1976 Research Report MONTCALM EXPERIMENTAL FARM Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research personnel working at the Montcalm Branch Experiment Station have received much assistance in various ways. A special thanks is due each of these individuals, private companies and government agencies who have made this research possible. Many valuable contributions in the way of fertilizers, chemicals, seed, equipment, technical assistance, personal services, and monetary grants were received and are hereby gratefully acknowledged. Special recognition is given to Mr. Theron Comden for his devoted cooperation and assistance in many of the day-to-day operations and personal services. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION, WEATHER AND GENERAL MANAGEMENT ................... 1 Potato Yield Trials 1976 N.R. Thompson, R.W. Chase, E. Meister & R.B. Kitchen ...... ..4..... The Effect of Type of Seed Piece and Size for Growth, Yield and Quality of Russet Burbank Ron Troyer and R.W. Chase.................................... 9 Fertilizer Studies With Potatoes M.L. Vitosh and D.A. Hyde . .................................... 11 Weed Control in the Production Management System R.W. Chase, W.F. Meggitt, Richard Kitchen & Robert Bond ..... ..14. Herbicide-Insecticide Interactions on Potatoes A.L. Wells, R.W. Chase and W.F. Meggitt....................... 16 Effect of Pre-Storage Seed Treatment on Potato Production H. Spencer Potter.............................................. 18 Crop Rotation and the Influence of Root-Lesion Nematodes on Michigan Potato Production G.W. Bird.......................................................20 Influence of Experimental Nematicides on Control of Root-Lesion Nematodes and Potato Yields G.W. Bird....................................................... 23 Insecticide Evaluation on Potatoes Arthur L. Wells.................................................25 Validation of Potato Pest On-Line Computer Simulation G.W. Bird....................................................... 29 Corn Hybrids, Plant Population and Irrigation E.C. Rossman and Bary Darling.................................. 57 1976 Weed Control Studies on Pickling Cucumber, Peas and Snap Beans A.R. Putnam, Paul F. Boldt and A. Paul Love ......... 65 Influence of Nematicides and Subsoiling Beneath the Planting Row on the Development and Yield of Navy and Kidney Bean Plants G.W. Bird..................................... 77 MONTCALM BRANCH EXPERIMENT STATION RESEARCH REPORT R.W. Chase and M.H. Erdmann, Coordinators Department of Crop and Soil Sciences INTRODUCTION The Montcalm Branch Experiment Station was established in 1966 with the first experiments initiated in 1967. This report marks the completion of ten years of studies. The 40-acre facility is leased from Mr. Theron Comden and is located in west-central Michigan, one mile west of Entrican. The farm is used primarily for research on potatoes and is located in the heart of a major potato producing area. This report is designed to coordinate all of the research obtained at this facility during 1976. Much of the data herein reported represents projects in various stages of progress; so results and interpretations may not be final. RESULTS PRESENTED HERE SHOULD BE TREATED AS A PROGRESS REPORT ONLY as data from repeated trials are necessary before definite conclusions and recommendations can be made. WEATHER Tables 1 and 2 summarize the 9-year temperature and rainfall data. Average maximum temperature for April was unusually high particularly in comparison with 1975 and the 9-year average. Temperatures from April 14 to 18 ranged from 78 to 84 and many days were in the 60’s. May, however, was a cooler than usual month with the balance of the growing season about normal. The rainfall distribution however was 10 inches less in 1976 than 1975 and about 5 inches below the 9-year average. July, August and September were far below the 9-year average which necessitated the need for more intensive irrigation. The total rainfall recorded from April through September was the second lowest since records were initiated at the Farm in 1968. Irrigation applications of approximately one inch each were made 14 times (July 9, 12, 17, 22, 26 and August 2, 6, 10, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30 and September 7). SOIL TESTS For specific projects where more detailed analysis are needed the results are in the individual reports. Soil test results for the general plot area are: Pounds per Acre Pounds per Acre Pounds per Acre Pounds per Acre Mg pH P per Acre Pounds 6.7 360 K 288 Ca 778 209 Table 1. The 9-year summary of recorded maximum and minimum temperatures during the growing season at the Montcalm Branch Experiment Station. Year April Min April Max May Max May Min June Max June Min July Max July Min August Max August Min September September 6-Month average Min Max Max 6-month average Min 1968 61 37 62 41 74 53 80 55 81 58 74 50 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 56 54 53 47 54 57 48 58 35 35 31 30 36 36 28 35 67 65 65 70 63 62 73 63 43 47 39 47 42 41 48 41 9-year average 54 34 66 43 70 72 81 72 77 73 75 79 75 50 55 56 50 58 52 56 57 54 80 80 82 79 79 81 80 81 59 60 55 57 60 57 57 58 82 80 80 76 80 77 79 80 56 57 53 57 60 56 58 53 73 70 73 69 73 68 65 70 80 58 79 56 71 48 empty table cell 73 49 74 51 73 54 76 49 73 48 74 45 70 44 70 46 71 50 49 45 48 48 51 48 49 48 empty table cell Table 2. The 9-year summary of precipitation (inches per month) recorded the growing season at the Montcalm Station. July August September Year 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 9-year average April May 2.84 3.33 2.42 1.59 1.35 3.25 4.07 1.81 3.27 4.90 3.65 4.09 0.93 1.96 3.91 4.83 2.05 4.03 June 3.74 6.18 4.62 1.50 2.51 4.34 4.69 4.98 4.22 1.23 2.63 3.67 1.22 3.83 2.36 2.39 2.71 1.50 1.31 1.79 6.54 2.67 7.28 3.94 6.18 11.25 1.44 2.66 3.37 4.09 2.39 4.71 Total 17.32 18.16 28.52 11.91 19.53 19.13 23.97 25.87 15.86 20.0 3.30 0.58 7.18 4.00 2.60 1.33 1.81 3.07 1.40 2.81 FERTILIZERS USED Except for the specific fertility studies where the fertilizers are specified in the report, the following fertilizers were used on the potato plot area: Banded at planting - 20-10-10 - 650 lbs/A - 200 lbs/A Sidedressed Red clover plowed down. - 45-0-0 HERBICIDES Preemergence - metribuzin (Sencor) 1/2 lbs/A + alachlor (Lasso) at 1-1/2 qts/A Directed postemergence - metribuzin (Sencor) 1/4 lbs/A June 21 and 22. May 14. DISEASE AND INSECT CONTROL The systemic insecticide Temik was applied at planting at 3 pounds per acre. Foliar fungicide and insecticide sprays, applied with an air blast sprayer, were as follows: June 25 Se vi n July 24 Bravo + Thiodan July 31 Brav o + Mo ni tor August 7 Brav o + Mo nitor August 18 Brav o + Moni tor August 27 Brav o + Th iodan September 6 Brav o + Cygon POTATO YIELD TRIALS 1976 N.R. Thompson, R.W. Chase, E. Meister and R.B. Kitchen Department of Crop and Soil Sciences Twenty-five advanced seedlings and named varieties were planted at the Montcalm Research Farm in three blocks to permit harvests on August 10, September 1 and September 20. Yield of marketable tubers, total solids, chip ratings and after cooking darkening are shown in the following tables. Several cultivars demonstrated characteristics desirable in our Michigan program and will be increased for seed. When harvested August 10, the two seedlings AK37-19 and MS 002-171 pro­ duced equally high yields of US #1 potatoes that made exceptionally good potato chips. The total solids of the seedling AK37-19 were very high. MS 002-171 is a yellow fleshed potato with higher than average total solids. The Atlantic variety, while lower in yield, possessed high solids and made excellent chips. At later harvests AK37-19 and Atlantic increased in yield, maintained the high solids and chipped well. Two seedlings MS 706-34 and MS 711-8 exceeded 400 cwt/A. These are general purpose table varieties that store and cook well and have demonstrated the high yield over a period of years. Limited amounts of seed of these two seedlings are available for increase in seed programs. The seedling 003-69, a yellow flesh potato, makes excellent chips at harvest and after storage and reconditioning. It normally produces an average yield but its chip record over the past three years could make it very useful. Several newer seedlings in the replicated yield trials or in seedling increase plots will be included in trials in 1977. Varieties Selected for Increase 1977 Table Stock Variety Early - August 10 255 235-2 Marketable cwt/A Specific Gravity 1.087 Mid-Season - September 1 706-37 449 711-8 Mid-Season September 1 235-2 Mid-Season September 1 AK37-5 Mid-Season September 1 Late - September 20 470 706-34 711-8 Late - September 20 Late - September 20 AK37-5 Yellow Flesh 002-302 298 003-69 Yellow Flesh 413 396 374 372 365 289 1.079 1.075 1.091 1.077 1.083 1.081 1.077 1.083 1.090 4 3 5 1 Chip Rating 3 4 4 4 4 1 Seedling Increase Plots 1976 Planted May 13 - Harvested September 20 Marketable tubers cwt/A Specific Gravity Maturity * Seedling 102-2 103-54 105-2 108-5 203-2 231-2 305-15 305-17 305-19 305-22 305-24 307-1 307-6 * E - early, M = medium, L = late, VL = very late 1.095 1.081 1.090 1.097 1.085 1.081 1.078 1.086 1.099 1.076 1.072 1.102 1.100 326 355 377 370 304 304 507 312 312 341 326 283 341 M M M VL E E L VL L E E L VL When compared to Katahdin maturity. Chip Rating 4 1 2 4 1 5 6 4 4 6 7 3 4 Yield Trial 1976 - Second Harvest Montcalm Research Station September 1 Marketable tubers cwt/A Specific Gravity Chip* rating 50º Chip* rating 50 º Harvest 2 mos. 449 435 413 396 394 388 382 380 378 376 374 357 357 351 351 347 346 322 318 312 298 298 289 244 234 1.079 1.106 1.077 1.083 1.080 1.100 1.081 1.082 1.081 1.078 1.081 1.075 1.092 1.094 1.091 1.092 1.070 1.073 1.082 1.082 1.091 1.086 1.090 1.078 1.079 3 2 3 4 3 1 5 4 5 3 4 5 2 5 2 4 4 4 3 2 1 1 2 1 5 6 7 5 3 4 2 5 2 4 7 6 5 2 5 5 6 7 1 5 8 1 1 8 1 1 Variety 706-34 AK37-19 711-8 235-2 A6789-7 Atlantic Snowchip 645-2 231-2 709 AK37-5 305-15 002-408 Bellisle 645-1 103-59 007-201 Bison 503 002-171 002-302 004-198 003-69 Wischip Centennial Russet *Scale 1 white, 10 dark, 3 or less acceptable. **Scale 1 white, 5 dark, 3 or less acceptable. After cooking After cooking darkening** darkening** 1 hr. 24 hrs. 3 1 1 4 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 4 2 2 1 3 2 Yield Trial 1976 - First Harvest Montcalm Research Station August 10 Marketable tubers cwt/A Specific Gravity Chip Rating 1.101 1.086 1.084 1.083 1.087 1.100 1.068 1.081 1.076 1.078 1.075 1.081 1.095 1.080 1.087 1.090 1.087 1.082 1.076 1.080 1.073 1.081 2 1 2 4 4 1 3 3 4 5 6 3 2 3 6 2 4 5 4 3 7 6 314 293 263 261 255 252 244 240 236 234 232 228 226 211 199 193 187 187 185 181 156 154 Variety AK37-19 002-171 004-198 645-2 235-2 Atlantic 007-201 709 Bison AK37-5 706-34 503 003-69 Snowchip 645-1 002-302 103-59 Centennial Russet 711-8 Wischip A6789-7 Bellisle Varieties Selected for Increase 1977 Processing Variety Early - Harvested 314 August 10 AK37-19 Marketable cwt/A Specific Gravity 1.101 Early - Harvested August 10 002-171 Early - Harvested August 10 004-198 Atlantic Early - Harvested August 10 Mid-Season Harvested September 1 AK37-19 435 A6789-7 Mid-Season Harvested September 1 Atlantic Mid-Season Harvested September 1 002-408 Mid-Season Harvested September 1 Late - Harvested 425 September 20 103-59 A6789-7 Late - Harvested September 20 AK37-19 Late - Harvested September 20 002-408 Late - Harvested September 20 293 263 251 394 388 357 404 376 365 1.106 1.095 1.086 1.084 1.100 1.080 1.100 1.092 1.082 1.102 1.090 2 2 3 Chip Rating 1 2 1 3 1 2 3 2 2 The Effect of Type of Seed Piece and Size On Growth, Yield and Quality of Russet Burbank Ron Troyer and R.W. Chase Department of Crop and Soil Sciences A study was conducted in 1976 to evaluate the effect of seed piece type and size on the growth and yield of Russet Burbank potatoes. Whole and cut seed were compared using 1, 1 1/2, 2 and 2 1/2 ounce seed pieces of each type. Whole tubers were selected and sized for each category and 6 to 8 ounce tubers were selected from which the properly sized seed pieces were cut. The cut seed pieces were obtained from a comparable position (apical) from each tuber to avoid differences which might occur due to using an apical or stem end seed piece. The tubers were cut and well suberized before planting. Ten seed pieces were hand planted per plot with four replications. Observations were made on emergence and growth. At harvest, number of stems, number of tubers and yield were determined for each hill. RESULTS Table 1 summarizes the yield for each seed type and size. The one ounce seed piece for both the whole and cut seed resulted in smallest yields. Current recommendations for seed piece size are 1 1/2 to 2 ounces. Except for the two ounce the cut seed tended toward greater yields, however, this difference was not significant. The reduced yield of the two ounce cut seed is inconsistent with the trend of the yields from the 1 1/2 or 2 1/2 seed size. There was an increasing number of tubers per hill as seed piece size increased (Table 2). Whole seed had a greater number of tubers per hill, however, this was not a significant difference. The number of tubers per hill closely related to the numbers of stems per hill (Table 3). Again there were more stems with the larger seed pieces and a greater number with whole vs. the cut seed. There was no effect from any of these variables on specific gravity readings. These data tend to substantiate the current recommendation for using a 1 1/2 to 2 ounce seed piece. There was a yield reduction from using seed of one ounce or smaller whether whole or cut. Table 1. The total yield (cwt/A) of Russet Burbank potatoes planted with two seed types of four sizes. Seed Type Seed Size 1.0 oz. Seed Size 1.5 oz. Seed Size 2.0 oz. Seed Size 2.5 oz. Average Whole Cut Average 353 377 366 388 431 410 408 387 397 410 455 432 390 413 empty table cell Table 2. The total number of tubers harvested per hill of Russet Burbank potatoes planted with two seed types of four sizes. Seed Type Whole Cut Average 1.0 oz. 6.7 6.3 6.5 1.5 oz. 7.5 7.1 7.3 2.0 oz. 2.5 oz. Average 8.3 7.4 7.9 8.9 8.2 8.5 7.8 7.3 empty table cell Table 3. Number of stems per hill of Russet Burbank potatoes planted with two seed types and four sizes. Seed Type Whole Cut Average 1.0 oz. 3.0 2.7 2.8 1.5 oz. 3.5 3.1 3.3 2.0 oz. 4.4 3.6 4.0 2.5 oz. 4.6 4.0 4.3 Average 3.9 3.3 empty table cell Fertilizer Studies With Potatoes M.L. Vitosh and D.A. Hyde Department of Crop and Soil Sciences Two fertilizer studies were conducted with potatoes in 1976 at the Montcalm Experimental Farm. N-SERVE, a nitrification inhibitor, was evaluated at four rates of nitrogen, 0, 50, 100 and 150 pounds of N per acre on Russet Burbank potatoes. The nitrogen was applied as anhydrous ammonia, knifed into the soil April 13 several weeks before planting. Three rates of nitrogen were compared with and without one-half pound of N-SERVE. In addition, all plots received 650 pounds of a 20-10-10 starter fertilizer banded at planting time. Potato yield, size and specific gravity measurements were taken on each plot and the data are presented in Table 1. Total yield was significantly reduced at the 100 and 150 pound rates when N-SERVE was used. These findings support research information from Wisconsin and Indiana indicating that potatoes prefer nitrate­ nitrogen rather than ammonium-nitrogen. N-SERVE at these two rates gave a smaller percentage of large tubers (over 10 oz.) but a larger percent of knobby tubers. Specific gravity was increased at the 50 pound rate but decreased at the 150 pound rate. A starter fertilizer study was established at the Montcalm Experimental Farm to evaluate different fertilizer materials and ground-up alfalfa hay on yield and quality of potatoes. Russet Burbank was used as the test variety. The experiment was initially designed so as to create visual differences in growth for the 1976 spudtacular field day recognizing that the treatments were not necessarily a practice which potato growers might follow. The rate of the various fertilizer materials was determined by the initial setting of the planter fertilizer bins which applied 650 pounds of a 20-10-10 fertilizer. The setting for other materials was not changed since there was essentially no way to obtain equal rates of applica­ tion without using some type of filler material. Thus, each material was applied using the same setting on the planter and the rate was determined primarily by the physical properties of the material and its nutrient composition. The data for this experiment are shown in Table 2. Specific gravity ranged from 1.071 to a high of 1.080. Straight potash (0-0-60) produced the lowest specific gravity as could have been predicted by its high salt index. This treatment should also serve warning to those growers who use a fertilizer high in potassium at planting time. Mono-ammonium phosphate (12-62-0) and super phosphate (0-46-0) with no potash had the highest specific gravity. Straight urea (46-0-0) and the mixed fertilizer (20-10-10 treatment 5) had significantly lower specific gravity than the previously mentioned treatments. When alfalfa hay was banded with the mixed fertilizer, specific gravity was significantly increased (treatment 7 versus 5). Total yield was significantly increased by the addition of N, P and K (treatments 2, 3 and 4 versus 1), however, a combination of N-P-K tended to yield slightly better, particularly mono-ammonium phosphate and the 20-10-10 fertilizer with alfalfa. What effect alfalfa hay is having on yield is not known. Additional research will be required to assess if these differences are real and what constituent of alfalfa is affecting the growth process of the potato. Table 1. Effect of nitrogen rate and "N-SERVE" on yield, specific gravity and size of irrigated Russet Burbank potatoes at the Montcalm Experimental Farm. Treatment Lb/NA Specific Gravity Size Distribution % knobs Total Yield Size Distribution Size Distribution cwt/Acre % % Small Large Size Distribution % Med. 0 50 50 + N-SERVE 100 100 + N-SERVE 150 150 + N-SERVE LSD (.05) 1.078 1.076 1.080 1.080 1.078 1.080 1.076 0.003 20.7 18.0 18.3 16.2 25.1 17.0 21.4 5.6 14.5 14.5 13.7 11.4 11.6 14.1 16.6 53.0 54.8 55.5 54.5 50.1 51.4 50.7 11.8 12.7 12.5 17.9 13.1 17.5 11.2 N.S. N.S. 4.7 282 -281 293 323 269 320 269 33 Planted: May 11, 1976 Row spacing: 34 inches Seed spacing: 12 inches Basic fertilizer: 650 lb 20-10-10 Irrigation: 14 inches Harvested: October 7, 1976 Harvest area: 142 Sq. Ft. at planting Table 2. Effect of starter fertilizer materials on size, yield and specific gravity of Russet Burbank potatoes. Treat Starter1 Fertilizer Treatment Fertilizer Rate Lbs/A Salt Index Specific Gravity g/cc Knobs % Small % Medium % Large % Total Yield cwt/A 243 287 298 295 304 315 335 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 None 46-0-0 0-46-0 0-0-60 20-10-10 12-62-0 20-10-10 + alfalfa 0 454 681 733 650 611 650 461 — 75 10 116 - 30 - 1.079 1.077 1.080 1.071 1.076 1.080 1.079 26.0 19.6 25.9 27.0 19.0 17.2 22.2 14.1 14.1 11.2 8.8 10.4 12.2 13.2 48.4 49.4 47.0 46.6 46.7 52.2 45.0 11.5 16.9 15.8 17.7 23.8 18.3 19.6 LSD (.05)empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell .003 NS 3.6 NS 6.0 36 All plots received an additional 90 pounds of N per acre sidedressed June 21 Planted: May 11, 1976 Row spacing: 34 inches Seed spacing: 12 inches Irrigation: 14 inches Harvested: October 7, 1976 Harvest area: 142 sq. ft. Soil tests: pH=6.7, P=360, K=288, Ca=778, Mg=209 WEEP CONTROL IN THE PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM R.W. Chase, W.F. Meggitt, Richard Kitchen and Robert Bond Department of Crop and Soil Sciences PROCEDURE Foundation seed of the Russet Burbank variety was planted on May 10, 1976. Five preplant incorporated and preemergence herbicide treatments were applied to 16 row plots and replicated three times. On June 21, at the time that urea was sidedressed and the crop was hilled, four directed, postemergence herbicide applications were made on four row plots within each preemergence treatment. The preemergence and postemergence entries were as follows: PREEMERGENCE ENTRY EPTC (Eptam) ppi linuron (Lorox) linuron (Lorox) + alachlor (Lasso) metribuzin (Sencor) + alachlor (Lasso) metribuzin (Sencor) lbs/A 4 1 1/2 1 + 1 1/2 1/2 + 1 1/2 1/2 POSTEMERGENCE ENTRY metribuz in (Sencor) metribuzin (Sencor) + alachlor (Lasso) metribuzin (Sencor) + alachlor (Lasso) none - check lbs/A 1/4 1/4 + 1 3/8 + 1 1/2 empty table cell Weed control ratings at harvest, yields and specific gravity determinations were made. RESULTS There was no significant difference in the resulting total yield among any of the preemergence or postemergence treatments (Table 1). There was a lower yield in the Eptam treated plots because of inadequate broadleaf weed control. Except for this deviation there appears to be no apparent difference in yield. There was similarly no effect on specific gravity readings. Table 2 summarizes the at harvest weed control data for each of the preemergence entries. These data show that Eptam did not adequately control the broadleaf weeds, especially barnyard grass and pigweed. The principle observation to note is the degree of barnyard grass control was not adequate. Where a known barnyard grass or a similar grassy weed problem exists, the use of materials such as EPTC (Eptam) or alachlor (Lasso) are most effective on grass. Table 1. The total yield (cwt/A) of Russet Burbank potatoes when treated with different preemergence and postemergence herbicides. Preemergence Treatment Directed Postemergence Treatment Sencore Sencore +Lasso Directed Postemergence Directed Postemergence Directed Post Emergence Treatment Treatment None Sencor + Lasso Directed Postemergence Treatment Average Eptam Lorox Lorox + Lasso Sencor + Lasso Sencor Average 289 316 364 368 353 338 301 314 361 369 363 342 325 339 359 346 352 345 307 326 356 363 351 Empty table cell 314 336 341 366 336 338 Table 2. The effect of several preemergence herbicides on the control of certain weed species. Preemergence Treatment Eptam Lorox Lorox + Lasso Sencor + Lasso Sencor Weed Control Ratings Weed Control Ratings * * Labsquarter Pigweed Weed Control Ratings * Barnyard grass 3.9 9.8 10.0 10.0 9.8 2.5 9.3 9.7 9.5 9.0 8.6 6.2 9.6 9.3 5.5 * Weed Control Rating 0 = no control, 10 = complete control. Table 3. The effect of postemergence herbicides on the control of certain weed species. Postemergence Treatment Sencor Sencor + Lasso Sencor + Lasso Check-none Weed Control Ratings ** Lambsquarter Weed Control Ratings ** Pigweed Weed Control Ratings ** Barnyard grass 8.6 8.8 8.7 8.7 7.8 8.4 8.3 7.4 7.4 8.2 8.0 7.7 * These four postemergence treatments were made on plots treated with a preemergence herbicide. ** 0 = no control, 10 = complete control. HERBICIDE-INSECTICIDE INTERACTIONS ON POTATOES A.L. Wells Department of Entomology R.W. Chase and W.F. Meggit Department of Crop and Soil Sciences A study to determine the possible interaction of selected preemergence herbicides and soil systemic insecticides applied on potatoes at planting was conducted at the Montcalm Farm in 1976. The plots were established on May 10 using Superior and Russet Burbank variety seed in three replications of adjacent single 25 foot rows. The insecticides were banded with the fertilizer at the time of planting and the herbicides were applied to the soil surface in two-row plots covering both varieties and all insecticides prior to emergence of the potatoes. One plot was not treated with the systemics at planting to serve as a control for the study. Included in the herbicide component was a treatment of preplant Incorporated Eptam whereas the other herbicide treatments were applied preemergence. The DiSyston treatment plot was sidedressed with another application prior to hilling. All of the plots received a full foliar program of insecticides and fungicides during the season in addition to the soil systemics. The plots were examined carefully during emergence and periodically through the season to determine any abnormal symptoms which may have been caused by any of the herbicide or insecticide components alone or in combination with each other. The weed and insect control in the treated plots were excellent throughout the season and were not a limiting factor in the final yield except for the Eptam treatment. The plots were harvested on September 23 to determine the overall yields and size distribution of the tubers. Samples of the tubers from each plot were later checked for specific gravity. The list of herbicide and insecticide treatments and the yields of tubers from both varieties are presented in Table 1. Results All of the plots emerged uniformally with the systemic treatments slightly ahead of the untreated plots which has been noted in previous studies. This poor broadleaf weed control in the Eptam plot is reflected in the lower yields across all of the insect control treatments. The insect control was very good in all plots and probably did not affect the yield. The increased yields in the soil systemic plots were probably due to the early plant development which has been noted in other studies. This could be a response from nematode protection since it is most prominent in the Temik and Furadan plots. No adverse symptoms were observed on either variety which could be associated with the chemical treatments. The data are being analyzed statistically for further study. Table 1. List of Herbicide and Insecticide Treatments and Resulting Yields on both Varieties. A. List of Chemical Treatments: All treatment rates are active ingredient per acre (insecticides based on 34" rows). Herbicide Treatments Eptam 7 E.C. Lorox 50 W.P. Sencor 50 W.P. Lorox 50 W.P. + Lasso 4 E.C. Sencor 50 W.P. + Lasso 4 E.C. 4 lb ppi 1 1/2 lb pre 1/2 lb pre 1 lb 1 1/2 lb pre 1/2 lb 1 1/2 lb pre Insecticide Treatments Control (Foliars only) Temik 15 G Furadan 10 G DiSyston 15 G 3 lb 3 lb 3 lb B. Superior Variety - Total Yields (cwt)/A Herbicide Insecticide Foliars Insecticide Temik Insecticide Furadan Insecticide DiSyston Eptam Lorox Sencor Lorox + Lasso Sencor + Lasso 140 165 174 187 161 220 250 281 257 285 193 238 250 214 213 163 187 215 185 184 C. Russet Burbank - Total Yields (cwt)/A Herbicide Insecticide Foliars Insecticide Temik Insecticide Furadan Insecticide DiSyston Eptam Lorox Sencor Lorox + Lasso Sencor + Lasso 234 209 269 249 236 269 338 367 351 369 213 300 330 300 325 249 285 288 273 294 EFFECT OF PRE-STORAGE SEED TREATMENT ON POTATO PRODUCTION H. Spencer Potter Department of Botany and Plant Tests were conducted to determine effect of pre-storage treatment of seed potatoes with fungicides and bactericides on stand improvement and productivity. In the fall of 1975 washed and unwashed seed potatoes, variety Minona, were treated before storing with 7 different fungi­ cide and bacteriacide combinations to combat Fusarium dry rot and bacterial soft rot. Treated tubers were held in a commercial storage (temperature 40° - 45° F) from early October until the end of April 1976. Seed was selected at random from treated tubers held in storage, rated for dry and soft rot infection. Seed was cut and planted by hand (row width, 34", plant spacing 9") at the Montcalm Research Farm on May 11, 1976. Treatments were randomized in 2 adjacent blocks and replicated 4 times. Individual plots consisted of a single row 25" long. Fungicide and insecticide sprays were applied at regular intervals throughout the growing season, and plots were irrigated when necessary. A stand count was made six weeks after planting. Plots were harvested during the second week in October. Results: Treatment Rate (PPM) Condition of tubers % diseased tubers * % of diseased tubers * Soft Rot Dry Rot Stand * % Yield - cwt/A * Yield - cwt/A B U.S. #1 Mertect 340 + Chlorine 1500+200 Mertect 340 + Chlorine 1500+200 Mertect 340 + Nabac 25 EC Mertect 340 + Nabac 25 EC 1500+100 1500+100 unwashed 1500+200 washed Beniate 50W+ Chlorine unwashed 1500+200 Beniate 50W+ Chlorine washed Beniate 50W+Nabac 25EC 1500+100 Beniate 50W+Nabac 25EC 1500+100 unwashed Topsin M + Chlorine washed 1500+200 Topsin M + Chlorine 1500+200 unwashed Topsin M + Nabac 25 EC 1500+100 washed Topsin M + Nabac 25 EC 1500+100 unwashed washed 1500+200 Bravo 6F + Chlorine unwashed Bravo 6F + Chlorine 1500+200 empty table cell washed No treatment empty table cellunwashed No treatment washed unwashed washed 5 c 8 c 6 c 8 c 5 c 10 c 7 c 9 c 8 c 8 c 10 c 10 c 33ab 24 b 43a 29 b 0 b 1 b 2 b 1 b 0 b 1 b 0 b 0 b 1 b 1 b 0 b 0 b 1 b 2 b 5a 6a 91 b 93 b 94 b 96 b 96 b 94 b 94 b 93 b 92 b 91 b 93 b 93 b 85a 84a 79a 80ab 251.2 c 249.9 c 22.2 b 20.9 b 243.9 c 25.3a 284.0 d 282.7 c 263.6 c 260.0 c 264.6 c 251.5 c 253.3 c 277.2 c 272.3 c 212.2 b 218.5 b 178.0a 190.3ab 21.1 b 21.0 b 22.2 b 20.9 b 19.9 b 19.0 b 21.6 b 21.2 b 22.0 b 19.0 b 19.1 b 34.4a 32.0a *Average of 4 replications. Values followed by a common letter do not differ significantly at the 5% level (Duncan's Multiple Range Test). Summary: Treatment containing Mertect Beniate and Topsin were very effective in reducing the incidence of Fusarium dry rot in stored tubers. Bacterial soft rot was kept to a minimum with the addition of either chlorine or Nabac. All treatments except for those containing Bravo improved the stand and increased yields of U.S. #1 tubers. CROP ROTATION AND THE INFLUENCE OF ROOT-LESION NEMATODES ON MICHIGAN POTATO PRODUCTION G.W. Bird Department of Entomology The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of various crops grown in rotation with potatoes on tuber yield losses caused by the root-lesion nematode (Pratylenchus penetrans). A range containing five replicate plots of sudax, red clover, potatoes (Russet Burbank), corn and fallowing established at the MSU Montcalm Potato Farm in 1975 and planted with potatoes (cv Norchip) in 1976. Half of the range was maintained as soil infested with the root-lesion nematode and the other half was maintained in a relatively nematode-free environment. Nematode population density dynamics were monitored throughout the growing season, and the crop harvested. Root-lesion nematode population densities were highest where red clover was grown in 1975 (TABLE 1). During the early part of the growing season, populations of the root-lesion nematode were significantly higher (P=0.05) where red clover was planted the previous year (TABLE 2). In the presence of Temik 15G, the previous crop had no influence on population densities; whereas, in the absence of a nematicide, there were significant differences among the populations. Nematode control had a much greater influence on tuber yields than the previous crop (TABLE 3). TABLE 1 Population densities of Pratylenchus penetrans following five crops at the Montcalm Potato Research Farm 1975 Crop No. per 100cm3 soil 11/25/75 No. per 100cm3 soil 2/27/76 No. per 100cm3 soil 4/27/76 No. per gram root 11/25/76 Corn Sudax Red Clover Potato Fallow 11b1 15a 15a 14ab l1b 13a 29a 50a 40a 1la 22a 51a 80a 51a 25a 0a 10a 109b la 15a Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to the Student-Newman-Kuels Multiple Range Test. TABLE 2 Influence of crop rotation and chemical control on population densities of root-lesion nematodes (Pratylenchus penetrans) associated with potato roots 1976 treatment and 1975 cropNo. per 100cm3 soil No. per gram root 7/16/76 No. per 100cm3 soil 7/16/76 6/4/76 DiSyston Corn Sudan Red Clover Potato Fallow Temik Corn Sudax Red Clover Potato Fallow DiSyston DiSyston DiSyston 31ab1 4lab 55b 30ab 39ab 7abc 15bc 19c la l0abc Temik Temik Temik 27ab 21a 58b 17a 13a la 5ab 12abc 3ab 4ab 3.6ab 12.8b 11.8b 0.8a 0.8a 0.4a 0.4a 2.4a 0.0a 0.6a 1 Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to the Student-Newman-Kuels Multiple Range Test. TABLE 3 Influence of crop rotation and chemical control of nematodes on yields of Norchip potatoes. 1976 treatment and 1975 crop Yield (cwt/acre) A's Yield (cwt/acre) J's Yield (cwt/acre) Total B's DiSyston Corn Sudan Red Clover Potato Fallow Temik Corn Sudax Red Clover Potato Fallow DiSyston DiSyston DiSyston DiSyston Temik 228abc 203ab 192a 218abc 216abc 295c 288bc 291c 264bc 298c 0a 0a 0a 0a 0a Temik 4ab 4ab 9b 6b 8b 38c 32b 40c 41c 39c Temik 28ab 32b 26a 27a 27a 266ab 235a 232a 259ab 255a Temik 327c 324c 326c 297bc 333c 1 Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to the Student-Knewman-Kuels Multiple Range Test. INFLUENCE OF EXPERIMENTAL NEMATICIDES ON CONTROL OF ROOT-LESION NEMATODES AND POTATO YIELDS G.W. Bird Department of Entomology Eleven formulations of nematicides were evaluated for control of root­ lesion nematodes (Pratylenchus penetrans) associated with potato (cv Monona) at the Michigan State University Montcalm Potato Research Farm. Each treatment was replicated four times in a randomized block design, with each plot consisting of four rows, 34 inches apart and 50 ft in length. All of the fumigant nemati­ cides were injected to a 6-8 inch soil depth on April 21, 1976. Soil samples for nematode analysis (Centrifugation-flotation technique) were taken from each plot immediately before application of the soil fumigants. The non-fumigant nematicides and DiSyston 15G insecticide were applied at planting on May 13, 1976. Soil and root samples from nematode analysis (centrifugation-floation and shaker techniques) were taken at mid-season (July 26, 1976) and at harvest (September 9, 1976). The center two rows of each plot were harvested, graded and analyzed for quality. During the growing season the plants were maintained under normal commercial fertility, irrigation, insect control and disease control practices. There were no significant differences in initial soil population densities of P. penetrans among the experimental plots, and in all cases the population den­ sities were above the estimated threshold levels for most potato cultivars grown in Michigan. There were no significant differences among the soil population densities of P. penetrans associated with the nematicide treatments during the middle of the growing season or at harvest (see table). Based on P. penetrans recovered from root tissue, the corn cob formulation of Temik 15G resulted in the best nematode control. Vorlex and Vydate 10G also appeared to lower root population densities of P. penetrans. NA 060, Dacamox 10G, Furadan 10G and the Nemacur-DiSyston 15G formulation appeared to have less than desirable nematicides activity in this test. While similar initial population densities of P. penetrans at this site significantly (P = 0.05) reduced yields of cv Superior and cv Russet Burbank potatoes in 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976, they did not significantly inhibit yields of Monona in this test. The corn cob formulation of Temik 15G, however, did significantly (P - 0.05) increase total tuber yield compared with the Dacomox 10G, Mocap 10G and Nemacur-DiSyston 15G treatments. The corn cob formulation of Temik 15G also significantly (P=0.05) increased jumbo Grade yields compared with NA 061 and Nemacur-DiSyston 15G, and B Grade yields compared with Mocap 10G and Nemacur-DiSyston 15G. Three generalizations can be developed from these data; 1) Monona is very likely more tolerant to P. penetrans than Superior or Russet Burbank, 2) the corn cob formulation of Temik 15G, Vorlex and Vydate 10G appeared to suppress population densities of P. penetrans to a greater degree than the other materials evaluated in this test, and 3) NA 060, Furadan 10G, Dacamox 10G, Mocap 10G and Nemacur-DiSyston 15G did not perform as well as expected. None of the nematicide treatments had any significant influence on the specific gravity of the tubers. The plots treated with Mocap 10G suffered from poor early-season insect control. Furadan 10G would most likely have performed better if it had been applied in a band instead of in-row. Treatment, rate per acre and method of application Yield (cwt/care) Total Yield (cwt/Acre) Yield (cwt/acre) Yield (cwt/acre) B grade A grade Jumbo grade P. penetrans/ P. penetrans Specific GravityP. penetrans/ g root tissue 100 cm soil 7/26 7/26 100 cm soil 4/23 P. penetrans g root tissue 9/13 180ab 176ab 178ab Check (DiSyston 15G, 20 lb, in-row) 1873b1 Vorlex, 10 gal, broadcast + DiSyston 15G, 20 lb, in-row NA 061, 6.7 gal, broadcast + DiSyston 15G, 20 lb, in-row NA 060, 10 gal, broadcast + DiSyston 15G, 20 lb, in-row NA 055, 10 gal, broadcast + DiSyston 15G, 20 lb, in-row Temik 15G, gypsum, 20 lb, in-row Temik 15G, corn cob, 20 lb, in-row Vydate 10G, 30 lb, in-row Nemacur-DiSyston 15G, 20 lb, in-row 160b 171b Mocap 10G, 30 lb, in-row 183ab Furadan 10G, 30 lb, in-row 168b Dacamox 10G, 30 lb, in-row 190ab 192ab 209a 183ab 44ab 35ab 26b 37ab 31ab 45ab 57a 33ab 19b 39ab 4lab 43ab 139a 140a 147a 136a 155a 144a 148a 138a 138a 129a 134a 126a 3.4ab 1.079a 105a 4.lab 1.080a 79a 5.lab 1.079a 130a 2.8ab 1.076a 4.5ab 3.Oab 5.5a 3.9ab 2.7b 2.7b 4.9ab 4.2ab 1.074a 1.078a 1.076a 1.078a 1.076a 1.075a 1.079a 1.073a 97a 47a 139a 118a 51a 60a 47a 95a 123a 48a 31a 44a 17a 14a 36a 30a 18a 16a 17a 58a 51a 83ab 115b 11a 56ab 85ab 69ab l00ab 91b 115ab 23ab 10a 33ab 155b 43ab 310b 261b 46ab 34ab 0a 2ab 79ab 65ab 43ab 70ab 1Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05) according to the Student- Newman-Kuels Multiple Range Test. INSECTICIDE EVALUATION ON POTATOES Arthur L. Wells Department of Entomology A study to evaluate experimental insecticides for the control of foliar insects on potatoes and their resulting yields at harvest was conducted at the Montcalm Farm. Onaway and Russet Burbank seed were used in the study to represent the early and late maturing varieties. The plots were planted on May 11 using Premier Foundation seed in three replications of paired 25 foot rows each. The Onaway plot included ten treatments of soil systemic insecticides applied in a four inch band in the seed row at the time of planting and 20 foliar treatments applied with a CO2 sprayer on June 18 and July 21. Five leaf samples were taken from each of the treatment plots on July 13 to evaluate the materials for potato leaf hopper nymphs and early aphid control. The plots were examined weekly after the second foliar application but aphid populations did not build up sufficiently for enumeration. The plots were harvested on August 31 and September 1 and graded for size and yields deter­ mined. The specific gravities of tuber samples from each plot were deter­ mined later. The list of treatments, insect data and harvest data are presented in Table 1. The Russet Burbank plot included 17 treatments of soil systemic in­ secticides and 13 foliar treatments applied as described above on the Onaways. Five leaf samples were taken from each of the plots on July 13 to evaluate the materials for potato leaf hopper nymphs and early aphid control. Ten sweep samples with an insect net were obtained from each plot on July 28 to further evaluate the foliage feeding insects. The plots were examined weekly for aphids but the populations did not build up. Another sweep sample was obtained on August 27 but was lost before analysis. The plots were harvested on September 22 and 23 to determine yields and specific gravities on tuber samples. The data are presented in Table 2. Table 1. Insecticide Evaluation on Onaway Variety Material and Formulation Lb Tox* Insects/15 Leaves Insects/15 leaves Aphide Yields Cwt/A Pot. Leaf Hop. Nymphs Yields Yields % by size Yields % by size Gran 1 7/8-3 1/4 to 1 7/8 Yield % by size 3 1/4+ Soil Systemics Soil Systemics Soil Systemics Soil Systemics Soil Systemics 1.0757 1.0770 1.0767 1.0797 19 16 12 12 2 0 0 4 Soil SystemicsSoil Systemics 363 335 312 319 375 334 404 344 374 382 6 4 7 5 5 3 4 6 5 5 75 80 81 83 78 81 79 81 80 80 1 1 0 0 0 0 Foliars 7 1 2 2 5 9 4 17 16 17 13 15 15 1.0770 1.0783 1.0780 1.0773 1.0790 1.0787 Foliars FoliarsFoliars FoliarsFoliars 1.0780 1.0787 1.0750 1.0810 1.0786 1.0777 1.0763 324 332 346 316 339 322 330 86 78 83 84 84 80 84 7 17 13 11 11 15 9 7 5 4 5 5 5 7 3 8 4 314 357 333 5 5 5 78 87 82 17 8 13 Soil Systemics Nemacur 15% - Disyston 15% G Disyston 15G Disyston 15G + Disyston 15G (Sidedress) Furadan 10G Furadan 10G +' Furadan 4F (Foliar) Dacamox 10G Temik 15G Temik 15G Temik 15G (1/2 rate N) Temik 15G (No N) Foliars Mobil 9087 2 EC GCP 9646 4 EC Zolone 3 EC PP 557 2 E PP 557 2 E Vydate 2 E Bay SRA 12869 6 EC Croneton 4 E + Guthion 2 S Guthion 2 S Bay NTN 9306 6 EC Bay NTN 9306 6 EC + Monitor 4 WM Monitor 4 WM Orthene 75 S Furadan 4 F Pirimor 50 W SD-43775 2.4 EC SD-41706 2.4 EC Thiodan 3 EC Imidan 50 W + Pirimor 50 W DPX 3853 2 EC Untreated Untreated 0 1 Soil Systemics 12 lb 3 lb 3 lb 3 lb 3 lb 3 lb 1 lb 3 lb 2 lb 3 lb 3 lb 3 lb 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Foliars Foliars 3/4 lb 11 1/2 lb 47 1 lb 57 1 oz 14 2 oz 15 32 0.5 lb 22 1 lb 1/2 lb + 1/2 lb 1/2 lb 1 lb 1 lb + 3/4 lb 3/4 lb 1 lb 1 lb 4 oz 0.1 lb 0.1 lb 3/4 lb 1 lb 4 oz 1/2 lb -- -- 4 13 2 1 32 5 8 23 42 8 28 30 49 64 8 Foliar treats applied in water at 50 gal/A. 17 14 12 13 9 14 14 9 10 11 5 10 *Soil treats (In-row and Sidedress) rates based on 34" rows (15,390 ft/A.). 309 337 339 363 340 311 344 330 319 306 295 309 79 80 83 83 84 80 81 84 0 4 1 9 7 1 0 0 2 2 4 6 85 83 90 84 4 6 5 4 7 6 5 7 5 6 5 6 1.0767 1.0773 1.0770 1.0770 1.0777 1.0780 1.0767 1.0777 1.0773 1.0793 1.0790 1.0783 1.0775 1.0773 1.0807 able 2. Insecticide Evaluation on Russet Burbank Variety Insects/30 Sweeps Pot Lf Hops oil Systemics oil Systemicsoil Systemicsoil Systemics Insects/15 Pot Leaf Hop.Nymphs Aphids Lb Tox /A* leaves Insects/30 Sweeps Potato Beetles Insects/30 Sweeps Aphids oil Systemicsoil Systemics Yield Spec Cwt/A Gran oil Systemics oil Systemics aterial and Formulation oil Systemics emacur 15%-Disston 15% Gran 12 lb isyston 15G 3 lb isyston 15G 3 lb + Disyston 15G (Sidedress) 3 lb uradan 10G 3 lb uradan 10G 3 lb + Furadan 4F (Foliar) 1 lb acamox 10G 3 lb emik 15G 2 lb emik 15 G 3 lb emik 15G (1/2 rate Nitrogen) 3 lb emik 15G (No Nitrogen) 3 lb acamox 10G 2 lb S-15647 CR 10G 2 lb emik Gyp 15G 2 lb emik Gyp 15G 3 lb 1-1/2 lb C - 21865 75 WP C - 21865 75 WP 3 lb C - 21865 75 WP 6 lb oliars 5 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oliars 6 30 8 20 3 6 7 1 7 5 7 6 9 4 13 13 8 oliars 9 12 5 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 5 2 2 15 17 4 oliars oliars oliars roneton 4E (Bay Hox 1901) + Guthion 2S uthion 2S ay NTN 9306 6 EC ay NTN 9306 6 EC + Monitor 4 WM onitor 4 WM rthene 75S uradan 4F irimor 50W D-43775 2.4 EC D-41706 2.4 EC hiodan 3 EC midan 50 W + Pirimor 50 W PX 3853 2 EC ntreated ntreated 1/2 lb + 1/2 lb 1/2 lb 1 lb 1 lb + 3/4 lb 3/4 lb 1 lb 1 lb 4 oz 0.1 lb 0.1 lb 3/4 lb 1 lb 4 oz 1/2 lb —— —— 43 47 27 7 10 2 0 34 14 6 57 15 26 51 49 2 4 3 1 7 1 9 8 1 2 17 5 1 6 4 12 10 11 3 7 2 3 3 4 1 14 8 10 14 20 0 0 1 1 7 14 0 6 0 0 8 2 7 11 22 3 3 1 17 12 8 3 2 1 3 12 6 2 4 0 6 6 oliars 4 3 2 2 4 5 2 0 0 5 4 0 1 13 7 320 272 287 301 318 293 352 335 341 374 306 318 304 358 308 317 311 1.0863 1.0870 1.0867 1.0847 1.0843 1.0843 1.0903 1.0867 1.0873 1.0890 1.0863 1.0880 1.0880 1.0900 1.0883 1.0887 1.0880 oliars oliars 266 279 248 292 294 297 346 261 292 285 276 289 296 246 241 1.0840 1.0857 1.0840 1.0863 1.0867 1.0860 1.0853 1.0843 1.0860 1.0870 1.0857 1.0837 1.0867 1.0850 1.0860 *Soil (In-row and Sidedress) treats rates based on 34" rows (15,390 ft/A.). Foliar reais applied in water at 50 gal/A. Results Very few aphids developed in the plots of either variety during the season although the leaf samples on July 13 indicated their presence and potential increase. The potato leaf hopper nymphs were held in check by the soil systemics and most of the foliars even though it had been over three weeks since the first foliar application. The first sweep samples indicated very few differences between any of the treatments. It is doubt­ ful if these are statistically significant if analyzed. There is a wide variation in the yields from the different plots from either variety with the soil systemics generally higher. The apparent differences can not be explained by insect control only without further analysis. There appears to be no differences between the specific gravities of any of the tuber samples. VALIDATION OF POTATO PEST ON-LINE COMPUTER SIMULATION G.W. Bird Department of Entomology The objective of this investigation was to validate the interactive potato root-lesion nematode computer simulation developed at M.S.U., and to convert it to potato varieties of economic significance in Michigan. Ninety-six 50 ft. rows of potatoes (32 of Superior, 32 of Onaway and 32 of Russet Burbank) were planted at the Montcalm Potato Farm (5/12/76). Half of the plants were maintained in a soil environment containing the root-lesion nematode (Pratylenchus penetrans) and half were maintained in a relatively nematode-free environment. The area was divided into eight separate blocks. Beginning on 5/21/76, 48 plants (16 from each variety, 8 from each soil environment, and 6 from each block) were harvested every seven days through 9/7/76. On each date, the following parameters were measured: 1. Tuber fresh weight 2. Tuber dry weight 3. Stolon fresh weight 4. Stolon dry weight 5. Root fresh weight 6. Root dry weight 7. Shoot fresh weight 8. Shoot dry weight 9. Mother tuber fresh weight 10. Mother tuber dry weight 11. Shoots per mother tuber 12. Root distribution 13. Nematodes per plant 14. Nematodes per gram root tissue 15. Nematodes per 100 cm3 soil 16. Number of second order roots Some of these data are presented in Figures 1-28, and are being used to convert the M.S.U. Potato-Pest Computer Simulation from the original German varieties to Russet Burbank, Superior and Onaway. A systems scientist and several indi­ viduals employed by the M.S.U. Pest Management program are working on this pro­ ject, and should be completed within the next six months. The potato simula­ tion is unique and has been demonstrated to a diverse and large segment of the scientific community. It has been received with favor and recognition of its potential for pest-crop ecosystem prediction has been even better than expected. FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 FINGURE 6 FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8 FIGURE 9 FIGURE 10 FIGURE 11 FIGURE 12 FIGURE 13 FIGURE 14 FIGURE 15 FIGURE 16 FIGURE 17 FIGURE 18 FIGURE 19 FIGURE 20 FIGURE 21 FIGURE 22 FIGURE 23 FIGURE 24 FIGURE 25 FIGURE 26 FIGURE 27 CORN HYBRIDS, PLANT POPULATION AND IRRIGATION E.C. Rossman, and Bary Darling Department of Crop and Soil Sciences Performance data for 80 commercial corn hybrids evaluated in 1976 with irrigation and without irrigation are presented in Table 1. Twelve inches of supplemental water were supplied in ten applications on July 12, 17, 22, 26 and August 2, 6, 10, 18, 21, 24. Bouyoucous soil moisture blocks were placed at 6, 12, 18 and 24 - inch depths in both irrigated and unirrigated plot areas. Irrigated yields averaged 84.6 bushels per acre more than unirrigated — 156.4 vs 71.8, an increase of 118%. Hybrids ranged from 120.2 to 183.2 irrigated and 48.9 to 92.6 bushels per acre without irrigation. Hybrids significantly better than the average yield (arranged in order of increasing moisture content at harvest) are listed below. Sixteen of the nineteen hybrids were in the highest yielding group for both irrigated and unirrigated plots. The correlation of irrigated with unirrigated yields was highly significant, .490**, The correlation was not as high as in other years when it ranged from .7 - .9. indicating that the hybrids tended to respond alike in both situations. Irrigated Cowbell PSX 7300 (2X) Northrup King PX32 (2X) Michigan 4122 (2X) Michigan 407-2X (2X) Pioneer 3780 (2X) Security SS102 (2X) Pioneer 3709 (MSX) Golden Harvest H-2450(2X) Funk G-4444 (2X) Super Crost S27 (2X) Asgrow RX58 (2X) Pick XR44 (2X) Blaney B606 (2X) Michigan 5802 (2X) Funk G-4321A (2X) U.S. Steel 0011 Acco UC3301 (2X) Mlgro M-0301 (2X) Unirrigated Cowbell PSX7300 (2X) Northrup King PX32 (2X) Michigan 4122 (2X) Michigan 407-2X (2X) Pioneer 3780 (2X) Security SS102 (2X) Blaney EX7305 (2X) Pioneer 3709 (MSX) Golden Harvest H-2450 (2X) Funk G-4444 (2X) Pick XR44 (2X) Blaney B606 (2X) Michigan 5802 (2X) Funk G-4321A (2X) Acco UC3301 (2X) Migro M-0301 (2X) Average, highest and lowest yields for corn hybrids irrigated not irri­ gated for a 9-year period, 1968 - 1976, are given in Table 2. The average yielding hybrid has given a response of 49 bushels to irrigation. The highest yielding hybrids have responded with 62 bushels added yield while the lowest yielding hybrids have given only 32 bushels added yield when irrigated. These results demonstrated the importance of choosing high yielding hybrids to maximize returns from irrigation with little, if any, additional cost. Plant Population x Irrigation Five adapted hybrids at four plant population irrigated and not irrigated were grown in each of nine years, 1968 - 1976, Table 3. Over the nine-year period, a population of 23,200 has given the highest average yield (172 bushels) when irrigated while 19,100 has given the highest yield (113 bushels) without irrigation. The 23,200 population irrigated has given the highest yield in eight of the nine years. The average 9-year increase due to irrigation has been 71 bushels per acre at the 23,300 population. Moisture content of grain at harvest has averaged .5 - 1.0% higher for the higher plant populations. Stalk lodging has increased slightly with increased plant population. Table 2. Average, highest and lowest yields for com hybrids irrigated and not irrigated for nine years, 1968 - 1976. Year No. of hybrids tested Average Irrigated Average Not Irrigated Highest Irrigated Highest Not Irrigated Lowest Irrigated Lowest Not Irrigated 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 80 75 76 72 72 56 64 63 56 empty table cell Average 156 154 112 114 157 163 144 146 136 143 72 125 103 101 137 28 103 86 96 94 183 207 134 138 206 211 194 185 182 182 93 157 122 120 179 42 128 109 123 120 120 106 65 78 99 91 95 97 92 93 49 80 58 73 91 11 70 56 65 61 Table 3. Average yield at four plant populations irrigated and not irrigated for nine years, 1968 - 1976. Year 15,200 Irrigated 15,200 Not Irrigated 19,100 Irrigated 19,100 Not Irrigated 23,200 Irrigated 23,200 Not Irrigated 27,500 Irrigated 27,500 Not Irrigated 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 153 158 118 108 152 173 122 126 144 72 136 100 97 132 37 91 91 114 174 183 130 134 187 189 144 158 169 84 164 111 116 159 35 112 109 130 181 196 135 128 191 191 158 173 193 81 151 98 106 149 20 93 96 107 Average 140 97 163 113 172 101 161 172 120 108 161 181 151 148 178 153 68 146 94 102 144 11 85 86 89 92 NORTH CENTRAL MICHIGAN Montcalm County Trial - Irrigated vs. Not Irrigated One, Two, Three Year Averages - 1976, 1975, 1974 Zone 3 % Moisture 1976 % % Moisture 2 yrs. Moisture3 years Bushels Per Acre1976Irrig Bushels per acre 1976 Not Irrig Bushels Per Acre 2 years Irrig Bushels Per Acre 2 years Not Irrig Busehls Bushels Per Acre 3 years Irrig Per Acre 3 yearsNot Irrig % Stalk Lodging1976Irrig 197 % Stalk Lodging 6 Not Irrig % Stalk Lodging 2 years Irrig % Stalk Lodging 2 years Not Irrig % Stalk Lodging 3 years Irrig % Stalk Lodging 3 years Not Irrig Table 1 Hybrid (Brand- Variety) Northrup King PX20 (2X) Pick 185 (Sp.) Pride 2206 (2X) Pick 6266 (Sp.) Michigan 280 (4X) Funk G-5191 (4X) Michigan EXP7502 (3X) Sohigro 12 (2X) Migro M-0101 (2X) Michigan 2853 (3X) Pick P23 (Sp.) DeKalb XL12 (2X) Michigan 333-3X (3X) Wolverine W128 (2X) Super Crost 1610 (2X) Pride 3315 (2X) Michigan 3093 (3X) Funk G-4195 (3X) Funk G-4141 (2X) Michigan 396-3X (3X) Michigan 3102 (2X) Blaney B443 (3X) Funk G-4252 (3X) Blaney B302 (2X) Asgrow RX2345 (2X) -- -- -- 20 20 23 23 128.0 17.4 18.0 -- -- 131.2 18.2 -- -- 133.7 18.5 -- -- 117.8 18.6 133.0 137.8 18.8 18.8 -- -- 140.5 -- 120.2 18.9 -- 139.2 21 24 19.1 138.3 21 19.2 23 -- 19.2 137.4 21 19.6 147.4 19.7 21 144.0 21 19.7 129.6 20.4 22 124.5 20.4 -- 138.4 22 - 150.9 20.5 21 20.8 148.6 22 - 21.3 152.2 21.4 23 155.9 21.5 159.6 157.7 21.5 21.6 149.5 21.7 154.3 21.7 -- -- 149.7 23 24 - 23 22 26 24 23 24 27 26 27 25 26 -- 58.8 48.9 64.7 55.4 57.8 69.4 68.0 53.1 66.3 66.2 64.0 62.4 78.9 56.0 54.6 59.6 76.4 63.6 75.2 68.3 76.0 76.9 73.7 72.3 73.0 132 -- -- -- -- -- 128 -- 85 -- 75 -- -- -- 88 83 -- 83 97 78 81 -- -- 140 134 -- 136 144 126 130 -- 155 141 154 158 158 156 147 148 -- -- 1.5 12.3 3.6 2.3 6.7 9.2 6.0 8.6 2.9 3.6 4.5 30.6 -- 10.2 -- 6.3 -- 19.8 -- 6.2 14.5 -- 15.7 -- 11.7 9.6 124 -- -- -- 124 -- -- -- 130 130 -- 129 137 119 123 90 -- -- -- 86 -- -- -- 91 92 -- 90 103 85 89 -- -- 5.7 4.4 2.2 1.4 10.4 0.7 101 - - 3.7 6.0 86 4.4 95 98 6.5 104 2.2 99 - - 7.3 93 8.7 5.2 94 3.6 -- 104 108 138 139 -- 96 99 -- 131 148 147 93 - - 10.5 16.1 3.3 7.4 9.2 1.6 10.5 26.0 13.0 12.3 9.0 19.0 9.1 20.1 7.2 -- -- -- 3 6 -- -- -- -- 3 4 7 2 4 4 -- -- 4 15 -- 8 8 17 6 4 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 8 4 5 11 2 3 7 3 7 3 3 3 6 7 3 -- -- 6 - 15 4 7 - 2 7 2 6 10 - 6 5 12 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 11 6 6 12 4 4 4 - 10 - 4 4 - 4 9 -- ——— Table 1 Continued Michigan EXP7501 (3X) Wolverine W155 (2X) 1,2 Cowbell PSX7300 (2X) Pioneer 3958 (2X) Super Crost 1692 (2X) 21.8 21.8 22.1 22.1 22.1 22.1 22.4 22.5 22.5 Cowbell MSX102 (2X) Acco U334 (3X) Acco UC2301 (2X) Funk G-4343 (2X) Migro M-1020 (2X) ——— ——— ——— 28 24 26 23 25 22 ——— ——— Sohigro 22 (2X) 23 ——— Blaney B401 (2X) ——— Golden Harvest H-2370 (2X) 22.5 ——— 27 Asgrow RX53 (2X) 25 ——— ——— Super Crost 2350 (2X) ——— 24 25 ——— 27 24 24 28 26 23 ——— ——— ——— ——— 28 ——— 28 ——— 30 ——— 30 ——— ——— Blaney B303A (2X) Blaney B605WX (2X) 1,2 Northrup King PX32 (2X) 1,2 Michigan 4122 (2X) 1,2 Michigan 407-2X (2X) 1,2 Pioneer 3780 (2X) Pride 4404 (2X) Sohigro 44 Super Crost 1901 (2X) Wolverine W166 (2X) 1,2 Security SS102 (2X) 2 Blaney EX7305 (2X) 22.5 22.6 22.7 22.7 22.8 23.2 23.2 23.4 23.6 23.6 22.8 23.1 23.1 25 23.2 25 23.2 25 25 26 ——— 26 25 ——— 25 25 25 26 23.8 23.8 23.9 24.0 24.0 Michigan 572-3X (3X) Michigan 410-2X (2X) Cowbell PSX4100 (2X) 28 30 29 30 155.3 153.1 170.8 149.9 147.7 130.9 140.6 154.0 151.8 162.0 141.5 147.3 161.4 153.3 161.8 160.7 149.6 172.1 180.0 176.8 169.2 178.9 155.6 154.9 166.2 176.0 169.3 164.5 170.4 158.5 74.6 ——— 76.5 ——— 84.2 73.4 66.6 158 155 139 ——— 62.7 73.8 70.7 72.4 75.1 ——— 65.5 68.5 76.9 65.9 69.9 ——— 149 ——— 161 135 157 160 159 151 ——— ——— 139 140 133 ——— ——— ——— 103 100 85 ——— 102 ——— ——— ——— 105 ——— 86 96 105 101 92 ——— ——— ——— 170 180 173 169 173 108 115 109 103 107 ——— 155 90 173 103 ——— ——— 106 163 160 98 164 106 94 149 ——— 71.1 67.4 79.8 88.9 80.6 75.6 81.8 64.6 61.6 68.2 84.1 78.9 68.0 78.2 75.8 ——— ——— 99 100 94 ——— ——— 108 ——— ——— ——— ——— 105 95 96 ——— ——— 107 ——— 113 ——— 108 ——— 100 ——— ——— 105 104 108 96 3.7 8.2 0.8 3.0 2.9 5.3 2.2 4.5 3.0 1.5 5.7 6.0 1.5 7.0 3.9 10.9 0.9 0.7 3.7 0.7 3.3 3.8 2.9 3.0 3.9 6.2 3.8 3.2 6.9 6.9 14.8 18.6 25.4 9.4 9.0 9.7 14.4 13.6 10.6 9.7 16.4 16.9 18.8 15.4 12.3 18.0 14.9 13.7 10.2 12.1 7.6 16.1 11.5 24.0 6.1 18.7 11.5 3.8 9.8 13.5 ——— ——— 4 2 3 ——— ——— 4 2 ——— 5 9 4 7 3 ——— ——— 3 2 2 2 4 ——— 2 5 ——— 3 5 6 7 8 ——— ——— ——— ——— 16 6 7 ——— ——— 3 1 2 ——— —— ——— 1 ——— ——— 13 11 ——— 3 18 11 5 2 8 ——— ——— 6 ——— ——— ——— 11 4 5 ——— ——— ——— 4 ——— ——— ——— 12 8 6 ——— ——— 10 5 6 ——— 2 ——— 1 ——— 5 10 3 ——— ——— 2 13 7 ——— ——— ——— 8 5 7 9 2 3 4 5 ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— 7 5 7 9 6 3 5 6 ——— ——— ——— ——— 148 ——— ——— 146 140 139 ——— 153 160 ___ 154 ——— 148 ——— 144 148 154 137 Table 1 Continued 24.2 ——— 1,2 Pioneer 3709 (MSX) ——— 1,2 Golden Harvest H-2450 (2X) 24.5 26 24.7 24.8 27 24.9 27 Pride R290 (2X) 1,2 Funk G-4444 (2X) 1,2 Super Crost S27 (2X) Michigan 5443 (3X) U.S. Steel 0050 1 Asgrow RX58 (2X) 1,2 Pick XR44 (2X) 1,2 Blaney B606 (2X) 26 24.9 25.3 ——— 25.4 ——— 25.6 ——— 25.8 26 Golden Harvest EXP445 (2X) 25.8 ——— 25.8 28 26.2 28 26.3 28 26.9 ——— ——— Funk G-4366 (2X) Migro M-1130 (2X) 1,2 Funk G-4321A (2X) 1,2 Michigan 5802 (2X) 1 U.S. Steel 0011 1,2 Acco UC3301 (2X) Pioneer 3535 (2X) Michigan 575-2X (2X) 1,2 Migro M-0301 (2X) Average Range 27.1 27.6 30 27.6 30 27.7 28 28.7 ——— 22.7 24 ——— ——— 29 30 30 ——— ——— ——— ——— 31 ——— ——— 31 32 ——— ——— 33 32 ——— 28 178.6 92.6 170.9 81.1 ——— 68.2 163.7 79.8 183.2 179.6 86.4 ——— 161 175 170 168.4 78.0 161.6 70.5 171.0 75.6 179.5 89.4 171.5 90.3 164.2 73.0 178.2 88.2 167.6 73.8 163.2 65.6 173.4 80.3 ——— ——— 174.0 73.0 173.4 79.9 167.5 74.5 169.7 76.2 173.5 87.0 ——— 156.4 71.8 168 ——— ——— ——— ——— 174 ——— 183 169 167 ——— ——— ——— 190 184 169 158 ——— ——— ——— ——— 101 107 113 ——— ——— 105 ——— ——— ——— 117 ——— ——— 152 160 148 ——— 153 120 103 102 ——— 148 153 ——— ——— 118 116 106 ——— 167 ——— 156 ——— ——— 106 112 104 ——— 112 ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— 101 104 ——— ——— 114 ——— 109 ——— 3.7 8.1 0.0 21.3 10.8 15.5 0.7 20.3 1.5 19.4 3.0 13.2 2.9 22.3 3.7 16.2 2.2 13.3 0.7 3.3 1.6 6.9 3.5 14.5 0.8 18.1 2.2 5.1 18.7 0.7 8.4 28.0 1.5 18.1 2.3 1.5 6.9 3.7 3.7 6.9 ——— ——— ——— ——— 9 2 2 11 12 13 ——— ——— 6 2 1 ——— 3 ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— 2 2 1 4 ——— ——— ——— ——— 9 3 ——— ——— ——— 1 ——— 8 ——— 1 12 2 5 ——— ——— ——— ——— 8 8 9 ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— 2 8 3 1 2 4 ——— ——— 1 10 2 ——— 6 3 ——— 7 4 ——— ——— 99 143 101 4.1 13.3 4 9 3 6 17.4 to 28.7 20 to 30 23 to 33 120.2 to 183.2 48.9 to 92.6 126 to 190 75 to 120 119 to 167 85 to 114 0.0 to 12.3 1.5 to 30.5 1 to 11 2 to 18 1 to 7 2 to 12 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell Least significant difference 1.1 0.8 0.7 14.4 6.8 8 7 5 5 1Significantly better than average yield, irrigated, 1976. 2Significantly better than average yield, not irrigated, 1976. Table 1 Continued empty table cell Planted Harvested Soil Type Previous Crop 1976 May 5 October 29 Montcalm sandy loam Clover Population Rows Fertilizer Irrigation Soil Test: pH Soil Test: P K Soil Test: 19,300 30" 336-156-156 12 inches 6.7 403 (very high) 163 (medium) Farm Cooperator: Theron Comden, Lakeview County Extension Director: James Crosby, Stanton 1975 May 7 October 15 Montcalm sandy loam Clover 20,700 30" 255-110-110 9 inches 6.5 268 (very high) 257 (high) 1974 May 4 October 26 Montcalm sandy loam Sorghum - Sudan seeded to rye in fall 20,500 30" 150-120-170 8 inches 6.1 340 (very high) 198 (medium) 1976 WEED CONTROL STUDIES ON PICKLING CUCUMBERS, PEAS AND SNAP BEANS A.R. Putnam, Paul F. Boldt and A. Paul Love Department of Horticulture Summary Cucumbers. More consistent weed control treatments are still needed for seeded cucumbers. Of the new chemicals tested, HOE-23408 and VEL-5052 continued to look promising. Several combinations involving HOE-23408 gave excellent re­ sults. Poor soil moisture after treatment made it impossible to accurately assess crop safety with EL-161. Several methods were evaluated to allow safe use of chloramben (AMIBEN) on cucumbers. The only method which looked promising was the use of activated charcoal sprayed in a 2 inch band over the seeded row. Both paraquat and glyphosate gave good weed knockdown prior to seeding cucumbers in a stale stale seedbed. Peas. Since we had not conducted herbicide trials on peas for several seasons, and since the acreage has increased considerably in the Montcalm area, tests were established to evaluate pea and weed response to a large number of products. In an early trial with low weed densities, good weed control was ob­ tained with most of the chemicals tested. All of the PPI dinitroanilines except profluralin (TOLBAN) caused some visible injury or stand reduction on peas. Several preemergence combinations including propachlor (RAMROD) + dinoseb (PREMERGE), HOE-23408 + dinoseb, and penoxalin (PROWL) + dinoseb gave good weed control without injury. Postemergence applications of MCPA (DOW MCP AMINE) + HOE-23408, or dinoseb + HOE-23408 also gave excellent results. In a late planting, under dry conditions, the PPI dinitroaniline chemicals were effective and safe. The preemergence and postemergence combinations mentioned above also provided good results in this test. Snap Beans. Many of the same chemicals evaluated on peas have been evalu­ ated on snap beans for several seasons. In a PPI test, CGA-24705 was safe at rates up to 2.5 lb/A. Of several dinitroanilines tested, tolerance to dinitroa­ mine (COBEX) and penoxalin (PROWL) was marginal. Surface preemergence applica­ tions of CGA-24705 and ethofumesate (NORTRON) gave satisfactory weed control without injuring beans. The use of dinoseb (PREMERGE 3) as an overlay or in combination with other herbicides often improved the results on broadleaf weeds. Both paraquat (PARAQUAT CL) and glyphosate (ROUNDUP) performed satisfactorily to kill emerged weeds in a stale seedbed. Key to abbreviations used in data tables: BYGR = Barnyardgrass CIR = Crop injury rating COLQ = Common lambsquarters CUCU = Cucumber GRD = Grade LACG = Large crabgrass PO = Postemergence PPI = Preplant incorporated PRE = Preemergence RRPW = Redroot pigweed SNBE = Snap bean TEND = Tenderometer Rating system: 0 = No weed control or crop injury 7.5 = Acceptable weed control 10.0 = Complete weed control or complete crop kill Cucumber Evaluation, Stale Seedbed Location: Soil type: Date of planting: Plot size: Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican McBride Sandy Loam June 18, 1976 Variety: Carolina 4’ x 20' Replication: 3 GPA: 36 HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW APPLIED PRE DATE JUNE 18 AIR T. 78° SOIL T 83° SOIL MOIST MOIST WIND 5-8 MPH SKY SUNNY NOTE: Weed growth June 18, RRPW 4 leaf, BYGR 3-5 leaf, COLQ 4-6 leaf. Weeds per sq ft June 29, RRPW 4.2, BYGR 2.2, COLQ 3.4 CUCU75031 TRT NO CHEMICAL FORM RATE HOW APP GRD-1 LBS/PL 081276 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell CONTROL 1 2 WEEDED CONTROL empty table cell 3 4 5 6 PARAQUAT + X-77 PARAQUAT + X-77 NON 2139 NON 2139 2EC 2EC 3WS 3WS 0.0 empty table cell2.0 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.9 empty table cell PRE PRE PRE PRE empty table cell .50 1.00 .75 1.50 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell LSD AT FIVE PERCENT LEVEL COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT) empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell .5 empty table cell17. GRD-2 LBS/PL 081276 GRD-3 LBS/PL 081276 DVRSZ LBS/PL 081276 YIELD 081276 T/A BYGR RATING 062976 RRPW RATING 062976 COLQ RATING 067976 0.0 3.1 3.4 2.7 4.0 3.4 0.0 6.2 8.2 7.0 8.2 7.0 .7 13. 3.0 27. 0.0 6.9 9.5 10.7 10.8 7.7 2.6 19. 0.0 4.9 6.2 6.0 6.7 5.4 1.4 16. 0.0 10.0 5. 7 6.0 4.7 6.7 2.1 21. 0.0 10.0 5.0 5.7 4.3 6.3 1.0 10. 0.0 10.0 5.0 5.3 4.0 5.7 .5 60 Preemergence Herbicide Evaluation in Pickling Cucumbers Location: Soil type: Date of planting: June 4, 1976 Variety: Carolina Plot size: Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican McBride Sandy Loam 4' x 20' Replications: 3 GPA: 36 HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW APP PRE NOTE: No rainfall occurred within 8 days after application. Plots were SOIL MOIST ADEQUATE WIND 3-5 MPH DATE JUNE 4 SOIL T 87° AIR T 82° SKY SUNNY RH 44% irrigated on June 12. Weeds per 1 ft. June 18, 1976, BYGR 2.0, RRPW 5.9, COLQ 2.1. empty table cell empty table cell BYGR RATING 061876 empty table cell RRP W Rating 061876 COLQ Rating 061876 CUCU CIR 061876 STAND COUNT 062476 0.0 0.0 .7 2.3 1.7 1.7 4.3 3.0 6 .0 4.3 2. 3 5.0 7.7 1.0 5.3 8.0 7.7 5.3 4.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 .7 2.7 2.0 1.7 4.7 3.0 6.0 4.3 2.7 5.3 7.3 1.7 5.0 7.3 6.3 5.7 5.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 .7 1.0 .7 1.3 .3 2.0 1.0 1.3 1.7 1.7 .3 1.3 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.7 1.7 52.3 60.0 51.3 50.0 58.0 48.3 52.3 54.0 48.3 55.3 3 9.0 41.0 44.0 50.7 56.7 52.3 44.3 61.7 55.0 58.0 2.1 33. 2.3 35. 1.0 59. 18.3 21. CUCU76032 TRT NO RATE CONTROL CHEMICAL FORM empty table cell 1 2 WEEDED CONTROL empty table cell 0.75 EL-161 3 1.00 EL-161 4 1.25 5 EL-161 HOE-2340 8 1.00 6 2.00 7 HOE-2340 8 1.30 8 VEL 5052 2.00 VEL 5052 9 3.00 VEL 5052 10 1.00 DINOSEB 11 2.00 DINOSEB 12 4.00 NAPTALAM 13 4.00 14 BENSULIDE 1.50 CHLORAMBEN ME 15 NAPTALAM 16 4.00 1.00 HOE-2340 8 NAPTALAM BENSULIDE CHLORAMBEN ME HOE-2340 8 CHLORAMBEN ME BENSULIDE 3EC 3EC 3EC 3EC 3EC 2EC 2EC 2EC 3EC 3EC 2WS 4EC 2EC 2WS 4EC 3EC 3EC 2WS 3EC 19 3EC 4EC 17 18 20 NAPTALAM DINOSEB 2WS 3EC 4.00 4.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 4.00 4.001.00 0.0 empty table cell0.0 1.0 0.7 1.3 1.0 7.0 6.3 7 .3 7.0 2.7 0.7 7.0 0.7 1.7 7.0 HOW APP PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PR: PRE PRÊ PRE PRE 7.0 5.7 1.3 5.3 LSD AT FIVE PERCENT LEVEL empty table cell empty table cell 1.7 COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT)empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell29. empty table cell empty table cell Evaluation of Chloramben and Combinations on Pickling Cucumbers Location: Soil type: Date of planting: June 4, 1976 Variety: Carolina Plot size: Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican McBride Sandy Loam 4' x 20' Replications: 3 GPA: 36 AIR T 82° 85º DATE JUNE 4 JUNE 14 HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW SKY APP SUNNY PRE CLOUDY PO NOTE: No rainfall occurred within 8 days of application. Plots were irrigated on June 12. Weeds per sq. ft. on June 18, RRPW 8.1, COLQ 3.3, BYGR 1.3. Stand count is plants per 20’ of row. Cucumbers at time of PO spraying had the first true leaf just enlarging. SOIL MOIST ADEQUATE SURFACE DRY WIND 3-5 MPH 3-5 MPH SOIL T 87º 88º RH 44% 65% CUCU76033 TRT NO CHEMICAL FORM RATE HOWAPP empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 2EC 2EC 10 G 10 G 2EC 3EC 2EC4EC 2EC3EC 2EC 2EC 2EC empty table cell CONTROL 1 WEEDED CONTROL empty table cell 2 CHLORAMBEN 3 CHLORAMBEN 4 CHLORAMBEN 5 CHLORAMBEN 6 CHLORAMBEN 7 DINOSEB 8 CHLORAMBEN BUTRALIN CHLORAMBEN 9 MOE-2340A CHLORAMBEN ACT. CHARCOAL CHLORAMBEN ACT. CHARCOAL CHLORAMBEN ACT. CHARCOAL CHLORAMBEN ACT. CHARCOAL CHLORAMBEN ME CHLORAMBEN CHLORAMBEN CHLORAMBEN CHLORAMBEN .075 1.50 0.75 1.50 0.750.75 0.75 1.50 0.751.00 1.50200 1.50400 3.00 200 3.00400 3.00 0.75 1.50 0.75 1.50 2EC 2EC 2EC 10 G 10 G 2EC 13 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 PRE PRE PRE PRE PREPRE PREPRE PREPRE PREPRE PRE PRE PREPRE PRE PRE PRE PO PO PO PO BYGR RATING 061876 0.0 0.0 .3 1.0 1.7 3.7 2.3 4.7 6.0 2.7 2.3 4.0 4.0 2.0 .7 .7 1.7 1.7 RRPW RATING 061876 0.0 0.0 2.7 5.3 3.3 6.0 4.0 6.7 4.7 6.3 5.3 6.0 6.3 6.7 0.0 .3 .7 1.0 COLQ RATING 061876 0.0 0.0 2.3 3.3 3.7 4.0 3.7 6.0 5.0 5.7 3.7 5.3 5.7 6.0 0.0 .3 0.0 .7 CUCU CIR061876 0.0 0.0 1.3 2.4 2.7 3.0 1.0 2.0 1.3 2.7 1.7 3.0 2.7 1.7 2.3 2.3 1.7 2.7 CUCU CIR 062976 0.0 0.0 1.3 5.0 3.0 5.0 0.0 2.7 .7 2.7 2.0 4.7 4.3 3.0 4.7 5.7 5.3 6.7 STAND COUNT 062976 66.0 56.3 53.0 54.3 49.7 52.0 70.3 68.3 72.3 58.3 64.7 63.3 67.3 64.7 49.3 52.0 39.0 57.3 16.2 17 empty table cell LSD AT FIVE PERCENT LEVEL empty table cellempty table cell COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT)empty table cellempty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 2.5 68 2.1 34 2.5 48 1.4 44 1.8 33 Early Herbicide Evaluations in Peas Location: Soil type: Date of planting: Plot size: Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican McBride Sandy Loam April 20, 1976 Variety: Green Giant #531 4' x 10' Replications: 3 GPA: 36 HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW APP PPI PRE PO DATE AIR T SOIL T SOIL MOIST WIND SKY APRIL 20 APRIL 20 MAY 26 65° 60° 74° 67° 61° 77° SURFACE DRY LIGHT MIST DRY 4-8 MPH 2-4 MPH 0 CLEAR CLOUDY SUNNY NOTE: May 26: Peas had 6 nodes and were up to 5 inches high, RRPW up to 2 true leaves, COLQ up to 4 leaves, BYGR 1-3 leaves. Pea seed was treated with Captan 75 and methoxychlor. June 2: Weeds per 9" square, BYGR 5.8, RRPW 6.0, COLQ 1.7, LACG 0.4. PEAS76051 TRT NO CHEMICAL FORM RATE HOW APP BYGR RATING 052676 RRPW RATING 052676 COLD RATING 052676 PEAS CIR 052676 STAND COUNT 052676 YIELD (LB/A) CONVERTED TO 103 TEND empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 1 2 3 4 5 CONTROL WEEDED CONTROL BUTRALIN BUTRALIN DINITRAMINE DINITRAMINE 6 7 CGA-24785 8 CGA-24785 9 10 11 EL-161 EL-161 DINOSEB 4EC 4EC 2EC 2EC 6EC 6EC 3EC SEC SEC 1.50 3.00 0.33 0.50 1.50 3.00 0.75 1.50 6.00 PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI 0.0 0.0 8.3 9.7 8.0 9.3 8.7 9.3 9.7 9.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 9.7 8.3 9.3 8.7 9.0 9.3 9.7 8.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 9.3 9.3 9.7 9.7 8.7 9.7 10.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 3.0 2.0 3.0 6.0 6.0 1.7 4.8 1.3 empty table cell 6212 5404 5930 4846 4458 5148 4525 6816 12.7 15.8 13.2 8.7 empty table cell 9.8 9.7 empty table cell 12.2 empty table cell 5.8 empty table cell 10.5 7.0 16.3 4721 4107 5236 4927 4881 4793 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell Early Herbicide Evaluations in Peas (Continued) TPT NO 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 CHEMICAL PROFLURALIN PROFLURALIN TRIFLURALIN TRIFLURALIN TRIFLURALIN DINOSEB TRIFLURALIN EL-161 CGA-2670 5 CGA-2670 5 HDE-2360 8 HOE-2360 8 ALACHLOR ALACHLOR ETHOFUMESATE ETHOFUMESATE DINOSEB DINOSEB PENOXALIN PENOXALIN PROPACHLOR PROPACHLOR 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 R-33222 33 R-33222 36 CGA-2470 5 OINOSEB PROPACHLOR DINOSEB HOE-2340 8 OINOSEB PENOXALIN DINOSEB VEL 5052 NEL 5052 35 36 37 38 39 FORM 6EC RATE 0.50 6EC 6EC 6EC 6EC 3EC 6EC 3EC 6EC SEC 3EC 3EC 6EC 6EC 1.5EC 1.5 EC 3 EC 3EC 6EC 6EC 65WP 65NP 50WP 50WP 6EC 3 EC 65WP 3EC 3EC 3EC 4EC 3EC 2EC 2EC 0.75 0.50 0.75 0.50 6.00 0.25 0.38 1.50 3.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 3.00 1.50 3.00 6.00 9.00 0.50 1.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 1.50 6.00 2.00 6.00 1.00 6.00 0.50 6.00 1.50 3.00 HOW APP PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE BYGR RATING 9.3 RRPW RATING 9.3 COLD RATING 9.7 PEAS CTR 1.0 9.3 8.7 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.0 10.0 9.3 8.0 9.3 10.0 9.3 1.0 2.0 2.3 2.3 YIELD (LB/A) TEND 5298 5715 empty table cell STAND count 11.8 12.5 empty table cell 12.2 10.7 empty table cell 11.5 5532 empty table cell 6195 4349 3979 9.7 10.0 9.3 2.0 11.3 5431 9.7 10.0 10.0 9.7 10.0 10.0 9.7 10.0 8.0 8.0 7.3 8.7 4.7 9.0 9.7 10.0 10.0 9.0 9.7 7.3 5.7 9.7 10.0 9.3 10.0 8.3 9.0 8.0 7.7 3.7 8.0 9.0 9.7 7.3 6.3 10.0 10.0 8.7 9.3 8.7 9.7 8.3 9.3 3.3 7.3 10.0 10.0 9.3 10.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 7.7 0.0 .3 6.0 8.0 8.0 6.3 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.3 6.0 3.7 4790 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 9.5 9.0 6354 16.0 16.5 empty table cell empty table cell 13.5 empty table cell 5750 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 7.2 16.7 13.7 7206 6493 4934 5289 11.3 12.8 13.5 16.0 16.8 13.5 15.5 13.3 13.5 6674 empty table cell 6140 empty table cell 6709 5877 7686 6833 6869 5997 5467 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 5319 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 9.0 8.7 10.0 1.3 16.7 6337 6223 10.0 8.7 9.7 10.0 7.3 8.7 9.0 9.0 9.7 9.3 8.7 9.3 .3 .3 1.7 3.3 13.8 6958 6292 16.3 16.0 13.3 5538 empty table cell empty table cell 6070 empty table cell empty table cell Early Herbicide Evaluations in Peas (Continued) TRT NO CHEMICAL FORM RATE HOW APP BYGR RATING 060276 RRPW rating 060276 COLD RATING 060276 PEAS CIR 060276 STAND COUNT 05257 YIELD (LB/A) TEND 40 HOE-2340 8 41 HOE-2340 8 42 MCPA MCPA 43 44 MCPB MCPB 45 46 DINOSEB 47 DINOSEB 48 MCPA HOE-2340 8 DINOSEB HOE-2340 8 BENTAZON 49 51 3EC 3EC 4EC 4EC 4EC 4EC 3EC 3EC 4EC 3EC 3EC 3EC 4EC 0.75 1.50 0.13 0.25 0.50 1.00 0.75 1.50 0.13 0.75 0.75 0.75 1.00 LSD AT FIVER PERCENT LEVEL empty table cell empty table cell COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT)empty table cellempty table cellempty table cell PO empty table cell 9.3 empty table cell 1.6 empty table cell 12. PO PO PO PO PO PO PO PO PO PO 5.3 7.0 6.3 7.3 5.7 8.0 7.0 2.0 10.0 8.7 5.7 8.0 6.0 6.0 5.7 8.0 9.3 4.3 10.0 10.2 9.3 8.3 9.3 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.7 6.7 4.0 13.0 9.7 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 empty table cell 6248 5520 5378 5836 15.8 14.7 empty table cell 13.8 5078 6034 13.2 empty table cell 11.3 15.8 empty table cell 5403 15.3 13.3 empty table cell 5527 14.2 5680 5502 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 5591 5015 12. 3 13. 2 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 1.6 12. 1.8 14. 1.1 36. 3.6 18. empty table cell empty table cell Late Herbicide Evoluation In Peas Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican McBride Sandy Loam June 2, 1976 Variety: Green Giant #531 6' x 20' Replications: 2 GPA: 36 Location: Soil Type: Date of Planting: Plot size: HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW APP PPI PRE PO DATE JUNE 2 JUNE 4 JUNE 15 AIR T 55° 82° 78° SOIL T 67° 87° 83° RH 68% 44% empty table cell SOIL MOIST WIND MOIST MODERATE DRY 3-5 MPH 3-5 MPH 5-8 MPH SKY SUNNY SUNNY SUNNY NOTE: Weed counts per sq. ft. June 15: RRPW 8.9, BYGR 8.1, COLQ 1.7, LACG .1 and plant size RRPW 2-4 inches, BYGR 3-4 leaves, COLQ 4-6 leaves, LACG 2-3 leaves, peas up to 4 inches. PEAS76052 TRT NO 3EC CHEMICAL CONTROL 4EC 4EC 2EC 2EC FORM empty table cell 1 2 WEEDED CONTROL empty table cell BUTRALIN 3 BUTRALIN 4 DINITRAMINE 5 6 DINITRAMINE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 HOF-23408 14 15 16 17 18 19 EL-161 EL-161 PROFLURALIN PROFLURALIN TRIFLURALIN TRIFLURALIN 3EC 4EC 4EC 4EC 4EC 3EC 3EC 4EC 4EC 2EC 2EC 3EC 3EC DINOSEB PENOXALIN PENOXALIN VEL 5052 VEL 5052 DINOSEB HOE-23408 PROPACHLOR DINOSEB PENOXALIN DINOSEB PROPACHLOR 20 21 22 65WP3EC 4EC3EC 65WP RATE HOW APP empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell BYGR RATING 061576 0.0 0.0 5.5 9.0 7.5 8.5 9.0 3.5 7.5 8.0 5.5 9.0 3.5 3.5 2.0 4.0 3.5 6.0 6.0 8.0 7.0 8.5 PEAS CIR 061576 0.0 0.0 0.0 .5 0.0 0.5 0.1 RRPW RATING 061576 0.0 0.0 6.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.0 9.5 1.0 8.5 9.0 8.0 9.0 2.5 8.5 2.5 3.5 2.5 4.0 7.0 9.0 8.5 5.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 .5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .5 .5 1.0 0.0 0.0 STAND COUNT 062976 12.4 14.4 15.5 14.9 15.0 14.2 14.7 14.4 15.2 14.3 16.1 13.1 15.7 17.0 14.8 14.2 16.3 17.6 15.7 15.0 15.0 13.8 YIELD (LB/A) 2221 3511 4362 3139 2966 3578 3950 4163 3458 4389 3538 3684 3285 3285 2474 3365 3312 2926 4017 4336 3365 3179 CONVERTED TO 103 TEND 2594 3939 5095 3817 3678 4351 4985 4617 4440 5442 4387 4892 4073 3837 4776 4092 3792 3207 4788 5273 4092 3942 1.50 2.50 0.33 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.75 0.50 0.75 1.00 6.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 6.001.00 3.00 6.00 0.50 6.00 3.00 PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PREPRE PREPRE PREPRE PRE Late Herbicide Evaluation in Peas (Continued) PEAS76052 TRT NO CHEMICAL FORM RATE MCPA 23 24 HOE-23408 25 MCPA HOE-2340 8 MCPA H0E-23408 MCPA DINOSEB 28 DINOSEB 26 27 0.38 1.00 0.25 1.00 4EC 3EC 4EC 3EC 4EC 3EC 0.38 1.00 4EC 3EC 3EC LSD AT FIVE PERCENT LEVEL empty table cell empty table cell COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT) empty table cellempty table cellempty table cell HOW APP PO PO PO PO PO PO BYGR 0.0 9.5 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.25 1.00 1.00 PO PO PO empty table cell 0.0 empty table cell 2.4 empty table cell20 RRPW RATING 062976 COLQ RATING 062976 PEAS CIP 062976 STAND COUNT 062976 YIELD (LB/A) CONVERTED TO 103 TEND 1.5 0.0 4.5 5.5 4.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 2.5 1.0 0.0 3.5 15.3 16.0 16.0 5.0 15.4 2620 2860 2820 2075 1.0 1.0 14.1 2567 1.0 2886 3060 3275 3745 2893 3296 3579 1.8 16 2.2 22 .9 66 2.3 7 empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell Snapbean Evaluation, Stale Seedbed Location: Soil type: Date of planting: June 18, 1976 Plot size: Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican McBride Sandy Loam 4' x 20' Replications: 3 Variety: Spartan Arrow GPA: 36 HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW APPLIED DATE AIR T. SOIL T. SOIL MOIST WIND SKY JUNE 18 PRE NOTE: Weed growth June 18, RRPW 2-4 leaf, COLQ 4-6 leaf, BYGR 3-4 leaf. 5-8 MPH SUNNY MOIST Weeds per sq ft June 29, RRPW 18, BYGR 1.8, COLQ 2.4. 78° 83° SNBE76051 TRT NO CHEMICAL HOW APP RATE FORM empty table cell empty table cell 1 2 3 4 5 6 CONTROL WEEDED CONTROL empty table cell 0.5 PARAQUAT +K-77 1.0 PARAQUAT + X-77 .75 MON 2139 1.5 MON 2139 empty table cell PRE PRE PRE PRE 2EC 2EC 4EC 4EC 062976 062976 RRPMRATING BYGRRATING empty table cell 0.0 empty table cell 10.0 7.8 6.7 6.3 8.0 empty table cell .8 empty table cell7. 0.0 10.0 5.7 6.3 4.0 5.7 .9 9. COLDRATING 081276 CWT/A 062976 YIELD 0.0 10.0 5.3 6.8 4.7 6.0 1.5 16. 0.0 29.1 38.6 28.4 34.8 31.2 11.8 24. LSD AT FIVE PERCENT LEVEL empty table cellempty table cell COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT)empty table cell empty table cellempty table cell empty table cells Evaluation of Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides on Snap Beans Location: Montcalm Experimental Farm, Entrican Soil type: Date of planting: June 4, 1976 Variety: Spartan Arrow Plot size: McBride Sandy Loam 4’ x 20’ Replications: 3 GPA: 36 AIR T 80° 78° SOIL T 93° 83° DATE JUNE 8 JUNE 18 HERBICIDE APPLICATION INFORMATION: HOW APP PRE PO NOTE: No rainfall occurred within 8 days after application. Plots were Irrigated June 12. Weeds per sq. ft. June 18, BYGR 5.5, RRPW 9.0, COLO 1.5. At time of Preemergence application, a few RRPW and BYGR were emerging and snap beans were sprouting. Where post sprays were applied: snap beans: first true leaf with first trifoliate starting to enlarge, BYGR 3-4 leaves, RRPW 2-4 leaves, COLQ 4-6 leaves. SOIL MOIST DRY SURFACE DRY SURFACE SKY SUNNY PT. CLOUDY WIND 0-5 MPH 5-8 MPH RH 51% 68% RATE FORM empty table cellempty table cell empty table cell empty table cell empty table cell SNBE76063 TRT NO CHEMICAL CONTROL 1 2 WEEDED CONTROL empty table cell 1.50 3 CGA-24705 2.00 4 CGA-24705 2.50 CGA-24705 5 1.503.00 CGA-24705 6 DINOSEB 2.00 ETHOFUMESATE 3.00 ETHOFUMESATE ETHOFUMESATE 4.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 0.75 1.50 3.00 1.00 2.00 0.75 1.50 7 8 9 10 R-33222 11 R-33222 12 R-33222 13 R-37104 14 R-37104 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 6EC 6EC 6EC 6 EC 3 EC 1.5EC 1.5EC 1.5EC 50WP 50WP 50 wp 50WP 50 WP 4EC 4 EC 3 EC 1.5EC 1.5EC 4EC 4EC PENOXALIN PENOXALIN DINOSEB ETHOFUMESATE ETHOFUMESATE BENTAZON BENTAZON HOWAPP PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE PRE P0 P0 P0 P0 BYGR RATING 062976 0.0 0.0 6.7 7.3 7.3 8.7 4.3 6.0 6.7 4.0 5.7 8.0 3.3 6.7 2.7 6.0 5.0 0.0 .3 0.0 0.0 RRPW RATING 062976 0.0 0.0 4.7 5.3 5.3 8.3 6.7 8.3 8.7 5.3 8.3 9.0 5.7 7.7 5.0 5.3 7.3 1.3 3.0 1.7 2.7 COLQ RATIN G 062976 0.0 0.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 9.0 6.7 8.7 8.7 6.7 8.0 9.0 8.0 9.0 6.3 7.0 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SNBE CIR062976 0.0 0.0 .3 1.7 1.0 2.0 1.3 2.3 2.7 1.7 5.0 7.0 5.0 6.7 1.7 1.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 STAND COUNT 062976 51.3 50.3 47.3 44.3 54.3 43.7 48.0 45.0 51.7 43.0 28.3 2.3 30.0 15.7 41.7 41.3 46.3 42.3 50.3 43.0 43.3 empty table cell LSD AT FIVE PERCENT LEVELempty table cellempty table cell COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION (PERCENT)empty table cellempty table cellempty table cell empty table cell empty table cell 1.7 24. 1.2 14. 1.4 15. 1.3 40. 12.0 18. INFLUENCE OF NEMATICIDES AND SUBSOILING BENEATH THE PLANTING ROW ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND YIELD OF NAVY AND KIDNEY BEAN PLANTS G.W. Bird Department of Entomology In 1975, yields and quality of dry beans grown in a sandy loam soil heavily infested with both the root-lesion (Pratylenchus penetrans) and stunt (Tylenchorhynchus nudus) nematodes were increased from 16.1 to 21.3 CTW PER ACRE through application of the nematicide carbofuran (Furadan 10G). There was a need to repeat this work and determine the reason for the increase in yield and assess its significance in relation to the overall aspects of Michigan dry bean production. A proposal was developed, submitted to the Michigan Dry Bean Commission, funded and carried out in Gratiot and Montcalm Counties during the 1976 growing season. Yields of dry beans in a Gratiot Co. field having a moderate population of the root-lesion nematode were increased from 15.3 to 21.0 CTW PER ACRE (TABLE 1) when carbofuran was applied during a subsoiling operation beneath the planting row. It was determined that approx­ imately 50% of this increase was due to alleviation of direct soil compaction problems or indirectly as soil compaction influenced the tolerance limit of the plant to the root-lesion nematode. The remainder of the yield increase was attributed to control of the root-lesion nematode. At the Montcalm Potato Research Farm, yields of kidney beans and navy beans were increased with carbo­ furan from 6.4 to 11.3 CTW PER ACRE and from 11.3 to 15.7 CTW PER ACRE, respectively (TABLES 2 and 3). Yields of kidney beans at this site were increased from 6.4 to 12.2 CTW PER ACRE with aldicarb (TABLE 3). Subsoiling beneath the planting was not used in the Montcalm tests. As predicted in the 1975 report to the Michigan Dry Bean Production Advisory Board and Michigan Bean Commission, moving the nematology-bean research program from clay loam and silt loam soils to sandy loam and sandy soils has greatly increased the success of the project. The average yield increase in these tests was 32% (11.1 to 16.3 CTW PER ACRE). One of the projects described above was shown to a number of grower groups and the response was extremely favorable. It is my understanding that there are a number of commercial bean growers interested in the type of soil preparation des­ cribed above. Unfortunately, however, very little is known about the use of this system in Michigan. For some soils, it is believed to be satisfactory. A research proposal for 1977 will be submitted to the Michigan Dry Bean Production Research Advisory Board and Michigan Bean Commission for continuation of this project. TABLE 1. Influence of subsoiling beneath of planting row and carbofuran on 1976 yields of Gratiot Co. navy beans. Yield (cwt/A) Pratylenchus penetrans per 100 cm3 soil (8/24/76) Treatment Commercial tillage Subsoiling and bedding Subsoiling and bedding plus carbofuran Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to the Student-Newman-Kuels Multiple Range Test. --- 7.0a 11.0a 15.3a 18.7a 21.1c TABLE 2 Influence of nematicides on control of Pratylenchus penetrans and yields of kidney beans Treatment Check (nontreated) Furadan 10G (20 lb/A) Temik 15G (13 lb/A) Mocap 10G (10 lb/A) CGA 12223 20G (15 lb/A) Yield (ctw/A) 6.4a 1 10.9b 12.3b 7.7a 11.4b P. penetrans per 100 cm3 soil 0.4a 0.4a 0.6a 0.8a 0.4a 1 Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to the Student-Newman-Kuels Multiple Range Test. TABLE 3 Influence of nematicides on control of Pratylenchus penetrans and yields of dry beans Treatment Yield (cwt/A) P. Penetrans per 100 cm3 soil (6/29/76) P. Penetrans per gram root (9/13/76) Check (nontreated) Furadan 10G (20 lb/A) Temik 15G (13 lb/A) Mocap 10G (10 lb/A) CGA 12223 20G (15 lb/A) 11.6a1 15.7a 13.4a 11.3a 11.7a 89.6a 64.8a 55.2a 61.6a 41.6a 2.2a 1.0a 1.2a 3.4a 3.6a 1 Column means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) according to the Student-Newman-Kuels Multiple Range Test.