Economic returns from nontraditional additives and maleic hydrazide infrequently justify application on potato (Solanum tuberosum) in the Columbia Basin
| Autor: | Thurgood, Colton Ray |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2022 |
| DOI: | 10.7273/000000075 |
| Popis: | Manufacturers of nontraditional crop additives frequently claim their products will enhance potato yield and improve economic return; yet, many only offer grower testimonials for product validation. Maleic hydrazide (MH) is used in-season to inhibit sprouting during storage and improve marketable yield by reducing undersized and misshapen tubers, but existing data on MH lack effects on economic return and newer, more efficient cultivars. Thus, these products may only serve to reduce grower revenue. To test these claims, potato field trials were conducted near Othello, Washington from 2016 to 2019 on 27 nontraditional additive treatments applied to Russet Burbank (RB). Additionally, MH was trialed from 2018 to 2019 on Alturas, Clearwater Russet (R.), Payette R., Ranger R., RB, R. Norkotah and Umatilla R. All products were applied in addition to grower standard practices and per manufacturer instructions with the following exceptions: Clearwater R., Payette R., and R. Burbank received early and late MH applications to measure effects on sprout inhibition. Economic returns (ER) were calculated using a mock processing contract adjusted for product costs. Although ER values of the 27 nontraditional treatments ranged from -7.7% to 8.5% of the control value, and yields ranged between 108 and 136 Mg ha-1 differences were not significant. Across seven cultivars, MH treatment had no significant effect on tuber size distribution, weight, or number per plant. However, ER and total market, and market yield >170g significantly declined by 5%, and 5.2, 4.5, and 5.1 Mg ha-1 respectively, from MH treatment when data were averaged across Alturas, Clearwater R., Payette R., R. Norkotah, RB (2018), and Umatilla R. In 2019 only, MH improved ER and market yield of R. Burbank by reducing secondary growth (knobs). Across years, MH had no impact on ER or yield from Ranger R. Effects on sprout inhibition were cultivar and timing dependent. Prior to full-scale adoption of nontraditional additives, growers should seek product validation from peer-reviewed research and replicated on-farm trials. Growers should also note that MH effects on ER, market yield, and sprout inhibition are cultivar dependent and, to prevent revenue losses, avoid using MH on cultivars that react poorly. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|