• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Modular Ecological Design: A Fruit and Vegetable Polyculture System
 

Modular Ecological Design: A Fruit and Vegetable Polyculture System

on

  • 531 views

Modular Ecological Design: A Fruit and Vegetable Polyculture System

Modular Ecological Design: A Fruit and Vegetable Polyculture System

Statistics

Views

Total Views
531
Views on SlideShare
531
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Modular Ecological Design: A Fruit and Vegetable Polyculture System Modular Ecological Design: A Fruit and Vegetable Polyculture System Document Transcript

    • 2/19/2009 Modular Ecological Ohio State University Design: A Fruit and Ohio Agricultural Research Vegetable Polyculture System and Development Center Wooster, OH Joe Kovach IPM Program OSU/OARDC Wooster, OH http://ipm.osu.edu Using Ecological Design and Biodiversity to Goals Make $90,000/Acre • Modular Ecological Design • Economics • Ecological Pest Mang. Principles • Polyculture Experiment Joe Kovach IPM Program OSU/OARDC Wooster, OH http://ipm.osu.eduGiven that we will eventually run out of Modular Ecological Designoil, can we design a food production Goal - to determine optimal layout of an intensive fruit &system that is: vegetable polyculture system that mimics natural systems & can be used by the small periurban or urban farmer. • Close to consumers Modular • Simulates natural systems y E • Uses Ecologically Based Pest Management Economics • Economically viable ≈ $90,000/A Pest density = $ 10 per ft of row Efficiency August 2005 1
    • 2/19/2009 Some Principles of Good Economic IPM and Marketing Farming/Gardening• Plan your farm/garden and set goals Product = Bundle of Benefits• Look at the whole picture (water, soil, crops, g goals) )• Fertility and slope of land• Learn and grow through reading and meetings• A farm must be profitable ($, joy) Marketing Strategies Lifestyle and Economic Potential • Cities are where the money is How to differentiate your product? • City dwellers are clamoring for good local food • To get top dollar target LOHAS 1) Price - more efficient, less cost LOHAS- Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability y y – 1/3 US pop. - 63 million adults 2) Quality - characteristic that – Goods & Services customers want • Health and Fitness • Environment • Social Justice Use different strokes for different folks • Personal development • Sustainable living Ecologically Based Agriculture Ecological Based Pest Management • General Principles of Ecomimicry Builds on strengths of natural systems – Select and grow a diversity of crops • Three concepts that have natural defenses against – Ecosystem Stability y y pests – Biodiversity – Choose varieties with resistance or tolerance – Biological Control – Build the soil with organic matter 2
    • 2/19/2009 Ecological Pest Management Ecological Pest Management Ecosystem Stability Ecosystem Stability • Reduce tillage/cultivation - fewer weeds• Ecosystems with more diversity • Reduce mowing - less disruption, increase – Are more stable beneficials – Greater resistance • Maintain “permanent” ground covers • Ability to avoid or withstand • Add organic matter - substrate for good MO’s disturbances • Use cover crops - inc. moisture retention – Greater resilience • Use crop rotation - breaks pest cycle • Ability to recover from stress • Increase crop diversity - more difficult to find • Create corridors - highways of habitat Ecological Pest Management Ecological Pest Management • Is a preventative approach• Tries to apply stress to the pests – Uses little “hammers” – Interrupt their life cycle – Instead of one big “hammer” – Remove alternative food sources • Relies on Biological Control (as much as possible)• Enhance beneficial population – Beneficial predators and parasites – Avoid agrochemicals where possible – Disease-causing organisms – Beneficial fungi and bacteria that inhabit roots – At least better timing Ecological Pest ManagementEnhancing Beneficials/Biocontrol Ecological Pest Management Biodiversity• Characteristics typical of fields with plenty of beneficials • Spatial diversity - across a landscape, within fields – Fields are small - a lot of edges, natural vegetation –CCropping systems are diverse i t di • Include perennials and flowering plants • Genetic diversity - different varieties, – Crops are managed with minimal agrichemical different crops inputs – Soils high in organic matter, biological activity • Temporal diversity - different crops at during off season different stages of growth • Covered with mulch or vegetation 3
    • 2/19/2009 Ecological Pest Management Commodities and Treatments Fertility Solid Row Mixed Row Checker board 4 trees/shrubs I. Apples(SwC)• Slow release of nutrients the best, II. Peaches – any compost is good compost (yard waste, III. Blueberries dairy barn, vermicompost) IV. Raspberries• Pests seem to follow the Nitrogen (plant suckers 4 herbaceous i.e. mites & aphids) Strawberries Edamame soybeans Tomatoes Green beans• Too much synthetic fertilizer cause nutritional imbalances The fourth treatment (not shown) is a mixed row configuration on raised Early, Mid, Late cultivars beds. 2006 Layout of plots RB SR MR CB RB = Raised Bed SR = Solid Row MR RB CB SR MR = Mixed Row CB = Checker Board SR CB RB MR Each plot - 44’ x 60’ CB MR SR RB Total Acres - 1.4 A April 2005 Raised Beds April 2005 Land Preparation ($1.20/ft) April 2005 April 2005 April 2005 April 2005 4
    • 2/19/2009 Yard Waste Compost Tree and Bush Planting May 2005 May 2005 May 2005 May 2005Groundhog, Rabbit, Deer Fence Raised Bed Mixed Row 2005 June 2005 August 2005 June 2005 2006 June 2006 - Weeding Cost 2005 Weeding Costs - $1.35/ft Labor hrs (760 hr) = $6,080 2006 Cost - $0.37/ft Landscape Cloth = $1,250 Labor (214 hr) = $1,612 Total = $2,862 5
    • 2/19/2009 2007 2007 HT= $9.50/ft High Tunnel Growth Differences (cm) High Tunnel Yield Differences (g/m) Trt All Ap Blue Rasp Peach Soy Stra Apples Trt Straw S Rasp F Rasp Tom Soy Blue SnP Aph/M No 172 a 232 a 118 a 142 a 271 a 74 a 41 a 19% a No 4673a 2276a 2086a 6806a 1147 a 706a 269a HT HT 196 b 243 a 123 a 185 b 333 b 86 b 44 b 38% b HT 3779b 1162b 3736b 8764b 1348 b 951a 387a Inc. 14% 30% 23% 16% 7% % -19% 96% 79% 23% 16% - - Tunnels have a shading impact and reduce wind Strawberries are primarily wind and gravity pollinated Japanese Beetle Japanese Beetle (July-Aug) (July-Aug) 2006, 2007Year No. JB 2006 2007 Crop No. JB % JB %2005 15,000 Rasp 30,146 52 109,292 392006 60,000 Peach 22,789 38 11,047 42007 283,000 Soy 1,851 3 108,239 382008 441,000 Straw 1,652 3 20,232 7 Blue 1,486 3 32,115 11Trt Apple 488 1 2,801 1High Tunnel 11,300 (4%) Tomato 0 0 110 0No HT 271,700 (96%) 6
    • 2/19/2009 Japanese Beetle Arthropod Collections 2005-08 Raspberry (JB/5ft/date) Sweep net samples Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, OctTrt 2006 2007 Cultivar 2006 2007 Total Beneficial Pest Incidentals Royalty 3.1 a 15.5 a Families 139 53 37 51MR 10.4 a 35.0 b Indiv ’05 25,258 16% 54% 30%CB 11.7 ab 29.8 c Carol 12.0 b 36.4 b ‘06 06 16,202 16 202 21% 50% 29%RB 13.3 bc 43.6 a Prelude 22.9 c 57.7 c ‘07 24,118 21% 51% 28%SR 15.3 c 37.8 b ’08 23,493 20% 45% 32% PreludeRoyalty Insect Individuals (2006) Harvest 2008 Crop % Pest %Nat. E. Strawberry 50.3 15.6 Peach 35.7 24.7 Raspberry 51.2 12.5 Blueberry 44.6 23.2 Apple 61.4 17.4 Soybean 48.3 10.5 Potato 73.8 13.6 Tomato 49.5 11.1 Harvest Evaluations 2006 Harvest Evaluations 2007 Trt Straw S.Rasp F.Ras Tom SnP Soy Blue Trt Soy S.Rasp Straw Tom Pot SR 2984 903 1512 3685 170 1021 882 SR 32 a 381 a 1407 a 2338 a 486 b CB 2707 1034 1429 5429 250 694 551 CB 59 b 279 a 1310 a 2083 a 300 a MR 2542 797 1685 4193 260 880 661 MR 47 b 289 a 1314 a 2420 a 275 a RB 3287 1403 1424 6965 512 1064 662 RB 56 b 505 a 1619 a 3086 b 475 b % 20 54 - 57 125 - - % 67 81 24 48 73 inc inc 7
    • 2/19/2009 Total Hours to Harvest all Crops 2005 Crop Dollars per Foot of Row (green beans, tomatoes, sweet corn & soybeans) 30 Treatment Hours/Meter/Person 25 CB 7.31a 20 MR 6.82a RB 6.44a 15 SR 5.78a 10 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly 5 different (LSD, P>0.05) Labor Cost = $1.00/ft for $8/hr for 6 months 0 GrBean SwCorn EdSoy Tom GrTom Apple Straw Rasp Peach Blue Establishment Costs Conclusions to Date2005 2006Establishment Seeds $ 484 • Jap. Beetles were a big problem in ‘07 ‘08 Soil prep Plants $ 176 5,015 Harvest material (qts, pts, container) 292 especially on rasp, soybeans or peaches Fencing/Irrigation 1,956 Weed Control Sub total 7,147 Landscape cloth 1,033 • High Tunnels Crops - had the fewest JBs, bestWeed Control Labor - 760h (weed, mulch) 6,080 Staples Labor -182h 216 1,456 growth, nicest fruit ($ 9.50/ft) Mulch (17 truck loads) 4,250 Sub total 2,705 Sub total 10,330 Trellis • Strawberry & Peaches had the mostRaised BedsMaterials 2,280 T-post Lumber 290 310 biodiversityTotal $19,757 Screws, wire 49 Sub total 649 • Peaches had the lowest % pests & highest % Misc. Total 590 $4,720 natural enemies Total investment $24,477 • Potatoes had the highest % pests per plot 1,530 (+ RB $1.20) $/ft $3.20 (+ HT= $9.50/ft) Conclusions to Date Questions? • Raised beds ($1.20/ft) - were easy to harvest and the best yield on some crops • Staff wanted solid rows on raised beds • Paid for capital improvements (plants, fence, irrigation, t ) ft i i ti etc.) after year 2 • $ 10/ft may be obtainable when under full production, with the correct market & certainly would be easier with a higher price than in grocery stores 8