A-Progress-Report…: Weed control in tomatoes
Authors
A. H. LangeF. M. Ashton
V. H. Schweers
H. B. Collins
H. Agamalian
A. F. Van Maren
R. C. King
H. L. Hall
Authors Affiliations
A. H. Lange is Extension Weed Control Specialist in the Experiment Station, University of California, Davis; F. M. Ashton is Associate Professor and Associate Botanist in the Experiment Station, University of California, Davis; V. H. Schweers is Farm Advisor, Tulare County, University of California; H. B. Collins is Farm Advisor, San Benito County, University of California; H. Agamalian is Farm Advisor, Monterey County, University of California; A. F. Van Maren is Farm Advisor, Riverside County, University of California; Ray C. King is Farm Advisor, San Joaquin County, University of California; Harwood Hall, Alameda County, is Farm Advisor, University of California.Publication Information
Hilgardia 19(3):8-10. DOI:10.3733/ca.v019n03p8. March 1965.
PDF of full article, Cite this article
Abstract
tomatoes are grown on more acreage in California than any other vegetable crop. Weed control costs amounted to $4.24 million, with additional losses from weeds estimated at $10.28 million -for a total cost of $14.5 million annually to tomato growers in California, according to the 1964. report of the Statewide Weed Control Committee of the State Chamber of Commerce. Current costs of weeding tomatoes are estimated at $27 per acre. These costs may increase : (1) if mechanical harvesting requires a longer period of weed control; and (2) if the labor for hand weeding becomes more scarce with the end of the bracero program.
Also in this issue:
Research on: Mechanization of citrus harvestingSoil Compaction Effects on Oxygen Diffusion Rates and Plant Growth
Sprays for Aphid Control Increase Sugar Beet Yields in Davis Tests
Cabbage Looper: A principal pest of agricultural crops in California
Composition and Feeding Value of Almond Hulls and Hull-Shell Meal
Bark Grafting Grapevines: At high and low levels
A lysimeter investigation of nitrogen gains and losses under various systems of covercropping and fertilization, and a discussion of error sources