|Gilreath, James - UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA|
|Santos, Bielinski - UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA|
|Noling, Joseph - UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA|
|Locascio, Salvadore - UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA|
|Dickson, Donald - UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA|
|Olson, Steven - UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA|
Submitted to: HortTechnology
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: October 11, 2011
Publication Date: September 1, 2006
Citation: Gilreath, J.P., Santos, B.M., Noling, J.W., Locascio, S.J., Dickson, D.W., Rosskopf, E.N., Olson, S.M. 2006. Performance of Containerized and Bareroot Transplants with Soil Fumigants for Florida Strawberry Production. HortTechnology. 16:461-465. Interpretive Summary: Florida is the second leading state for the production of strawberries with a 2005 value of $178 million. The production of strawberry has been dependent upon the use of methyl bromide for soil fumigation for control of weeds, nematodes and soilborne diseases. A number of chemical alternatives have been proposed as potential replacements for methyl bromide for Florida strawberry production, including 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D), chloropicrin (pic), metam sodium, napropamide for weed control, and these materials in various combinations. In addition, it has been proposed that the use of containerized strawberry transplants can reduce soilborne disease problems when compared to the use of bare-root transplants. A field trial was conducted to test multiple chemical methyl bromide alternatives combined with the use of either bare-root or container-grown transplants. All fumigants resulted in higher yields than those obtained in the untreated check and the type of transplant used had no impact on yield.
Technical Abstract: Field studies were conducted in three Florida locations during 1998-2000 to: 1) compare the performance of two transplant systems under diverse methyl bromide alternative programs using Chandler strawberry, and 2) determine the efficacy of these treatments on soilborne pest control in strawberry. Soil treatments were: 1) untreated check, 2) methyl bromide plus chloropicrin (350 lb/A), 3) chloropicrin (300 lb/A) plus the herbicide napropamide (4 lb/A), 4) 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) plus chloropicrin (35 gal/A) plus napropamide (4 lb/A), 5) metam sodium (60 gal/A) plus napropamide (4 lb/A), and 6) metam sodium (60 gal/A) followed by 1,3-D (12 gal/A) and napropamide (4 lb/A). There was no significant interaction between transplant type and fumigation treatment. Ring nematode (Criconema spp.) and nutsedge (Cyperus spp.) populations and total yield of marketable fruit were influenced only by fumigant application. All fumigants improved control of these pests and increased yield when compared to the untreated check.