:vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca wrote:

Hi, I’m late in this exchange, but my grain of salt…

First, I entirely agree with Dave… except for this:

would argue that strep is still the cheapest, most effective, and most proven 
product for controlling blossom blight, and I see no reason to use other 
products except where strep resistance has been documented or is suspected due 
to failure of well-timed strep sprays.

In many markets, use of antibiotics is illegal or questioned. I have a good 
number of growers happy to see real alternatives to strep such as blossom 
protect.

In fact, alternating with biologicals or with oxytet may actually be 
counter-productive because they may allow more bacteria to survive, thereby 
leaving larger populations to be controlled by strep and/or allowing some 
infections to become established and thus carry the disease through until the 
next year.

At the end of the day, when a number of trials give results “at par” with 
strep, I don’t see how we can argue that ‘more bacteria survive’


Vincent Philion, agr., M.Sc.
Microbiologiste/Phytopathologiste (pomiculture)


___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Kasugamycin for fire blight

[David A. Rosenberger]

Thanks for the follow-up information, Brian.  Using six strep sprays during 
bloom, while I can see how it may be necessary, does make me a bit more uneasy 
about selecting for strep resistance.  In northeastern United States, we often 
need two sprays during bloom, sometimes three, and very rarely four.  I’ve not 
been concerned about using four sprays if needed. However, I doubt that anyone 
has enough experience with the impact of 6 early-season sprays to be certain of 
the outcome.

One theory about how strep resistance develops (and I think this is still 
valid) is that the initial selection for resistance is not in Erwinia, but 
rather in other bacteria that exist in the orchard environment. These other 
bacterial species may then pass on the strep-resistance genes to Erwinia 
because bacteria have mechanisms for transferring useful DNA (i.e., DNA that 
enhances survival) from one species to another.  When strep is applied to apple 
and pear flowers in springtime, the over-all bacterial populations on leaves 
and in soil are still rather low because bacterial population build slowly as 
plants and soil warm up. Therefore,  there is less selection pressure for 
resistance in the non-Erwinia species when strep is applied during bloom as 
compared to after bloom.  Bacterial populations in the orchard environment 
increase very rapidly as temperatures rise, so summer applications of strep 
impact a much larger universe of bacteria and therefore are presumed to be  
more likely to trigger resistance that can later be transferred to Erwinia.

Strep is broken down in sunlight, but each application may contribute to 
residual accumulations in the ground cover, duff, or soil surface where the 
accumulation from multiple applications might persist long enough to enhance 
selection for resistance in soil bacteria as soil temperatures rise. I really 
don’t know how long strep persists in orchard soils, and there is undoubtedly 
huge variations depending on rainfall, orchard cover, soil type, etc.

I’m sending this post simply to indicate that there is still a lot of things we 
don’t know about how our agrichemical products impact the total orchard 
environment. Given that uncertainty, I’m still willing to bet, based on our 
history in the Northeast, that limiting strep applications to blossom time in 
areas that average only two or three strep sprays per year will never result in 
selection for strep resistance even if growers occasionally use one additional 
application after bloom to suppress trauma blight following hail or wind 
storms.  However, if you will need more than four strep sprays on a regular 
basis, that makes me a bit less comfortable and you may want to break up that 
string of strep sprays by including Kasumin in your blossom spray strategies.

On Mar 21, 2015, at 10:09 PM, Brian Heatherington 
beechcreekfa...@earthlink.netmailto:beechcreekfa...@earthlink.net wrote:

No resistance from bloom sprays is good news. I have had no control problems 
with copper prior to green tip, strep timed by Maryblyt, Apogee to minimize 
pruning/harden shoots to possible shoot blight, and control of 
aphids/leafhoppers at petal fall/1st cover. A few years ago, however, we had a 
long, extended bloom with Pink Lady. Maryblyt called for a total of 6 sprays 
(predicted EIP over 100), which exceeds most recommendations of 4 max. I went 
with the 6 applications and came out OK, but have always wondered if this might 
trigger resistance. I will stick with strep during bloom and leave the Kasumin 
for those that need it. I did just put in a block of CrimsonCrisp and haven't 
thought about putting copper on them. Good advice. Thanks.

On 3/21/2015 10:36 AM, David A. Rosenberger wrote:
While Kasugamycin works about as well as streptomycin, oxytetracycline is 
generally a bit less effective and has the disadvantage of preventing bacterial 
multiplication without killing off all of the bacteria contacted by the spray.  
Of the three antibiotics, it is my understanding that only strep is absorbed 
into apple tissue, thereby giving it a bit of an edge over both of the other 
products, especially in cases where a few infections might have been initiated 
a few hours before the product is applied.  Kasugamycin, like strep, kills 
bacterial cells that it contacts, but it has the disadvantage of being 
considerably more expensive than strep.

Some of my pathologist colleagues may disagree with me, but I see no reason to 
pay the extra price for kasugamycin in established orchards that have no 
history of strep resistance. (An exception would be in countries like Canada 
where the strep labels allow a maximum of 3 applications/yr.)  In eastern New 
York and New England, we have used strep exclusively for fire blight control 
for more than 60 years without encountering resistance.  Resistance to strep 
has only appeared in regions where nurseries or fruit growers have used it 
repeatedly during summer (as many as 12 times/yr

Re: [apple-crop] Kasugamycin for fire blight

[David A. Rosenberger]

I should have added one more thought:  Probably the very best strategy for 
avoiding selection for strep-resistant Erwinia amylova (Ea) is to prevent fire 
blight from becoming established in the orchard in the first place.  To that 
end, the integrated strategy that Brian described (copper early, strep as 
required by a timing model, and Apogee to make shoots more resistant) reduces 
the likelihood that he will ever have visible fire blight or even high 
populations of Ea in his blocks. You can’t get resistance if the pathogen of 
interest never becomes established, even if non-Erwinia species in the sprayed 
blocks may have detectable levels of strep-resistance.

On Mar 23, 2015, at 9:04 AM, David A. Rosenberger 
da...@cornell.edumailto:da...@cornell.edu wrote:

Thanks for the follow-up information, Brian.  Using six strep sprays during 
bloom, while I can see how it may be necessary, does make me a bit more uneasy 
about selecting for strep resistance.  In northeastern United States, we often 
need two sprays during bloom, sometimes three, and very rarely four.  I’ve not 
been concerned about using four sprays if needed. However, I doubt that anyone 
has enough experience with the impact of 6 early-season sprays to be certain of 
the outcome.

One theory about how strep resistance develops (and I think this is still 
valid) is that the initial selection for resistance is not in Erwinia, but 
rather in other bacteria that exist in the orchard environment. These other 
bacterial species may then pass on the strep-resistance genes to Erwinia 
because bacteria have mechanisms for transferring useful DNA (i.e., DNA that 
enhances survival) from one species to another.  When strep is applied to apple 
and pear flowers in springtime, the over-all bacterial populations on leaves 
and in soil are still rather low because bacterial population build slowly as 
plants and soil warm up. Therefore,  there is less selection pressure for 
resistance in the non-Erwinia species when strep is applied during bloom as 
compared to after bloom.  Bacterial populations in the orchard environment 
increase very rapidly as temperatures rise, so summer applications of strep 
impact a much larger universe of bacteria and therefore are presumed to be  
more likely to trigger resistance that can later be transferred to Erwinia.

Strep is broken down in sunlight, but each application may contribute to 
residual accumulations in the ground cover, duff, or soil surface where the 
accumulation from multiple applications might persist long enough to enhance 
selection for resistance in soil bacteria as soil temperatures rise. I really 
don’t know how long strep persists in orchard soils, and there is undoubtedly 
huge variations depending on rainfall, orchard cover, soil type, etc.

I’m sending this post simply to indicate that there is still a lot of things we 
don’t know about how our agrichemical products impact the total orchard 
environment. Given that uncertainty, I’m still willing to bet, based on our 
history in the Northeast, that limiting strep applications to blossom time in 
areas that average only two or three strep sprays per year will never result in 
selection for strep resistance even if growers occasionally use one additional 
application after bloom to suppress trauma blight following hail or wind 
storms.  However, if you will need more than four strep sprays on a regular 
basis, that makes me a bit less comfortable and you may want to break up that 
string of strep sprays by including Kasumin in your blossom spray strategies.

On Mar 21, 2015, at 10:09 PM, Brian Heatherington 
beechcreekfa...@earthlink.netmailto:beechcreekfa...@earthlink.net wrote:

No resistance from bloom sprays is good news. I have had no control problems 
with copper prior to green tip, strep timed by Maryblyt, Apogee to minimize 
pruning/harden shoots to possible shoot blight, and control of 
aphids/leafhoppers at petal fall/1st cover. A few years ago, however, we had a 
long, extended bloom with Pink Lady. Maryblyt called for a total of 6 sprays 
(predicted EIP over 100), which exceeds most recommendations of 4 max. I went 
with the 6 applications and came out OK, but have always wondered if this might 
trigger resistance. I will stick with strep during bloom and leave the Kasumin 
for those that need it. I did just put in a block of CrimsonCrisp and haven't 
thought about putting copper on them. Good advice. Thanks.

On 3/21/2015 10:36 AM, David A. Rosenberger wrote:
While Kasugamycin works about as well as streptomycin, oxytetracycline is 
generally a bit less effective and has the disadvantage of preventing bacterial 
multiplication without killing off all of the bacteria contacted by the spray.  
Of the three antibiotics, it is my understanding that only strep is absorbed 
into apple tissue, thereby giving it a bit of an edge over both of the other 
products, especially in cases where a few infections might have been initiated 
a few hours

Re: [apple-crop] arctic apples

[David A. Rosenberger]

Thank you, Kevin, for your comments on how GMOs are needed in many countries to 
ensure a reliable food supply.  At our national plant pathology meetings last 
summer, we heard a keynote speaker, a female scientist from South Africa, 
address that same issue.  In fact, she pointed out that glyphosate-resistant 
crops provided female emancipation on many small farms because it was the women 
who were expected to provide the family food supply from small gardens, and 
before glyphosate resistant crops became available they had to spend incredible 
amounts of time hand-hoeing crops in the heat of summer.  She also mentioned 
how incorporating disease resistance into cassava via genetic modification 
could drastically improve food stability.

After listening to her impassioned presentation, I pretty much decided that the 
anti-GMO folks in Europe and North America are really just neocolonialists and 
male chauvinists who lack compassion for the less fortunate members of the 
human race. 

Genetically modified foods, at least GMOs that do not include DNA from other 
organisms, will eventually be broadly accepted because they offer so many 
advantages over conventional breeding.  Those who are totally opposed to GMOs 
are, in my opinion, very similar to those who were convinced that motorized 
vehicles should not be allowed to displace horses.  Motorized vehicles have 
certainly brought with them a host of human health and environmental issues, 
but I doubt that there are any GMO-phobes willing to live without any of the 
advantages that we gain from using motorized vehicles. Instead, we have learned 
to live with motorized vehicles by regulating their manufacture and use.  
However, I doubt that Arctic Apples will have the revolutionary impact of the 
Model-T Ford. Instead, I am more interested in watching the progression of 
Simplot’s GMO potato because it offers the consumer a potato that, when fried, 
will contain less of a compound that is recognized as a potential carcinogen. 
This should eventually force consumers to choose between “safer” potato 
products (as in reduced carcinogen risk) or non-GMO products with higher 
carcinogen risk. How/if Simplot eventually capitalizes on this GMO potato will 
be instructive for other commodity groups.


 On Feb 26, 2015, at 11:45 AM, kuffelcr...@kuffelcreek.com wrote:
 
 As a nurseryman with a stake in East Africa, I find the discussion
 fascinating.  Here GMO is being used to slightly modify a cosmetic flaw in
 an apple for marketing purposes; where I work with in Uganda, it is being
 used to give resistance to plantain bananas to a devistating disease that
 is wiping out their food supply, with people starving as a result. The
 Arctic Apple folks claim that their product is the most tested apple in
 history, and this is why APHIS had to approve it; their conclusion cannot
 be affected by public opinion or demand, but on science.  What if it indeed
 proves in the long run to be safe? (I've seen zero research stating
 otherwise).  I wish with you guys that the first GMO apple released would
 have been something that's actually useful to us, such as reducing the
 12-20 sprays necessary to bring an apple to market, but as far as GMO
 actions go, this one is pretty benign; switching off a gene already in the
 apple and not imported from a moth or potato, for a minor alteraion.  But
 maybe this was the place they had to start to address a very important
 question; is this indeed safe, and should it be used to protect the world's
 food supply?
 
 Kevin Hauser
 Kuffel Creek Apple Nursery
 Riverside, California
 Nakifuma, Uganda
 
 
 
 On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:09:33 +, Shoemaker, William H
 wshoe...@illinois.edu wrote:
 I like your comment David, and I agree. I don't want to carry water
 for
 them anyway. All of these companies pay big money for the best lawyers
 and
 lobbyists. They need to help defending their actions. I take the
 position
 when pressed by folks who are not familiar with genetic engineering that
 I'm comfortable with the technique, but that I'm not sure I'm
 comfortable
 with how its being employed. I'd like to see more caution and more
 effort
 to give the public real answers to their questions about these products
 and
 about the way these techniques are used. I think they companies which
 employ GMOs don't feel they need to be accountable for the products they
 are putting into the marketplace. Every direct-market growers knows that
 they face accountability, like it or not, and must reconcile with it in
 some way. And while these companies do to, like it or not, I don't think
 they are being fair to the consumer in the marketplace by failing to
 make
 more effort to address their questi
 ons about their products. So I tell those folks who ask that I can't
 defend the products, not because I think they are unsafe, but because I
 don't agree with the way they are being introduced into the market.
 
 Bill
 William H. Shoemaker
 Retired fruit and 

Re: [apple-crop] arctic apples

[David A. Rosenberger]

I can appreciate your frustration, David, and your “easy answer” gave me a good 
chuckle.  I certainly would NOT attempt to relay the concepts in my last post 
to the average consumer while attempting to sell them apples.  What would be 
the point?  Most consumers arrive with very pre-concieved ideas about GMOs and 
I don’t think that the point of sale is the best time to attempt re-education 
(if that is even remotely possible). I suspect that the best approach is to be 
non-commital, and perhaps to note that none of the apples currently available 
for sale are GMOs.  

When non-ag folks ask me about GMOs, I usually tell them that, as with any 
technology, GMOs bring exciting new possibilities but also pose dangers that 
need to be carefully regulated.  I am not particularly excited about the 
advantages of Arctic Apples, although it will be interesting to see if they 
eventually play a role in expanding the shelf life of sliced apples.

On the other hand, if I encountered a loud-mouthed GMO-phobe preaching the 
evils of GMOs at a party, I probably would point out to them that their 
opinions may be forcing less fortunate folks around the world into difficult 
subsistence life styles that could be, at least to some extent, remedied via 
GMO technology. Since any discussion of GMOs can generate heated arguments, it 
may be best if none of you ever invite me to your parties!

 On Feb 26, 2015, at 11:42 AM, David Doud david_d...@me.com wrote:
 
 Well argued David - now will you attend my markets with me and repeat that to 
 every third customer? If I spend my time making these points will Arctic 
 apples reimburse me? Will Arctic apples let me grow their material in return 
 for 'carrying their water'?
 
 This dialog is being forced on me, the front line representative - I resent 
 it - I particularly resent being expected to defend it on the basis of 
 cosmetic issues that were/are addressable by conventional breeding - 
 
 You know what the short easy answer is for me and people in my position? My 
 opinion is GMO apples will give you cancer and cause your kids to be 
 autistic. Here - let's have a taste of what I am offering, no GMO 
 herethat bag is $7, thanks very much - 
 
 It's tempting -
 D
 
 
 
 
 On Feb 26, 2015, at 11:07 AM, David A. Rosenberger wrote:
 
 Thank you, Kevin, for your comments on how GMOs are needed in many countries 
 to ensure a reliable food supply.  At our national plant pathology meetings 
 last summer, we heard a keynote speaker, a female scientist from South 
 Africa, address that same issue.  In fact, she pointed out that 
 glyphosate-resistant crops provided female emancipation on many small farms 
 because it was the women who were expected to provide the family food supply 
 from small gardens, and before glyphosate resistant crops became available 
 they had to spend incredible amounts of time hand-hoeing crops in the heat 
 of summer.  She also mentioned how incorporating disease resistance into 
 cassava via genetic modification could drastically improve food stability.
 
 After listening to her impassioned presentation, I pretty much decided that 
 the anti-GMO folks in Europe and North America are really just 
 neocolonialists and male chauvinists who lack compassion for the less 
 fortunate members of the human race. 
 
 Genetically modified foods, at least GMOs that do not include DNA from other 
 organisms, will eventually be broadly accepted because they offer so many 
 advantages over conventional breeding.  Those who are totally opposed to 
 GMOs are, in my opinion, very similar to those who were convinced that 
 motorized vehicles should not be allowed to displace horses.  Motorized 
 vehicles have certainly brought with them a host of human health and 
 environmental issues, but I doubt that there are any GMO-phobes willing to 
 live without any of the advantages that we gain from using motorized 
 vehicles. Instead, we have learned to live with motorized vehicles by 
 regulating their manufacture and use.  However, I doubt that Arctic Apples 
 will have the revolutionary impact of the Model-T Ford. Instead, I am more 
 interested in watching the progression of Simplot’s GMO potato because it 
 offers the consumer a potato that, when fried, will contain less of a 
 compound that is recognized as a potential carcinogen. This should 
 eventually force consumers to choose between “safer” potato products (as in 
 reduced carcinogen risk) or non-GMO products with higher carcinogen risk. 
 How/if Simplot eventually capitalizes on this GMO potato will be instructive 
 for other commodity groups.
 
 
 On Feb 26, 2015, at 11:45 AM, kuffelcr...@kuffelcreek.com wrote:
 
 As a nurseryman with a stake in East Africa, I find the discussion
 fascinating.  Here GMO is being used to slightly modify a cosmetic flaw in
 an apple for marketing purposes; where I work with in Uganda, it is being
 used to give resistance to plantain bananas to a devistating disease

Re: [apple-crop] lightning

[David A. Rosenberger]

In most cases, damage along the trellis will diminish with distance because 
metal posts and/or trees attached to the trellis will act as grounds to 
dissipate the charge.  How many trees are killed or damaged will depend on many 
different factors, including the strength of the initial lightening strike, the 
size and moisture content of the trees that are tied to the wire, and the 
conductivity of trellis posts.  Pressure-treated wooden line posts may serve to 
direct the current to the ground when the posts are wet from rain, so in some 
cases only a single “panel” of trees will be killed or severely damaged.

Most growers overlook lightening as a cause of sudden tree death during summer. 
 I’ve been called out to diagnose tree deaths caused by lightening at least six 
times over the past 35 years.  Usually the grower will  “This tree was perfect 
last time I sprayed and now it is dead!”  Things that assist in diagnosing 
lightening include the following:
1.  The killed trees or dead limbs appear very suddenly, often in 
mid-summer (because that is when we get most of our thunderstorms). Brown-black 
leaves are still attached to the dead trees or limbs.  The killed leaves may 
have sharply bent petioles, presumably because the rapid desiccation caused by 
the heating deforms the normal arc of the leaf petiole.
2.  On trees that are not attached to a trellis, one or two trees at the 
center of the strike may be completely killed, but the tallest twigs or limbs 
on adjacent trees may show dieback caused by parallel charges that are of lower 
intensity than the main charge.  The lesser charges that kill shoot tips in 
adjacent trees dissipates to sub-lethal levels as it moves into heavier wood, 
thereby killing only is the smaller and most exposed shoots.
3.  Tangential cuts through recently killed terminal shoots may show 
“pelletized” pith in the center of the shoots because the pith contains more 
water than other shoot tissue and therefore  shrinks into distinct segments or 
“pellets” when it is instantaneously desiccated from heat associated with the 
electrical charge.
4. Several weeks after the damage was incurred, tangential cuts made 
through 1-in diameter limbs that still have normal leaves but that are located 
below killed sections of limbs will often reveal a ring of brown/black xylem 
tissue just inside the bark. The ring occurs when some of the youngest 
(outermost) xylem tissue is killed by the electrical charge but the cambium 
survives and generates healthy new xylem that overlays the damaged xylem.
5.  In southeastern New York, trunks of trees killed by lightening are 
often covered by fungal bracts within several weeks after the lightening strike 
occurred.  These bract fungi can sporulate very quickly on the killed trees 
because they were already present in the discolored xylem that is often evident 
in cross-sections of older trees.  The tree’s natural defenses keeps these 
xylem-invading fungi from moving outward into younger xylem, but they can only 
sporulate if xylem is killed all the way to the bark surfaces.  When lightening 
kills a tree,  the killed wood and the water it contains provides the perfect 
food sources for the bract fungi, so they rapid invade the wood and bark and 
produce bracts.


Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology
Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog-2014/


On Jan 13, 2015, at 12:17 PM, Rob Crassweller 
r...@psu.edumailto:r...@psu.edu wrote:

Lightning can indeed strike the new high density system wires. The charge will 
travel down the wire and literally fry the trees killing them. How many it 
kills will depend on the strength of the strike and how long your rows are.

Rob Crassweller
Professor of Horticulture
Penn State University
r...@psu.edumailto:r...@psu.edu

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 13, 2015, at 11:56 AM, Steven Bibula 
sbib...@maine.rr.commailto:sbib...@maine.rr.com wrote:

Anyone know of lightning strikes on wire trellised systems, and the effects on 
the trees?

Has anyone studied the attractiveness of these systems to lightning strikes, 
and whether grounding and foliage has much to do with it?

Steven Bibula
Plowshares Community Farm
Gorham ME

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list

Re: [apple-crop] research on suckering?

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hello, Hugh —

I was interested in your comment about controlling apple root suckers with 
Chaparral herbicide because root suckers have become a major headache in some 
of our older research plots.  However, when I checked the Chaparral label on 
the CDMS website, I can’t find any label that includes apples. Do you have a 
special state label for apples, or were you thinking of a different herbicide?

The Chaparral labels that I found indicate that it is not registered at all in 
NY (no big surprise), but I’m still curious about products that might be used 
for chemical control of root suckers in other states.  However, given all of 
the warnings on the Chaparral label about long-term residual effects, even in 
hay from treated fields, I’m wondering about long-term side effects on apples 
even if it were labeled.

On Jan 1, 2015, at 1:38 PM, Hugh Thomas 
hughthoma...@gmail.commailto:hughthoma...@gmail.com wrote:

Steven,
This is off point, but as an aside, I have found suckers (Bud 9) to weaken when 
sprayed with the herbicide Chaparral. This is a pre emergent but is labeled for 
suckers on apple. The effect is a severe weakening of the sucker roots and they 
are very easy to pull a couple of weeks after the spray. This is only anecdotal 
evidence and my personal experience.

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Steven Bibula 
sbib...@maine.rr.commailto:sbib...@maine.rr.com wrote:
Is there any information on the long term value of pre-planting sucker 
reduction?

On some apple (and peach) rootstocks that arrive from the nursery, I have seen 
what appear to be cream-colored, corm-like ‘nodes’ at various locations on the 
roots themselves as well as the lower portions of the central portion; these 
all pop off relatively freely when wiggled.  I have also seen suckers up to a 
few inches long as well.

Are these nodes the origination points of future sucker growth, or just suckers 
that are already on their way?  Do suckering rootstocks simply sucker from 
almost anywhere along their buried material, from dormant sucker buds scattered 
all over?

For sucker control over the life of the planting, is there any benefit to 
manually removing these nodes and growing suckers?  Or would that only reduce 
the suckering for the spring of the planting year?

I am planning to plant a lot of heavily-suckering Bud 9 and B.9/MM.111, and if 
long term benefits of removing these nodes are worth the one-time effort before 
planting, then I will do the work.  The hardest suckers to control are the ones 
right up next to the trunk, and any permanent sucker reduction would be nice on 
these heavily suckering rootstocks.

I hope someone has done the research and is willing to educate ignorant folk 
such as I.

Grateful in advance,

Steven Bibula

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop


___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Mankar Ultra-Low Volume Herbicide Applicators

[David A. Rosenberger]

We experimented with a ULV shielded applicator (Bubco) for herbicide 
applications in our research orchards many years ago.  In our hillside 
orchards, the shield was never low enough on the down-hill side, and we killed 
a number of trees by hitting trunks with concentrated glyphosate.  Unless you 
have a lot of money to waste, you should absolutely NEVER NEVER apply 
glyphosate in apples or stone fruits with a CDA applicator.  No matter how well 
shielded they are, you will end up damaging trees.  They may work OK on grapes 
and some other crops, especially on flat land, but I would never suggest that 
the risk is worth the benefit for apples and stone fruits.  DCA applicators may 
work OK for applying gramoxone (and some other herbicides??) because any 
gramoxone drift that escapes will only cause yellow spots on leaves (white 
spots on fruit) without becoming systemic within the trees.

Work by Hanna Mathers at Ohio State has shown that sub-lethal glyphosate 
exposure (via leaves or through the bark on young trees) will reduce winter 
hardiness.  I have seen several orchards over the course of my career that were 
destroyed by drift of glyphosate into lower limbs followed by a cold winter. 
You can do this without buying a CDA applicator if your higher-volume herbicide 
sprayer is not shielded and generates a lot of small drift-prone droplets. 
Nevertheless, applying a high concentration solution of glyphosate to apples 
with a sprayer specifically designed to generate very small droplets is the 
business equivalent of playing Russian roulette.


Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology
Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog-2014/


On Oct 30, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Matt Pellerin 
m...@treworgyorchards.commailto:m...@treworgyorchards.com wrote:

I have been researching different options for herbicide application in my 
orchard and came across Mankar ULV herbicide applicators.  
http://www.mankarulv.com/  The company promotes its shielded CDA applicators as 
virtually drift-free.  However, I have read in some apple publications that the 
small droplets made by CDA applicators are inherently prone to drift.  Does 
anyone have any clarifying information or experience with this equipment?

Thanks,
--
Matthew Pellerin
Agricultural Manager
Treworgy Family Orchards
3876 Union St
Levant, ME 04456
www.treworgyorchards.comhttp://www.treworgyorchards.com/
207-884-8354
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Apples From China?

[David A. Rosenberger]

 truth is, it's not that simple 
... and that applies when it comes to free market economics and lots of other 
things. Governments, laws, and policies that consider the public good and the 
needs of those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale are essential.  Our 
national policies are fraught with political motivations and a variety of other 
dishonesties that taint the real issues, but it is an oversimplification to 
expect that all would be fine if we abandoned minimum wage laws and cancelled 
unemployment benefits.

And I admit that this is my personal view and not a research finding from my 
day job as an entomologist.

Rick Weinzierl

Professor and Extension Entomologist
IL SARE PDP Coordinator
Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois
S-334 Turner Hall, 1102 S. Goodwin Avenue
Urbana, IL 61801
217-244-2126tel:217-244-2126


-Original Message-
From: 
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net
 
[mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net]
 On Behalf Of David A. Rosenberger
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:31 PM
To: Apple-crop discussion list
Subject: Re: [apple-crop] Apples From China?

So far as I know, there is no political quid pro quo for decisions on what 
products can be imported into the US or exported to other countries, and 
scientific concerns about importation of pests are given serious consideration. 
 Nevertheless, Bill's suggestion about trading apples for flip-flops hints at 
some factors that may ultimately impact negotiator positioning.  In this case, 
perhaps we should substitute soybeans for flip-flops.  Has anyone checked 
recently to see the value of soybeans and other ag exports from the US to 
China? And then of  course, we wouldn't want to  anger China into massive 
selling of the US securities that they have purchased over the past several 
decades while we spent our wealth on meaningless wars. Thus, we are 
inextricably linked in a world-wide economy that at times runs rough-shod over 
individual winners and losers.  In many cases, it is almost impossible to 
predict who those winners and losers will be as governments tug on the economic 
and
 political strings that interconnect countries.

Reducing or eliminating minimum wage laws and unemployment insurance would not 
and will not solve any apple farmer problems related to US competitive 
capabilities in the world market. It would only increase the inequities and 
distancing of haves and have-nots in our county, inequities that ultimately 
contributed to the riots in major cities in the 1960's and that have 
contributed to current problems in Fergusson, MO.  Those who ignore history 
are doomed to repeat it.  It is very difficult to have a vibrant economy in 
the midst of anarchy. Increasing the gap between rich and poor while at the 
same time burning the bridges that allow social progress for those born into 
poverty will almost certainly increase the the probability of lawlessness among 
those without any hope for the future. Apple growers who think that they could 
live on the current minimum wage should try it for a year, recognizing of 
course that one must start the experiment without any housing, without a car, a
 nd with no credit rating.

If you really believe that the free markets (i.e., no minimum wage, no 
unemployment benefits) will solve our problems consider this:  We already have 
a health care system that ranks somewhere around 29th when compared with those 
of other nations (and that was true before Obamacare was instituted).  Yet we 
pay a much higher price for our healthcare than Canada and the European 
countries that have better health care systems than we do, a fact that rather 
undermines the case that everything works fine if the government allows the 
free market (i.e., insurance and pharmaceutical companies and tort lawyers) to 
have their own way.


Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology Cornell's Hudson Valley Lab, 
P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231tel:845-691-7231Cell: 
845-594-3060tel:845-594-3060
http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog-2014/


On Aug 15, 2014, at 11:41 AM, Fleming, William 
w...@montana.edumailto:w...@montana.edu wrote:

 To me it just seems strange that we would allow importing apples from any 
 country when we depend on exports ourselves to market the excess amount of 
 fruit we produce.
 Maybe I'm just looking at it with too much common sense.
 Then again many times in trade agreements allowing an import of a product is 
 traded in exchange for export of another. Who knows, we might be trading 
 apples for flip-flops.
 Doesn't benefit the apple grower but may benefit an entirely different 
 industry, and a politician's campaign contributors.

 Bill

Re: [apple-crop] Apples From China?

[David A. Rosenberger]

So far as I know, there is no political quid pro quo for decisions on what 
products can be imported into the US or exported to other countries, and 
scientific concerns about importation of pests are given serious consideration. 
 Nevertheless, Bill’s suggestion about trading apples for flip-flops hints at 
some factors that may ultimately impact negotiator positioning.  In this case, 
perhaps we should substitute “soybeans” for flip-flops.  Has anyone checked 
recently to see the value of soybeans and other ag exports from the US to 
China? And then of  course, we wouldn’t want to  anger China into massive 
selling of the US securities that they have purchased over the past several 
decades while we spent our wealth on meaningless wars. Thus, we are 
inextricably linked in a world-wide economy that at times runs rough-shod over 
individual winners and losers.  In many cases, it is almost impossible to 
predict who those winners and losers will be as governments tug on the economic 
and political strings that interconnect countries.

Reducing or eliminating minimum wage laws and unemployment insurance would not 
and will not solve any apple farmer problems related to US competitive 
capabilities in the world market. It would only increase the inequities and 
distancing of haves and have-nots in our county, inequities that ultimately 
contributed to the riots in major cities in the 1960’s and that have 
contributed to current problems in Fergusson, MO.  Those who ignore history 
are doomed to repeat it.”  It is very difficult to have a vibrant economy in 
the midst of anarchy. Increasing the gap between rich and poor while at the 
same time burning the bridges that allow social progress for those born into 
poverty will almost certainly increase the the probability of lawlessness among 
those without any hope for the future. Apple growers who think that they could 
live on the current minimum wage should try it for a year, recognizing of 
course that one must start the experiment without any housing, without a car, 
and with no credit rating.

If you really believe that the free markets (i.e., no minimum wage, no 
unemployment benefits) will solve our problems consider this:  We already have 
a health care system that ranks somewhere around 29th when compared with those 
of other nations (and that was true before Obamacare was instituted).  Yet we 
pay a much higher price for our healthcare than Canada and the European 
countries that have better health care systems than we do, a fact that rather 
undermines the case that everything works fine if the government allows the 
free market (i.e., insurance and pharmaceutical companies and tort lawyers) to 
have their own way.  


Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology
Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/blog-2014/


On Aug 15, 2014, at 11:41 AM, Fleming, William w...@montana.edu wrote:

 To me it just seems strange that we would allow importing apples from any 
 country when we depend on exports ourselves to market the excess amount of 
 fruit we produce.
 Maybe I'm just looking at it with too much common sense.
 Then again many times in trade agreements allowing an import of a product is 
 traded in exchange for export of another. Who knows, we might be trading 
 apples for flip-flops.
 Doesn't benefit the apple grower but may benefit an entirely different 
 industry, and a politician's campaign contributors.
 
 Bill Fleming
 Montana State University
 Western Ag Research Center
 580 Quast Lane
 Corvallis, MT 59828
 
 -Original Message-
 From: apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
 [mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of Mike Arvay
 Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:26 AM
 To: Apple-crop discussion list
 Subject: [apple-crop] Apples From China?
 
 I'm curious on what the group thinks about this proposed amendment to the 
 U.S. Fruit and Vegetable Regulation which will allow the import of apples 
 into the U.S. from China.
 
 I don't want this to become a All things from China are bad. thread.  
 But I can see both negative and positive possibilities on allowing this.  
 They do recommend additional measures and actions other than the standard 
 Port of Entry Inspection.
 
 http://www.regulations.gov/?utm_source=hs_emailutm_medium=emailutm_content=13804591_hsenc=p2ANqtz--B9po2Wh9EOEarH4oSyBng8hr9QeyW3LJQbTqn5DyDzYxmuMr2ciJZaLS1t7JjLaavRgsui8ZQ9El8DY6ATo7HsWEkbg_hsmi=13804591#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2014-0003-0001
 
 Thanks.
 
 Mike Arvay
 Small Grower in Central Indiana.
 ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
 
 

Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals

[David A. Rosenberger]

 consumed table apples, as appearance of 
 these apples is very important. 
  
 Therefore, the RMS remains supportive of the approval of diphenylamine.
  
 In the study that generated the opinion above which was done to address home 
 processing of apples that were originally sold for fresh consumption, no 
 nitrosamines were found in raw apples, nor in apple juice; only in blended 
 and chopped apples (processed apples).
  
 The decision announced in March of this year indicates that the reason the 
 MRL for DPA was reduced to 0.1 ppm was because of data gaps in the 
 registration package that had been submitted.  The EU DPA Task Force has 
 vigorously protested the allegation of data gaps but, at any rate, the 
 reduction in the MRL in the EU was not based on a definitive assessment of 
 risk.
  
 While I am not an expert in this area, given the discussion regarding 1-MCP, 
 while it is very effective at preventing scald, work done by Jim Mattheis at 
 USDA/ARS-Wenatchee and Chris Watkins at Cornell, notes that in certain 
 situations use of 1-MCP can increase certain fruit disorders, some related to 
 CO2 injury.  Many packers in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, now use lower rates 
 of DPA in combination with 1-MCP to maximize its benefits.
 
 Mike Willett
 Northwest Horticultural Council
 http://www.nwhort.org/
 will...@nwhort.org
 509.969.0245 mobile
  
 This message is from a remote location, sometimes truly remote.
 From: apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
 [apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] on behalf of David A. Rosenberger 
 [da...@cornell.edu]
 Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 10:46 AM
 To: Apple-crop discussion list
 Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals
 Hello, Con —
 Since grilling meat on a barbecue almost always creates some nitrosamines, 
 I’m assuming that outdoor barbecues have also been banned in Europe? :)
 
 
 Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
 Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology
 Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
  http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/ 
 
  
 On Apr 29, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Con.Traas con.tr...@ul.ie wrote:
  
 Hello Mosbah,
 The cost of smartfresh treatment here is about 10 euros (12 dollars?) per 
 330kg bin (700lbs approx.). It feels expensive, especially compared with DPA, 
 which is very cheap. It does a lot more though.
 By the way, I think the issue with DPA from a European perspective is that 
 when it degrades it forms one or more nitrosamines, which are a group of 
 chemicals many of which are carcinogenic, though some much more-so than 
 others. So the EU is seeking to eliminate all sources of nitrosamines from 
 diets, and therefore DPA is gone. 
 I do remember when DPA was cleaned-up, but its breakdown products will be 
 nitrosamines, regardless of how cleanly it is produced.
  
 Con
  
 From: apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
 [apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] on behalf of Kushad, Mosbah M 
 [kus...@illinois.edu]
 Sent: 28 April 2014 15:53
 To: Apple-crop discussion list
 Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals
 If you are asking about diphenylamine (DPA), then it is an antioxidants that 
 blocks the oxidation of alpha farnesene into conjugated trienes in the peel. 
 Conjugated trienes are what causes the apple/pear peel to turn brown from 
 regular or superficial scald.  It doesn’t help soft scald or sunscald.   In 
 the old days they used to wrap fruits in paper soaked in mineral oil that 
 absorbs the conjugated triene gas.  I have only scene this recently being 
 practiced in one place.  To minimize superficial scald development, harvest 
 fruits when they are horticulturally mature.  Ethoxyquin was removed from the 
 market around the 80’s  because it was suspected to cause cancer. However, 
 DPA went through a rigorous cleaning process to remove any impurities that 
 cause cancer.  If you are asking about 1-methylecyclopropene (1-MCP), also 
 known as SmartFresh, it is an ethylene action inhibitor. Treated fruits 
 produce ethylene but it does not work, because the sites where ethylene 
 normally attaches itself, to initiate fruit ripening, are occupied by 1-MCP.  
 There is no evidence that  1-MCP causes any harm to human.Some consider 
 1-MCP as the best thing since CA storage was introduced in the 30’s -40’s.   
 hope this helps, Mosbah Kushad, university of Illinois. 
  
 Question to Con. What is the cost of using SmartFresh per bushel in your 
 operation?
  
 From: apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
 [mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of Ginda Fisher
 Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 7:08 AM
 To: Apple-crop discussion list; Con.Traas; 'Evan B. Milburn'; 'Apple-crop 
 discussion list'
 Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals
  
 Can anyone summarize what

Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hello, Con —
Since grilling meat on a barbecue almost always creates some nitrosamines, I’m 
assuming that outdoor barbecues have also been banned in Europe? :)


Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology
Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
 http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/


On Apr 29, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Con.Traas 
con.tr...@ul.iemailto:con.tr...@ul.ie wrote:


Hello Mosbah,

The cost of smartfresh treatment here is about 10 euros (12 dollars?) per 330kg 
bin (700lbs approx.). It feels expensive, especially compared with DPA, which 
is very cheap. It does a lot more though.

By the way, I think the issue with DPA from a European perspective is that when 
it degrades it forms one or more nitrosamines, which are a group of chemicals 
many of which are carcinogenic, though some much more-so than others. So the EU 
is seeking to eliminate all sources of nitrosamines from diets, and therefore 
DPA is gone.

I do remember when DPA was cleaned-up, but its breakdown products will be 
nitrosamines, regardless of how cleanly it is produced.



Con



From: 
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net
 
[apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net]
 on behalf of Kushad, Mosbah M [kus...@illinois.edumailto:kus...@illinois.edu]
Sent: 28 April 2014 15:53
To: Apple-crop discussion list
Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals

If you are asking about diphenylamine (DPA), then it is an antioxidants that 
blocks the oxidation of alpha farnesene into conjugated trienes in the peel. 
Conjugated trienes are what causes the apple/pear peel to turn brown from 
regular or superficial scald.  It doesn’t help soft scald or sunscald.   In the 
old days they used to wrap fruits in paper soaked in mineral oil that absorbs 
the conjugated triene gas.  I have only scene this recently being practiced in 
one place.  To minimize superficial scald development, harvest fruits when they 
are horticulturally mature.  Ethoxyquin was removed from the market around the 
80’s  because it was suspected to cause cancer. However, DPA went through a 
rigorous cleaning process to remove any impurities that cause cancer.  If you 
are asking about 1-methylecyclopropene (1-MCP), also known as SmartFresh, it is 
an ethylene action inhibitor. Treated fruits produce ethylene but it does not 
work, because the sites where ethylene normally attaches itself, to initiate 
fruit ripening, are occupied by 1-MCP.  There is no evidence that  1-MCP causes 
any harm to human.Some consider 1-MCP as the best thing since CA storage 
was introduced in the 30’s -40’s.   hope this helps, Mosbah Kushad, university 
of Illinois.

Question to Con. What is the cost of using SmartFresh per bushel in your 
operation?

From: 
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net
 [mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of Ginda Fisher
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 7:08 AM
To: Apple-crop discussion list; Con.Traas; 'Evan B. Milburn'; 'Apple-crop 
discussion list'
Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals

Can anyone summarize what this chemical is, why and how it is used, and what 
the risks might be to farmers and consumers from its use? I feel like I walked 
into the middle of a conversation.

Thanks,
--
Typed with Swype. Who knows what I meant to say?
On April 28, 2014 4:03:51 AM EDT, Con.Traas 
con.tr...@ul.iemailto:con.tr...@ul.ie wrote:
Hello Evan and everybody,

Coming from my perspective, where we are now having to cope without DPA for 
storing Bramley (culinary) apples, I must say that is it proving tricky, but we 
are managing, through use of 1-MCP combined with more complex (and expensive 
and risky) storage regimes. So I would say it is technically possible to keep 
apples without DPA or ethoxyquin, which we also can’t use, but ironically it 
mitigates against the smaller grower, and in favour of the larger ones (big 
ag?) who can afford the higher tech gear.

It is ironic that scaring people about pesticide residues on fresh foods 
(especially fruits) actually causes people to eat more processed foods (as 
though their ingredients do not also get pesticide treatments), as the studies 
linking better health with fruit consumption are studies conducted with 
conventionally grown fruits with their pesticide residues (if they are not 
residue free). In other words, the benefits of eating fruits and vegetables are 
there in black and white, even if those fruits and vegetables have residues. It 
is far less healthy to switch to a candy bar from an apple, even if that apple 
has some residue (so long as that is below permitted levels). However, 

Re: [apple-crop] Captan and russet

[David A. Rosenberger]

I’ll add a bit to what Dan presented below:  First, I doubt that anyone has 
good evidence of captan causing or contributing to russet when it is applied 
alone.  In fact, in many field trials where impacts of fungicides on fruit 
finish have been evaluated, captan applied at late bloom, petal fall, and first 
has REDUCED russetting on fruit compared to unsprayed control trees.  The 
problems occur when Captan is included in a tank mix that includes surfactants 
(either known surfactants added to the mix or those included in the 
formulations of other products in the tank mix).  The captan labels all state 
something to the effect of “Avoid use of surfactants that cause excessive 
wetting.”  The reason for that warning is that captan is very toxic if it 
penetrates through the cuticle and epidermis into plant cells.  Surfactants 
enhance the likelihood of such penetration. If you have 5 to 8 different 
products in the tank at petal fall, who knows when you will reach the point of 
“excessive wetting”?

In many situations, the first evidence of captan injury is leaf spotting, but 
in some situations I believe (but cannot prove) that fruit russetting will be 
induced at the same time.  The reason that I  (and probably no one else) can 
prove that captan causes russetting goes back to the fact that such injury 
occurs only when tank mixes are applied, and then one can always ask “Was it 
captan or LI-700?  Or my insecticide, or the other fungicide in the tank, or 
the strep I had in the same tank for fire blight?  Or the proprietary 
micronutrient that was applied either in the same tank or perhaps 5 days 
earlier which allows it time to soften the leaves and  fruit, making them more 
susceptible to captan uptake and injury?

Concerning the fruit russetting observed throughout the northeast last year, I 
suspect that most of it resulted from weather conditions during late bloom and 
petal fall and would have occurred under any fungicide program.  However, we 
had a few cases of really severe fruit burn where captan interacting with other 
products almost certainly contributed to the problem.

In my field trials in the Hudson Valley, we have multiple years of data 
(including last year) showing that applications of mancozeb at weekly intervals 
does a great job of suppressisng “natural” weather-induced russet on Golden 
Delicious.  (Captan applied alone would presumably suppress it as well, but we 
use mancozeb because we need it to control rust diseases.) However, if you opt 
for Captan to suppress russet, then you’re back to the tank mix/fruit uptake 
problem.)  Thus, based on my experiences in my field plots, I would avoid 
captan from bloom through first cover, especially in years where there is a lot 
of cloudy wet weather during this interval because cloudy wet weather allows 
tissue to expand rapidly without developing much cuticle.  Furthermore, I would 
try to keep my trees well coated with mancozeb during the period from bloom to 
second cover.  Polyram is probably just as good as mancozeb, perhaps slightly 
better for suppressing russet so long as rainfall between applications does not 
exceed two inches.  In a dry year, there will be no captan related problems 
unless you really overdo surfactants in the tank mix, so if you like captan you 
can stick with it in dry years.


Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology
Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
http://pppmb.cals.cornell.edu/people/dave-rosenberger


On Apr 2, 2014, at 3:46 PM, Daniel Cooley 
dcoo...@umass.edumailto:dcoo...@umass.edu wrote:

The evidence, whatever it is, is strong enough that Dave Rosenberger and Kerik 
Cox are recommending that growers not use captan in sprays at petal fall and 
first cover. From their article in Scaffolds (my bold):

We are suggesting for the first time this year that apple growers avoid captan 
in their petal fall and first cover sprays. Growers who choose to follow this 
suggestion will need to avoid any prebloom applications of mancozeb or Polyram 
that exceed 3.2 lb/A, because mancozeb will be needed as a contact fungicide in 
the petal fall and first cover sprays. If mancozeb is applied at more than 3.2 
lb/A in any spray, then the label does not allow for any use of mancozeb after 
bloom.
Our suggestion for avoiding captan in petal fall and first cover sprays is 
based on the increasing complexity of tank mixtures applied at those timings. 
Tank mixes at petal fall frequently include one or two plant growth regulators, 
two or three fungicides, one or two insecticides, foliar nutrients, pH buffers, 
water conditioners and/or spreader-stickers, and perhaps streptomycin for 
controlling fire blight on late flowers. These complex mixtures 

Re: [apple-crop] Southwest Injury

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hi, Greg —
I’m really curious to hear what others suggest.  Old-timers in northern NY 
would sometimes use shingle nails to nail the loose bark back to the trunks of 
big old winter-injured trees when the bark split away from the trunks due to 
cold injury during winter.  I’m not certain if it did any good, but it might 
have helped to reduce further desiccation of the loose bark if it was not 
already killed all the way back to the point of attachment.  Obviously, there 
is no value in nailing back dead bark.

So long as there is still live bark on one side of the trees, you might be 
surprised to see how well the trees recover on their own if you can avoid crop 
load stress and drought stress for the next year.  The damaged trees will never 
be quite the same, but my bet is that those trees that are not completely 
girdled will recover if they can be defruited or at least over-thinned this 
year.

Concerning bridge grafting, it’s pretty labor intensive, but I’ve seen it used 
effectively.  Unless you have ideally placed root suckers already growing at 
the base of affected trees, you would need to gather the grafting wood 
immediately and refrigerate it so as to have dormant wood for grafting when the 
bark begins to slip a bit later in spring.  Grafting will be more feasible if 
you had enough snow cover to keep some bark alive above the soil line.  If bark 
is killed all the way to the soil line, you might instead consider inarch 
grafting with rootstock liners (if you can find any for spring delivery).  
These can be inserted next to the trunks with a needle-nose spade, stomped to 
backfill the spade slot, and grafted into the trunks above the damaged area 
sometime near petal fall after the liners have begun to grow.  We did this 
successfully with some Delicious/MM.106 trees that were dying from union 
necrosis (ToRSV) back in the early 80s.  In that case, we needed several 
liners/tree because the union was dying all the way around the tree.  A single 
liner/tree might work OK if you still have live bark on one side.  But as noted 
above, the tree may recover on its own if it is still alive on one side.

As noted above, grafting is labor intensive, especially if it will be required 
for many trees/A as in high-density plantings.  In addition to the labor 
required for grafting, additional attention is required to remove buds that 
will sprout on the inarch pieces and special care will be required to avoid 
hitting those tender graft pieces when applying contact herbicides.

On Mar 16, 2014, at 10:42 AM, Peck, Greg 
greg.p...@vt.edumailto:greg.p...@vt.edu wrote:

Apple-Crop participants,

Like everyone else in the Eastern half of the US, we've had a particularly cold 
and snowy winter in Virginia. Not surprisingly, I am starting to hear reports 
about Southwest injury to young trees. While there is a lot of information 
available on how to prevent southwest injury, I have not been able to find much 
information on how to deal with the trunks after the damage has been done. 
Typically, growers in Virginia have do not paint trunks with latex paint, but 
many will probably reconsider that decision in future years.

Many trees are probably not going to make it, but I'm wondering if anyone has 
experience trying to save some of the less severely injured trees with 
bridge-grafts. How about wrapping the bark with grafting tape to try to get the 
wounds to heal? (I'm guessing that this will have a low success rate because 
the tissue has already dried out.) Depending upon how far into the rootstock 
the split extends and the age of the tree, we might also try cutting off the 
scion and hoping an advantageous bud breaks dormancy.

Any other suggestions from those who have to deal with Southwest Injury on a 
more annual basis?

Thanks,
Greg

Gregory Michael Peck, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Horticulture
Virginia Tech
Alson H. Smith, Jr. Agricultural Research and Extension Center
595 Laurel Grove Road
Winchester, VA 22602 USA
540/869-2560 ext 19
greg.p...@vt.edumailto:greg.p...@vt.edu
arec.vaes.vt.edu/alson-h-smithhttp://arec.vaes.vt.edu/alson-h-smith
www.anr.ext.vt.edu/tree-fruit/http://www.anr.ext.vt.edu/tree-fruit/
blogs.ext.vt.edu/tree-fruit-horticulturehttp://blogs.ext.vt.edu/tree-fruit-horticulture
www.facebook.com/VtechPomologyhttp://www.facebook.com/VtechPomology
photo.JPG
photo.JPG
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Unusual McIntosh trees

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hello, Art —
What is the strain of McIntosh that has the unusual growth habit and retained 
petioles?  I’m not certain about the curved shoots, but over the years we have 
occasionally noted retained petioles on various strains of Macs as they pass 
from the juvenile phase to full bearing.  The problem first showed up several 
years after Marshal Macs were introduced and has been reported on several of 
the newer strains since then.  The cause has never been definitively 
identified, but I and others suspect that is has been associated with cold 
injury in Nov-Dec.

With Marshal Mac, the hypothesis was that this cultivar tended to harden off a 
bit later and/or was slightly less winter-hardy than the older Mac strains.  
Once trees got past year 8 (and this was on older rootstocks such as M.7, 
MM.106, etc.), the trees seemed to recover.  However, during the period when 
they showed retained petioles, they also developed crotch cankers that may have 
(or may not have) been associated with winter damage.  The crotches on lower 
scaffolds limbs are reputedly the last part of the tree to harden off in the 
fall, so it made sense that the crotch cankers noted on these trees may also 
have been associated with cold injury.  We never noted any particular limb 
growth habit with this phenomenon on Marshal Macs, but that may vary with 
conditions.

Some otherwise-benign viruses may cause trees to grow a bit differently and may 
reduce winter hardiness a bit, but no one ever pinpointed any virus affiliation 
with the problem on Marshal Macs.  And there is documented evidence that 
glyphosate exposure can reduce winter hardiness by a degree or two, but I don’t 
think that glyphosate exposure would directly cause the abnormal limb growth or 
retained petioles.

So, it would be interesting to know the strain of Mac and the age of the trees 
in your block.  Also, did you get any rapid temperature declines in Nov or Dec 
either this year or in the several previous years that might have contributed 
to winter damage.  I ask about last year, or even two years ago, because if 
your trees have cankers, then the injury started some time ago.  Incidentally, 
I don’t view “black rot” as a primary cause of cankers:  the pathogen causing 
black rot canker (Botryosphaeria obtusa) is almost always a secondary pathogen 
that can cause damage only if trees were previously injury or compromised by 
some other factor.

On the same subject, Michigan had a serious canker outbreak on Linda Mac 
several years ago, and I have not heard much about it since then.  I’ve 
wondered if the canker outbreak in MI might also have been related to cold 
injury on trees that had not yet fully settled into mature bearing status.  My 
suspicion is that when many growers switch to a new strain of Mac at the same 
time, the age of those plantings is somewhat synchronous and age-related tree 
problems therefore get a lot of attention.  As plantings of new strains become 
more dispersed over time, the same problems may occasionally show up, but they 
don’t generate as much attention because there are fewer plantings of the same 
age and problems are therefore more scattered.


Dave Rosenberger, Professor of Plant Pathology
Cornell's Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
http://pppmb.cals.cornell.edu/people/dave-rosenberger


On Feb 12, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Evan B. Milburn 
ebmilb...@yahoo.commailto:ebmilb...@yahoo.com wrote:

Arthur,
Would it be possible to post some pictures?  If and /or when was any roundup 
applied?


  Evan B. Milburn
http://www.milburnorchards.com/


On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:52 AM, Arthur Kelly 
kellyorcha...@gmail.commailto:kellyorcha...@gmail.com wrote:
I have some McIntosh on M111 that have an unusual growth habit.  They grow 
shoots in sweeping curves and both the fruit and leaf petioles hang on.  There 
are petioles out there today.  There may be an association with black rot.  Any 
other thoughts?

--
Art Kelly
Kelly Orchards
Acton, ME

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop


___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] honeycrisp prices

[David A. Rosenberger]

We first planted Honeycrisp trees at our research lab in 1995, and we’ve added 
more HC in various plantings over the years.  From my perspective, we are a bit 
too far south (90 miles north of Manhattan) to get consistently high quality 
with Honeycrisp.  Some years they color well and taste great, but in many years 
the quality is only fair (at least compared to the best quality Honeycrisp I 
have eaten), and color can be unimpressive (to put it kindly!).  Over-cropping 
HC is definitely one way to kill eating quality, but I think that harvesting 
prematurely is a close second.  In some years, Honeycrisp show quite a bit of 
preharvest drop in our region, perhaps because of  water stress created by high 
temperatures between late July and August.  In any case, many folks have 
difficulty delaying harvest to achieve optimum quality when apples worth a 
dollar each are dropping in large quantities.  Folks in northeastern NY 
(Champlain Valley) can grow excellent HC and they initially reported that they 
did not have drop problems. However, significant drop also occurred in that 
region after an exceptional late-July heat wave several years ago. I’m not 
certain if anyone has really done the definitive study on how daytime temps, 
nighttime temps, water stress, rootstocks, crop load, spray programs (including 
foliar nutrients), and maturity at harvest  interact to create either 
exceptionally good or exceptionally bad Honeycrisp.  We all have some general 
concepts from observations, but it would be nice to know the acceptable ranges 
of the multiple variables that impact fruit quality (i.e., good-tasting) fruit.

Honeycrisp was my favorite apples for a number of years, but eventually I tired 
of buying “crunch” at the expense of the more complex flavors that exist in 
other cultivars. At this point, I’d compare Honeycrisp to a modest quality 
champagne (some folks always go for the bubbles) whereas better cultivars have 
the more complex flavor profiles one would expect in an expensive Cabernet.  
Currently, my personal favorites are freshly harvested SnapDragon, SweeTango, 
and (perhaps a surprise here) Pixie Crunch.  All three of these cultivars have 
both crunch and complex flavors, especially at harvest when the aroma volatiles 
that provide much of the flavor complexity are at their best. For a variety of 
reasons,  I doubt that any of these cultivars will ever rise to the level of 
Honeycrisp in consumer consciousness.  First, HC was the first cultivar to 
stake out totally new territory in the apple market because of its unique 
texture, and being first has advantages. (Many folks still refer to paper 
tissues as “Kleenex”.)  Second, good HC hold up well in storage and eating 
quality of HC can be excellent after 6 months of storage whereas my three 
favorites noted above all tend to lose some of their flavor volatiles during 
storage. SnapDragon and SweeTango are still good apples out of storage, just 
not quite as good as they are at harvest.  The managed cultivar status of 
SweeTango and SnapDragon almost ensure that they will never gain the world-wide 
visibility that HC has, although those who can find them in stores will 
hopefully get a more consistent quality apple than has been the case with HC.   
Finally, most consumers right now seem to want “sweet, juicy, crunch” and are 
less selective when it comes to the nuances of good apple flavors.  Thus, I 
would guess that those of us who have experienced top-quality fruit and can 
differentiate between “exceptional” and “good” fruit will always be a minority 
in the market place.

Now, if someone can come up with an easy-to-grow cultivar that has both the HC 
crunch factor AND complex aroma volatiles that persist through 6 to 10 months 
of CA storage, that will be the apple that will ultimately displace HC in the 
marketplace.


Dave Rosenberger, Professor of Plant Pathology
Cornell's Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
   Office:  845-691-7231Cell: 845-594-3060
http://pppmb.cals.cornell.edu/people/dave-rosenberger


On Jan 30, 2014, at 11:52 AM, Fleming, William 
w...@exchange.montana.edumailto:w...@exchange.montana.edu wrote:

Back when I grew apples in North Central Washington they always said you 
couldn’t grow good apples down south in the Columbia Basin so hardly anyone 
did. Then someone came up with idea of overhead cooling during the hottest 
days, the Gala and Honeycrisp planting boom started. Huge plantings in the 
Basin and their efficiency of scale flooded the market putting many growers in 
the traditional apple growing areas of Washington out of business.

Cooling addressed the problem caused by 100° plus days but did little for cool 
nighttime temperatures which I feel are essential for growing a good tasting 
apple. Apples from the Basin 

Re: [apple-crop] Bitter pit? Stink bug?

[David A. Rosenberger]

Hail injury from at storm in early to mid-season?  What are the internal 
symptoms when cut perpendicularly through the lesions?

On Oct 7, 2013, at 3:18 PM, Jon Clements jmcext...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 See attached...
 
 photo.JPG
 
 
 413-478-7219___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

**  
   Dave Rosenberger, Professor of Plant Pathology
  Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab
  P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
  Office:  845-691-7231
  Fax:845-691-2719
  Cell: 845-594-3060
http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/pp/faculty/rosenberger/


___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Apple bins

[David A. Rosenberger]

You may well be correct, David, in your assessment of off-flavors associated 
with storage odors even at the grocery store level.  Personally, I am never 
certain whether I am tasting an off-flavor from the storage or whether the wax 
that grocery stores require impart an off flavor.  Or perhaps waxing apples 
seals in the off flavors?

Incidentally, you can eliminate foul odors in storage rooms by paying for an 
ozone generator that runs throughout the storage period.  These have been used 
in lemons storages because the low levels of ozone that they generate inhibit 
sporulation and secondary cycling of the Penicillium species that attack 
lemons.  Since lemons are stored at about 55 F (as I recall), secondary spread 
of Penicillium in those storages is a huge issue.  The folks selling ozone 
generators have tried for many years to transplant this technology to apple 
storages, but we do not have secondary spread of Penicillium in apples storages 
because most of the blue mold infections will not sporulate under low-oxygen 
conditions. Thus, ozone generators provide no benefits for decay control in 
apples.  Nevertheless, some folks have tried the ozone generators and reported 
that they do make the storages smell much better because the ozone quickly 
oxidizes the gasses that carry the odor within storages.

Thus, one could use wooden bins and still have clean air via ozonation, but 
if you add the cost of the ozone treatments to the other disadvantages of 
wooden bins, you may find that the economic balance shifts a bit more toward 
using plastic.  Of course, if you are still using old wood-walled storages, 
then the wood decay odors may be coming from the building rather than from the 
bins, so plastic bins presumably would not resolve odor problems in old storage 
buildings.

Finally, I should have clarified that the packer who noted much less scuffing 
with plastic bins was speaking specifically of McIntosh and other soft 
varieties.  Wood bins would presumably contribute less to cullage with more 
indestructible cultivars such as Red Delicious.

On Sep 20, 2013, at 11:46 AM, David Doud 
david_d...@me.commailto:david_d...@me.com wrote:

 I don't think that the foul odors in apple storages have any impact on fruit 
quality.

My observations are contrary to this - I buy/evaluate grocery store apples 
regularly, and find that off flavor that I believe comes from nasty storages to 
be the most common quality deficiency. Customers are getting apples stored in 
cardboard in bad air, not a way to drive consumption. I find this across the 
spectrum of food stores, from high end to discount.

I'd agree that apples lose some of the taint as they set in fresh air, but is 
this something we want/need/expect the consumer to do?

If I were a big time marketer, I'd see an opportunity to sell high end 
'clean-air certified' or somesuch fruit

David





On Sep 20, 2013, at 11:03 AM, David A. Rosenberger wrote:

We did some work in 2000 comparing spore loads (Penicillium species, the most 
common of which causes blue mold) on wooden bins and plastic bins. Both sets of 
bins had been used for a number of seasons, and both came from the same apple 
storage operation.  We pulled them out of their empty bin piles in July and 
made no attempt to sanitize them before running them through an overhead bin 
drencher and then evaluating spore load by dilution plating of the drencher 
water. Some of the bins (both wooden and plastic) still had remnants of decayed 
fruit stuck on the bin floors.

 One would assume that plastic bins, which appear relatively smooth compared to 
wooden bins, would harbor far less inoculum.  In fact, we washed off roughly 
2.2 billion Penicillium spores per bin from wooden bins and about 483 million 
spores per bin from the plastic bins.  Thus, plastic bins may appear cleaner, 
but they can still harbor huge numbers of decay spores and other organisms.  We 
also made an attempt to sanitize both kinds of bins using a quaternary ammonium 
sanitizer.  Although we lowered spore numbers a bit with the sanitizer, we 
failed to really clean up either wooden or plastic bins in that trial in 2000.  
In retrospect, I realized that part of the failure in using the sanitizer was 
that our sanitizer solution was made using well water (presumably 55 F) and the 
contact time at that low temp was too short to get a good kill.  Nevertheless, 
that work showed that sanitizing plastic bins is not much easier than 
sanitizing wooden bins.   (Not all Penicillium species cause fruit decay, and 
we did not determine how many of the spores recovered from bins were the 
primary decay pathogen, P. expansum.  Nevertheless, the conclusions about 
cleanliness of bins still holds.)

One of my gripes about the plastic bins is that most of them have an 
open-celled grid-work of reinforcing plastic on the underside of the bin floor. 
 This reinforcing grid adds a tremendous amount of surface area for harboring 
dirt

Re: [apple-crop] Dry Agri-Mycin shelf-life

[David A Rosenberger]

Streptomycin is very stable when kept dry and away from light.  However, it 
will break down in light.  If your zip-lock bag was clear plastic and located 
on a windowsill, the product may have degraded at least to some extent.  
Otherwise, it should be OK.


On Feb 21, 2013, at 2:55 PM, Rye Hefley 
ducn...@yahoo.commailto:ducn...@yahoo.com
 wrote:

Hello,

I have a pouch left over that I purchased last year that was never opened.  
There is no expiration date on the pouch.

I also have a pouch that I purchased and opened last year.  The unused powder 
remained in the pouch in a zip-lock bag.  The only thing I could find is on the 
label, Keep tightly closed. Store at cool temperature when possible and with 
minimum exposure to the atmosphere.  I have kept the zip-lock tightly closed 
with minimum air inside.

Storage temperature for both (open/unopened) packages varied from about 60 - 85 
degrees F.

I found this site:

http://extension.missouri.edu/p/G1921

that has some general guidelines for wettable powders:

Moisture is the greatest factor affecting their storage, as it can cause 
caking that may reduce the effectiveness of the pesticide. 

So that tells me as long as there is no caking both (open/unopened) should be 
still good.  Is that true?

Your wisdom is appreciated.

Thanks,
Rye Hefley
So. Cal.
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

**
   Dave Rosenberger, Professor of Plant Pathology
  Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab
  P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
  Office:  845-691-7231
  Fax:845-691-2719
  Cell: 845-594-3060
http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/pp/faculty/rosenberger/

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Re: [apple-crop] Agri-mycin delivery method

[David A Rosenberger]

Hello, Rye --
Strep does NOT move systemically in plants.  It may be absorbed into surface 
cells, but so far as I know it won't be taken up through roots. If there was an 
easy way to control blight, someone would have found it by now:  we've only 
been studying it for several centuries.
Black on the bark may be dead cells killed by sunburn or by fungi invading 
heat-injured and/or desiccated cells.  So long as you have live bark 
underneath, it probably doesn't matter much.  If it is on the lower part of the 
tree, you can protect trees from sunburn by applying a white latex paint.

On Feb 13, 2013, at 8:30 PM, Rye Hefley 
ducn...@yahoo.commailto:ducn...@yahoo.com wrote:


Hi Apple gurus,

Answers don't jump out at me feom google.

I'm curious why we don't put agri-mycin in the irrigation water to treat from 
the inside out?  (As in we administer antibiotics to humans through the stomach 
for 10 days.) Why is spray the appropriate delivery?

I'm not growing fruit this year (renoving flowers). I'm not concerned about 
fruit saturation/consumption. I have pruned fireblight cankers what I can but 
I'm sure I didn't get it all nor did I pick up every last leaf particle.

Just grasping for a way to innoculate from the inside. Every pruning cut showed 
healthy wood inside but some trees have black splotches on the outer bark 
almost always on the south sid of the tree. I even scraped some of the black 
from pruned wood and the inner wood is very healthy looking immediately under 
the bark. I have a fantasy that that is sunburn here un sunny So Cal. Not 
realistically hopeful of that.

Thanks,
Rye Hefley
So Cal
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.netmailto:apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop


**
   Dave Rosenberger, Professor of Plant Pathology
  Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab
  P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528
  Office:  845-691-7231
  Fax:845-691-2719
  Cell: 845-594-3060
http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/pp/faculty/rosenberger/

___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop