- Author: Mark Bolda
So what does cheap natural gas do for California berry growers? Not a lot apparently, if one extrapolates from an excellent article written by Colin Carter and Kevin Novan and recently released by the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics titled “Shale Gas Boom: Implications for California Agriculture.”
http://giannini.ucop.edu/media/are-update/files/articles/V16N3_1_1.pdf
As most Americans know by now, the ability to access through hydraulic fracturing (known in the common parlance as “fracking”) previously unavailable shale gas resources portends an big shift in the energy dynamics of the United States.
The enormous amounts of shale gas becoming available through fracking in the US has brought about a drop in the price of natural gas nationwide, but this has not been followed with a worldwide drop in natural gas prices. Natural gas, moved as a gas through pipelines domestically, can only be transported to overseas markets once it has been converted to liquefied natural gas (LNG) at facilities where the gas is turned into liquid form and then pumped into tankers for transit. The current lack of such facilities in the US and subsequent difficulty to get our natural gas to foreign markets has resulted in huge price discrepancies globally, with natural gas prices in the US at approximately $3.30 per thousand cubic feet, at the same time in Europe for example prices are $12 per thousand cubic feet.
This price discrepancy of course presents a real cost advantage for users of energy and natural gas in the US over their overseas competitors. How much of this price advantage accrues to California berry growers is a question worth examination.
According to the article cited above, only 0.8% of total natural gas consumption in the US occurs in the agricultural sector. A lot of farm equipment, from tractors to motorized implements to trucks, use gasoline or diesel rather than natural gas. Obviously, if a lot of this equipment were to be converted to use natural gas there would be some cost advantage, but this is very much a proposition for the long term.
On the other hand, natural gas is the main input in the production of ammonia, which is subsequently converted to the nitrogen fertilizers which are a mainstay of California berry growers, who use anywhere between 160 to 250 lbs of the stuff per acre. However, fertilizer costs in the berry industry, according the UCCE Cost and Return studies make up only 1% percent of the total cost of production, meaning that price changes in nitrogen fertilizer are not that meaningful in one direction or another to the total cost of running a berry operation. Furthermore, fertilizer prices are arbitraged internationally, meaning prices tend not to vary too much from country to country, so low fertilizer costs stemming from cheap natural gas feedstock in the USA don’t really translate to much of a cost advantage to local growers anyway.
The other possibility where cheap natural gas prices could confer an advantage to California berry growers would be a reduction in the price of electricity, more than half of which in California is generated from natural gas. The heavy reliance on irrigation and the use of electricity to get that water out of the ground in California agriculture and the berry business at least superficially points to some savings from reduced energy costs. However, digging into our latest Cost and Return studies, pumping irrigation water constitutes only about 1.5% percent of the total cost of production of berries. The gains from cheaper gas and subsequently cheaper electricity will be not that significant in other words.
In conclusion, the increasing amounts of shale gas becoming available through fracking in the US, while offering some possibility of advantage over the long haul in terms of energy inputs for traction and transport, does not appear to give a lot of advantage currently to California berry growers over their foreign competitors in terms of cost of production.

- Author: Mark Bolda
UCCE is sponsoring a meeting on lygus in strawberries to be held April 18. Four Ph.D. level entomologists (and one fruit guy) will bring together a veritable brain trust in one room to share decades of experience and knowledge in entomology and lygus bugs.
Biology, sampling, cultural, chemical and biological control of lygus will all be discussed. This is without a doubt a can't miss event for growers, PCA's and anyone else interested in the latest and most in-depth information available on this difficult pest.
Agenda is to be found here:

- Author: Mark Bolda
- Author: Steven Koike
Introduction: This blog post is about the very common fungal pathogen of strawberry, powdery mildew. What follows is a review on the biology and management of this disease.
Causal Organism: Powdery mildew is caused by the pathogen that historically has been named Sphaerotheca macularis f. sp. fragariae. However, future scientific publications and other writings will likely use the new name Podosphaera aphanis. Like most powdery mildew pathogens on other hosts, the majority of the mycelium of this fungus grows on the outside of strawberry leaves and fruit. The masses of mycelium produce spores (conidia) that form in chains, are barrel shaped, whitish to clear (hyaline), and dry (Photo 1). If your vision is sharp, you could be able to see the spores with the unaided eye since powdery mildew conidia are relatively large compared to spores of other fungi. With a hand lens or dissecting microscope, chains of powdery mildew conidia are readily seen.
Symptoms: Powdery mildew appears as white patches of fluffy mycelium tending to infect the undersides of younger leaves first. If conditions favor the fungus, then the disease advances onto the top sides of these leaves; in severe cases, powdery mildew moves onto older leaves, petioles, flowers, and fruit. It is important not to confuse these initial, small white patches of mildew with the waxy white deposits produced by whiteflies during egg laying (Photo 2 and 3). Mildew infections eventually result in an upward curling of infected leaves. On some cultivars, such as Camarosa, a brown to purple blotchy discoloration forms on the upper leaf surface (Photo 4) . Mildew infections of immature fruit result in a small, unripened fruit. Powdery mildew infections of mature fruit are more obvious due to the white mycelial growth on the surface and the protruding seeds (Photo 6); if such fruit are eaten they can have a distinctive moldy taste.
Disease Cycle: It is believed that in California the majority of powdery mildew inoculum infecting first year strawberry plantings comes from the leaves or crowns of transplants. Such transplants are either carrying inoculum on them from the nursery or are already infected prior to being dug. In addition, second year or volunteer strawberries in the vicinity are likely to be infected with powdery mildew; these established plants provide a second source of spore inoculum that is carried by winds to new plantings. The powdery mildew fungus produces overwintering, sexual structures called chasmothecia (previously these were called cleistothecia) but these do not commonly form on strawberry grown in California and therefore do not appear to have an important role in disease development.
Epidemiology: Powdery mildew has certain conditions in which it thrives. A range of temperatures from 60o to 80o (15o to 26.7o C) during periods of moderate to high humidity (think fog) are the conditions which are optimum for powdery mildew growth. In addition, the fungus actually does not grow well if leaves are wet with free moisture. So the fungus develops more readily if strawberry foliage is dry.
Management: As fully as possible, an integrated pest management (IPM) approach is suggested when it comes to controlling any strawberry disease. Fungicides are a key IPM component for minimizing powdery mildew infection in strawberries on the Central Coast of California. There is a wide selection of fungicides available for use on strawberry (http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r734100711.html). Examples of such products are myclobutanil (Rally), triflumazol (Procure), pyraclostrobin + boscalid (Pristine) and quinoxyfen (Quintec). There are concerns of reduced sensitivity of the pathogen to several classes of these fungicides, but there is no hard evidence of resistance to any of them to date. It is worth noting that there are no reports of reduced efficacy of sulfur (both as a dust and flowable) despite the many years it has been used against powdery mildew. Many horticultural oils and insecticidal soaps (for example M-Pede) can also be effective for powdery mildew when applied at a frequency of every 10 to 14 days, but it should be pointed out that frequent applications of these oils or soaps can stress strawberries and reduce plant productivity while also reducing mildew.
To maximize the efficacy of fungicides used, one should begin applying these materials at the first sign of disease, which on the Central Coast can be as early as February or March and continue as favorable conditions for mildew growth continue.
Since a large portion of the powdery mildew initially infecting strawberry fields comes from the transplants, growers should make sure they are receiving clean plants. It is standard practice in the California strawberry nursery industry to apply a high number of protectant treatments for powdery mildew, but growers concerned about powdery mildew coming from nursery plants are encouraged to check with their provider to understand mildew management practices.
Genetic resistance to fungal diseases is an important aspect of disease management. While there is no complete resistance to powdery mildew in strawberry, there is still a wide range of susceptibility to the disease among the varieties grown in California, a discussion which is beyond the scope of this post. Growers are well advised to be aware of the relative susceptibility for disease in the varieties they are planting, especially if growing in an area known to be problematic for powdery mildew. Also, growers should perhaps avoid planting a very susceptible cultivar adjacent to a second year strawberry field.
The above has been a discussion the biology and management of powdery mildew disease in strawberry. There are pesticides mentioned for the management of powdery mildew on strawberry in this article. Before using any of these products, check with your local Agricultural Commissioner’s office and consult product labels for current status of product registration, restrictions and use information.






- Author: Hillary Thomas
- Author: Elizabeth Church
- Author: Mark Bolda
Introduction: As noted previously in this blog, lygus bugs are a major pest in strawberries since they cause mis-shaping of fruit from their feeding on the early forming fruit. This pest has been a real challenge to California strawberry growers, one reason being that the populations in the Central Coast production regions have become quite tolerant or even resistant to many of the pesticides used for it.
Fortunately several promising insecticide chemistries for control of lygus bugs have become available for field trials over the past few years.
Please note that sulfoxaflor and tolfenpyrad are still NOT REGISTERED (flonicamid is) for use in strawberries.
Three large scale trials of up to a third of an acre per treatment were conducted this past year to test these three novel insecticides under real field conditions.
Application: One trial in a second year strawberry field in Salinas testing three materials (plus one grower standard) was conducted with a standard research backpack sprayer (applied 5/3/2012), another (overseen by the California Strawberry Commission) in a first year field in Guadalupe with a tractor mounted spray rig (applied 8/28/2012 and 9/12/2012), and a third in Watsonville with another tractor mounted spray rig (applied 10/5/2012 and 10/12/2012). Refer to the table below for rates of test material and water carrier.
|
Test Material (Brand Name) |
Trial 1 Salinas |
Trial 2 Guadalupe |
Trial 3 Watsonville |
|||
|
|
Water carrier Rate |
Test material Rate (formulated product) |
Water carrier Rate |
Test material Rate (formulated product)1 |
Water carrier Rate |
Test material Rate (formulated product)1 |
|
Untreated Control |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Sulfoxaflor (Closer) |
75 gal/A |
5.7 fl oz/A |
100 gal/A |
5.7 fl oz/A |
200 gal/A |
5.7 fl oz/A |
|
Tolfenpyrad (Bexar) |
75 gal/A |
27 fl oz/A |
100 gal/A |
27 fl oz/A |
200 gal/A |
27 fl oz/A |
|
Flonicamid (Beleaf) |
75 gal/A |
6.0 fl oz/A |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Malathion Aquamul |
75 gal/A |
2 pt/A |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1 Note that these materials were added with the surfactant Natural Wet at the rate of 8 fl oz/A.
Insect and Fruit Sampling: Lygus bugs were sampled by beating 20 strawberry plants (3 times each) in a row into an open plastic container and counting small nymphs, large nymphs and adults. Lygus bugs were sampled weekly for 6 weeks following the first spray application in Guadalupe, weekly for three weeks following the first application in Watsonville and weekly for four weeks following the application in Salinas. Fruit evaluation took place on 9/26/2012 and 10/10/2012 in Guadalupe and 10/19/2012 and 10/26/2012 in Watsonville. Fruit sampling consisted of randomly picking 50 fruit from the center two furrows of each trial. These picked fruit were graded into three categories; marketable, unmarketable due to lygus feeding (“catfacing”) and unmarketable due to other causes (mainly rots and small size).
Statistical analysis is a standard analysis of variance (ANOVA), using a square root or a logarithmic transformation in some instances in order to closer meet the assumptions of the statistical analysis .
Results and Discussion:The experimental sprays worked, especially the sulfoxaflor. Analysis by date show that sulfoxaflor treated plots in the Guadalupe and Watsonville trial were associated with lower numbers of adults, large nymphs and small nymphs on multiple dates after the initial application, and treated plots in Watsonville. Tolfenpyrad also did result in significant reduction in numbers of nymphs and adults on certain evaluation dates, particularly two weeks after the first application.
See Graphics 2-4 below for visual demonstration of evaluation results of lygus nymphs and adults 14 days after first pesticide application at each trial site.
The use of sulfoxaflor resulted in significantly higher amounts of marketable fruit than the untreated control on three sampling dates at both evaluation sites, while the use of tolfenpyrad resulted in significantly higher amounts of marketable fruit than the untreated control on two sampling dates at the trial site in Watsonville. Refer to Table 1 below for a summary of these results.
Table 1: Average marketable fruit yield for each sampling pick date for insecticide trials in Guadalupe and Watsonville, CA
|
Guadalupe |
||
|
Date |
Test Material |
Avg Marketable Fruit (out of 50)* |
|
9/26/2012 |
Sulfoxaflor (Closer) |
26.50 A |
|
|
Tolfenpyrad(Bexar) |
11.75 B |
|
|
Untreated |
8.25 C |
|
10/10/2012 |
Sulfoxaflor (Closer) |
14.50 A |
|
|
Tolfenpyrad(Bexar) |
3.25 B |
|
|
Untreated |
0.75 B |
|
Watsonville |
||
|
Date |
Test Material |
Avg Marketable Fruit (out of 50)* |
|
10/19/2012 |
Sulfoxaflor (Closer) |
14.50 A |
|
|
Tolfenpyrad(Bexar) |
10.50 B |
|
|
Untreated |
6.00 C |
|
10/26/2012 |
Sulfoxaflor (Closer) |
21.50 |
|
|
Tolfenpyrad(Bexar) |
27.25 |
|
|
Untreated |
25.00 |
*Letters indicate significant differences by post hoc analysis at p<0.05
Outside of malathion and flonicamid, the sulfoxaflor and tolfenpyrad are still NOT REGISTERED for use in strawberries. Before using any insecticide products, check with your local Agricultural Commissioner's Office and consult product labels for current status of product registration, restrictions, and use information.




- Author: Mark Bolda
- Author: Steven Koike
Introduction: A major purpose of this blog is to educate and inform on new emerging issues and developments in strawberries and caneberries. In addition, we also want to review and update common, well known issues that readers may be very familiar with. The following article is a review of a very important disease affecting the strawberry and caneberry industries: gray mold caused by Botrytis cinerea.
Causal Organism: Botrytis cinerea belongs to the fungal phylum Deuteromycota (sometimes also known as fungi imperfecti) and reproduces by forming asexual spores (conidia). The sexually reproducing stage has not been seen on strawberry or caneberry. The young mycelium of this fungus is septate, branched, and basically colorless. When this fungus is grown on potato dextrose agar, a common medium used to culture fungi, Botrytis cinerea is at first white and later turns gray as spores form. The spore producing structures are branched, up to 5 mm tall, and light to dark gray in color. Even under the low magnification of a dissecting microscope, one can readily see the distinctive “botryose” (Greek for bunch of grapes) clusters of spores at the ends of the spore-bearing branches (see sixth picture below).
Symptoms on Fruit: The rot from Botrytis is fairly simple to distinguish from the other fruit rots occurring in strawberries and caneberries. Generally, Botrytis rot will start as a light brown to gray spot (see third photo below) without any distinct margin around the affected area. This spot remains firm as it spreads and even a fruit completely rotten with Botrytis will retain its original shape. After a few days, if conditions are favorable (temperatures between 59o- 77oF), a brown to gray velvety growth will appear on the surface of the infected fruit.
Disease Cycle: Botrytis fruit infections on the Central Coast generally begin when the spore lands on the strawberry or caneberry flower. Given cooler temperatures and the presence of water, the spore germinates and infects the flower. If conditions are really favorable, the disease will progress in flower tissues and result in blighted blossoms that will no longer develop into fruit. Partial flower infections can cause brown lesions to form on the fruit receptacle; such flowers will not produce normal, fully developed fruit. In other cases the flower-invading Botrytis can become dormant and will not resume growing until fruit sugar content is more amenable for growth, at which point the disease will become evident from the brown lesion and subsequent gray velvety growth that occurs on the ripening fruit. If conditions become unfavorable for further disease development, Botrytis growth will stop and the lesion will become dry and leathery.
Because Botrytis is an aggressive colonizer of plant wounds, direct infection of the fruit can also occur if the fruit is injured from physical abrasion (rubbing caused by winds, for example), insect feeding, environmental extremes, other diseases, and other factors. Mature, ripe fruit are especially susceptible to infection because of their high sugar content and sensitive tissues. For this reason, Botrytis is an important component of post-harvest fruit losses.
Epidemiology: Botrytis spores (primary inoculum) are everywhere. The fungus grows well on senescent, dead tissues (old, dead strawberry stems and leaves; crop residues of other adjacent crops). Spores are blown by winds or splashed by rains onto flower and fruit tissues. It is important to note that the presence of free moisture for several consecutive hours is necessary for spore germination. Therefore, development of gray mold disease is greatest in cool and wet conditions, such as rain and the fog commonly experienced here on the Central Coast.
Control: Growers and managers should take a threefold approach to managing Botrytis gray mold in the field.
Fungicides: There is a substantial universe of fungicides available for the management of gray mold in strawberries and caneberries and a decent listing of these materials is available at the UC IPM website (http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/crops-agriculture.html). The key point for disease managers is to apply fungicides BEFORE major moisture events. As emphasized above, Botrytis spores need free moisture to germinate; therefore fungicides, which mostly act as protectants,should be in place before the occurrence of humidity and free moisture from rain or heavy fog . It is worth noting that the use of surfactants, which serve to better distribute fungicides over the plant surface as well as stabilize them, is strongly recommended with fungicide applications.
Sanitation: Removal of infected fruit from around the plant during the harvest season is helpful in reducing Botrytis gray mold potential, since each infected fruit produces millions of spores that can move onto nearby flowers and fruit. It is not necessary to remove fruit completely from the field; deposition of diseased fruit into the furrow and its periodic destruction by foot or machine traffic is sufficient. Additionally, removal of dead leaves on occasion can be of benefit because it removes another potential source of inoculum while at the same time maintaining more air circulation around the plant and keeping it drier.
Moisture management: Knowing that free moisture is critical to development of Botrytis grey mold gives managers a key tool in limiting development of this disease. For strawberries, planting so as to account for expected plant size and allowing for more air circulation is one step. It is worth noting that transplants can be chilled with an eye to managing plant size; short day varieties such as Chandler and Camarosa should not be chilled more than three days for most situations, and day neutral varieties such as Albion, San Andreas or Monterey generally should not be chilled more than 18 days. The use of drip irrigation, a universal practice in California, is essential for preventing irrigation water from contributing to favorable conditions for gray mold disease.
The use of macro-tunnels (also called high tunnels or Spanish tunnels) in caneberries results in a tremendous reduction of free moisture from rain or dew and a very real drop in the amount of gray mold disease to the extent that fungicide applications for Botrytis might be dispensed with entirely. There is no bigger step a caneberry grower can take to reduce Botrytis gray mold in their crop than to construct a macro-tunnel over it.
Before using any fungicide products, check with your local Agricultural Commissioner's Office and consult product labels for current status of product registration, restrictions, and use information.







