Nimitz nematicide field trials - The IR-4 Projectir4.rutgers.edu/Fooduse/PerfData/4112.pdfNIMITZ...
-
Upload
trinhthien -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of Nimitz nematicide field trials - The IR-4 Projectir4.rutgers.edu/Fooduse/PerfData/4112.pdfNIMITZ...
0
NIMITZ NEMATICIDE
FIELD TRIALS Kiwi-1 Ranch, Poplar, CA
Kiwi-3 Ranch, Earlimart, CA
John Ojala and Sherod Craig ver. 04/13/16
Abstract
Two randomized complete block field trials were conducted at Kiwi-1 Ranch,
Poplar, CA and Kiwi-3 Ranch, Earlimart, CA during 2015 to evaluate the efficacy of
Nimitz (a.i. fluensulfone) nematicide. The objectives of these trials were to
determine if seasonal application of Nimitz nematicide will reduce root-knot
nematode (Meloidogyne spp.) soil populations and root infestations in kiwifruit.
Nimitz was sprayed onto the top of the berms in 50 gallons per acre spray volume
and quickly followed by one inch of irrigation water to move the nematicide into
the soil profile. A single application of Nimitz in mid-summer (late July) at 3.5
pints per acre rate provided slight to no control of nematode populations in the
soil or within plant roots. A split application of Nimitz (3.5 pts/ac in late May +
3.5 pts/ac in late July) showed trends in reducing soil root knot nematode
populations 61 days after the first application and lasting through the summer.
The number of nematodes elutriated from fall root samples and the gall severity
on roots both trended less for the Split Application compared to the Control and
Mid-Summer (3.5 pts/ac in late July) treatments, but high variance among the
treatments made it difficult to achieve significance at the 95% confidence level in
these trials. No detectable levels of fluensulfone were present in the fruit.
2015 REPORT ON RESEARCH
1
SUMMARY
Kiwi-1 Trial Summary - These results indicate that the Mid-Summer (July 27th) treatment (3.5
pints Nimitz per acre rate) slightly reduced soil root knot nematode populations thirty-six days
after the Nimitz application, but did not sustain this level of control later (94 days after Nimitz
application) in the growing season. Fewer root knot nematodes were elutriated from the roots in
the Mid-Summer treatment compared to the Control, but not significantly due to high variance
between treatments. Gall formation on the roots was not significantly reduced in the first year of
Nimitz application. Total fruit yield was significantly greater in the Nimitz Mid-Summer
treatment. Fruit grade and fruit quality were not significantly improved by application of Nimitz.
This trial demonstrated a weak response to a late July application of 3.5 pints Nimitz per acre for
control of root knot nematodes in the soil and roots of kiwifruit. The post-harvest Nimitz treatment
will be evaluated in 2016.
Kiwi-3 Trial Summary – A split application of Nimitz (3.5 pts/ac in late May + 3.5 pts/ac in late
July) showed trends in reducing soil root knot nematode populations 61 days after the first
application and lasting through the summer. A single application of Nimitz in mid-summer (3.5
pts/ac in late July) did not significantly reduce soil root knot nematode population during the
summer months compared to the Control. The less effective control of nematodes in the Mid-
Summer compared to the other treatments may be due to the low application rate (3.5 pts/ac) or
later application timing, or both. The number of nematodes elutriated from fall root samples and
the gall severity on roots both trended less for the Split Application compared to the Control and
Mid-Summer (3.5 pts/ac in late July) treatments, but high variance among the treatments made it
difficult to achieve significance at the 95% confidence level in this trial. The split application of
Nimitz produced significantly fewer large (grade 25) and more medium (grade 36) size fruit
compared to the control.
Residue Testing – No detectable levels of fluensulfone were present in samples of fruit (peel +
flesh) from each treatment replication at both trial locations.
2
Nimitz Nematicide Field Trials
John Ojala and Sherod Craig
Introduction
Root knot nematodes are a pervasive problem for kiwifruit growers in California. The most
reliable chemical control methods are pre-plant fumigants that work well for the first few years
during vineyard establishment. However, nematodes soon re-establish their populations and begin
to create galls on roots that impair water uptake, produce sun burning on leaves/fruit, reduce vine
vigor and reduce fruit size. There are a few post-plant biological/organic products that may help
to suppress nematode populations but they are not generally regarded as reliable or highly effective
materials for seasonal nematode control in established vineyards. Nimitz (fluensulfone),
distributed by ADAMA Agricultural Solutions, is a new chemistry of nematicides that is currently
registered for use on solanaceous and cucurbit crops in California, with additional registration
being pursued for other permanent vine and tree crops. Research trials conducted by ADAMA
have shown that Nimitz has an efficacy similar to fumigants, yet is much safer and easier to use.
This research project evaluates Nimitz application rate and timing on root-knot nematode soil
populations and root infestations in kiwifruit, and supports an IR-4 Project whose goal is to add
kiwifruit to the Nimitz product label. Two field trails were conducted in 2015, one at the Kiwi-1
Ranch near Poplar, CA and the other at the Kiwi-3 Ranch near Earlimart, CA.
Materials & Methods
Kiwi-1 Ranch, Poplar – The trial was located in a 32 year old stand of Hayward kiwifruit with a 15 ft. by
15 ft. spacing on block 2 of the Sun Pacific Kiwi-1 Ranch near Poplar, CA (Appendix 1). This site was
selected because it has a history of root knot galls and nematode soil tests revealed moderate to high (570
to 788 count per 500 cc soil) root knot nematode populations were present in the soil. The trial design was
randomized complete block with three treatments and five replications per treatment. The treatments were:
1. 3.5 pts/ac Nimitz applied in mid-summer (July 27th)
2. 3.5 pts/acre Nimitz applied post-harvest (November 13th)
3. Untreated control.
Each replication consisted of two female vines (15 ft. row width x 30 ft. length). Berms were approximately
6 ft. wide. A border vine (15ft. of row length) was present between each treatment. The total size of all
plots was 0.15 acres (excluding borders) of which 0.10 acres were the Nimitz treatment plots. Sixteen soil
subsamples were collected to an eighteen inch depth from each replication on July 17th, September 1st and
October 29th. The subsamples from each replication were mixed together to make a single soil sample for
each of the fifteen plots. A Pesticide Research Authorization (permit #1507025) to apply restricted
materials was obtained from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Nimitz nematicide (lot
number BO4315002) was hand-sprayed onto the berms of treatment plots with an R&D sprayer fitted with
a hand wand containing a flat spray nozzle. The total spray volume applied to the berm of the Nimitz
treatments was 50 gallons per acre. The berms of all plots were irrigated with 1.0 inch of water within 48
3
hours of spraying to incorporate Nimitz into the soil profile. Irrigation water was applied by micro
sprinklers located about 3 ft. above the berms on 15 ft. spacing (one sprinkler on both sides of the vines).
The spray pattern of the sprinklers covered both the berms and the rows. Soil and root samples were
collected from each replication post-harvest on November 6th for nematode analysis. Nematode analyses
were conducted by ID Services, McFarland, CA. All samples that were submitted to ID Services were
blind and had no Nimitz application identification written on the sample bags, which means they did not
know which if any treatment had been applied to any of the samples. Root knot nematode populations
were measured in soil samples using a sieving sugar flotation extraction method. Live nematodes were
extracted from roots using a Baermann Funnel procedure. Gall injury on root samples were evaluated by
visually examining post-harvest root samples. A random sample of fruit from around all areas (high, low,
inside, outer) of the vines in each replication was collected on October 20th and stored under refrigeration
(45F) until sent to OMIC USA Inc. (Portland, OR) on October 22nd for residue analysis of the entire fruit
(peel + flesh). Total fruit weight from each replication was measured during harvest on October 20th and
21st. Individual weights were also measured during harvest from a random sample of three boxes (85 lbs.
to 108 lbs. ranging from 334 to 455 fruit) of kiwifruit from each replication and were used to estimate
average fruit size and grade category. A random sample of 60 fruit were collected from each replication
during harvest and were measured for total soluble solids content using an Extech portable refractometer
and for skin rupture force (maturity) using custom equipment. A small sample of 36 fruit was also collected
during harvest and placed into mesh bags for dry matter analysis. The fruit from all plots were treated as
crop destruct and after the weight and quality measurements were collected they were discarded into the
rows and disked. Trunk circumference was measured for each vine on June 23rd and again on November
11th.
Kiwi-3 Ranch, Earlimart - The trial was located in a 14 year old stand of Hayward kiwifruit with a 15 ft.
by 15 ft. spacing on block 16 of the Sun Pacific Kiwi-3 Ranch near Earlimart, CA (Appendix 1). This site
was selected because it has a history of root knot galls and nematode soil tests revealed moderate to high
(224 to 982 count per 500 cc soil) root knot nematode populations were present in the soil. The trial design
was randomized complete block with three treatments and five replications per treatment. The treatments
were:
1) 7.0 pints Nimitz per acre split application (3.5 pints Nimitz per acre applied on May 21st + 3.5 pints
Nimitz per acre applied on July 24th)
2) 3.5 pints Nimitz per acre applied in mid-summer (July 24th)
3) Untreated control.
Each replication consisted of two female vines (15 ft. row width x 30 ft. length). Berms were approximately
6 ft. wide. A border vine (15 ft. of row length) was present between each treatment. The total size of all
plots was 0.21 acres (excluding borders) of which 0.15 acres were the Nimitz treatment plots. Sixteen soil
subsamples were collected to an eighteen inch depth from each replication on May 20th, June 25th, July 21st,
August 26th and October 30th. The subsamples from each replication were mixed together to make a single
soil sample for each of the fifteen plots. A 12 inch depth soil sample was also collected from each plot on
September 10th. A Pesticide Research Authorization (permit #1505043) to apply restricted materials was
obtained from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Nimitz nematicide (lot number
BO4315002) was hand-sprayed onto the berms of the treatment plots with an R&D sprayer fitted with a
hand wand containing a flat spray nozzle. The total spray volume applied to the berms of the Nimitz
treatments was 50 gallons per acre. The berms of all plots were irrigated with 1.0 inch of water within 48
hours of spraying to incorporate Nimitz into the soil profile. Irrigation water was applied by micro
4
sprinklers located about 3 ft. above the berms on 15 ft. spacing (one sprinkler on both sides of the vines).
The spray pattern of the sprinklers covered primarily the berms with little water application into the rows.
Soil and root samples were collected from each replication post-harvest on November 6th for nematode
analysis. Nematode analyses were conducted by ID Services, McFarland, CA. All samples that were
submitted to ID Services were blind and had no treatment identification written on the sample bags, which
means they did not know which if any treatment had been applied to any of the samples. Root knot nematode
populations were measured in soil samples using a sieving sugar flotation extraction method. Live
nematodes were extracted from roots using a Baermann Funnel procedure. Galls injury on root samples
were evaluated by visually examining roots. A random sample of fruit from around all areas (high, low,
inside, outer) of the vines in each replication was collected on October 21st and stored under refrigeration
(45F) until sent to OMIC USA Inc. (Portland, OR) on October 26th for residue analysis of the entire fruit
(peel + flesh). Total fruit weight from each replication was measured during harvest on October 21st.
Individual weights were also measured during harvest from a random sample of three boxes (59 lbs. to 105
lbs. ranging from 233 to 478 fruit) of kiwifruit from each replication and were used to estimate average
fruit size and grade category. A random sample of 60 fruit were collected from each replication during
harvest and were measured for total soluble solids content using an Extech portable refractometer and for
skin rupture force (maturity) using custom equipment. A small sample of 36 fruit was also collected during
harvest and placed into mesh bags for dry matter analysis. The fruit from all plots were treated as crop
destruct and after harvest measurements were collected they were discarded into the rows and disked.
Trunk circumference was measured for each vine on June 24th and again on November 27th.
Statistical Analyses – In both trials, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on dependent variables
containing homogeneous treatment variances. Dependent variables that were non-homogeneous
(significant ρ values in a Levene’s Test) were transformed (log10 or square root) and re-tested again for
variance homogeneity. If the treatment variances were homogenous then they were analyzed by ANOVA.
Any remaining dependent variables that still contained non-homogeneous variances were analyzed with
the non-parametric Welch’ test. Since the post-harvest Nimitz treatment at the Kiwi-1 trial location was
applied after all field and lab data was collected in 2015, the post-harvest plots were combined with the
untreated plots into a control treatment and statistically compared using a t-test for significance between
two means (control and mid-summer treatments). Statistica (StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, OK) and SPSS (IBM
Corporation, New York, NY) software was used to conduct ANOVA, LSD mean separation, Levene’s Test,
Welch’s Test, Brown-Forsythe and other statistical analyses. ANOVA tables were checked for accuracy
against hand calculations.
5
Results & Discussion
Kiwi-1 Ranch Trial, Poplar – The variance and coefficient of variation for soil nematode
population within and between treatments was high (Table 1), particularly during the early
sampling date for the Control (122% coefficient of variation) and Mid-Summer (63% coefficient
of variation) treatments. Treatment variance homogeneity is an important assumption for ANOVA
and was found to be true for nearly all measurements (Table A in Appendix 5). Mean separation
can be difficult to achieve when the treatment
variability is high, as has occurred in this trial.
Soil nematode population was significantly
different between treatments only on the
September 9th sampling date. However,
trends in the data over time should also be
examined.
Root knot nematode soil populations were
lowest in the early samples (July), peaked in
late summer (September) and then declined
by mid-fall (October) (Fig. 1). The lower
nematode population in the Mid-Summer
treatment does not indicate nematicide
efficacy since the population levels of the
Mid-Summer treatment were also lower at the
beginning of the season.
The Mid-Summer (3.5 pints Nimitz/acre)
treatment plots had fewer root knot
nematodes than the Untreated on every
sampling date, including the pre-treatment
samples taken on July 17th (Fig. 1). Soil root
knot nematode populations of the Mid-
Summer treatment were significantly less
than the Untreated only on the September 1st
sampling date (Table 4 and Fig. 1-B),
suggesting some efficacy. For Nimitz to
demonstrate nematode control in the soil, the
seasonal soil root knot nematode populations
in the Mid-Summer treatment should not
have a parallel or converging trend when
compared to the Untreated. However, the two
trend lines are parallel (Fig. 1) during the first
two sample dates and ultimately converge on
the final sample date, suggesting poor
efficacy for the Mid-Summer treatment.
6
The count of root knot nematodes elutriated
from after-harvest root samples also trended
less in the Mid-Summer treatment (Fig. 3),
but not significantly. The gall scores of the
after-harvest root samples were not
significantly different between treatments
(Table 4).
Since the post-harvest Nimitz treatment was
applied after all field and lab data were
collected in 2015, the post-harvest plots were
combined with the control plots into one
treatment (Untreated). The soil population of
Table 1. Root knot nematode soil population, root infestation and galling score in 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch, Poplar, CA.
Nimitz Application Plot
Rate Number 07/17/15 09/01/15 10/29/15 Roots2
Galls3
no. per gram root 0 to 10 score
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 1 291 601 788 192 5.00
none applied 2 5 442 1,418 357 264 0.00
none applied 3 9 261 1,103 362 409 2.50
none applied 4 11 333 1,430 749 522 3.75
none applied 5 14 2,315 1,624 694 308 6.25
Mean: 728 1,235 590 339 3.50
Std. Deviation: 890 401 213 129 2.40
Variance: 791,362 160,554 45,394 16,690 5.78
Coefficient of Variation: 122.1% 32.4% 36.1% 38.1% 68.7%
Post Harvest4 3.5 pts/acre 1 2 - 1,152 789 254 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 2 6 - 788 545 326 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 3 7 - 1,503 610 267 3.75
3.5 pts/acre 4 12 - 2,606 704 606 6.25
3.5 pts/acre 5 13 - 2,279 1,532 344 6.25
Mean: 1,666 836 359 5.25
Std. Deviation: 762 400 143 1.05
Variance: 580,254 159,952 20,379 1.09
Coefficient of Variation: 45.7% 47.8% 39.7% 19.92%
Mid-Summer5 3.5 pts/acre 1 3 267 970 441 100 8.75
3.5 pts/acre 2 4 370 315 550 90 2.50
3.5 pts/acre 3 8 521 491 560 275 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 4 10 39 1,006 367 242 2.50
3.5 pts/acre 5 15 624 1,135 818 502 5.00
Mean: 364 783 547 242 4.75
Std. Deviation: 228 358 171 167 2.56
Variance: 51,830 128,222 29,314 27,956 6.56
Coefficient of Variation: 62.5% 45.7% 31.3% 69.2% 53.9%
1 soil sample depth: 1 to 18 inches; extraction method: sieving sugar flotation.
2 root extraction method: Baermann Funnel procedure.
3 Gall Score: 0 = none (no galls found on roots), 5 = medium (one or more galls), 10 = high (more than 30% of roots have galls).
4 Nimitz application date on the post-harvest application treatment: November 13, 2015.
5 Nimitz application date on the mid-summer application treatment: July 27, 2015.
- - - no. root knot nematodes per 500 cc soil - - -
Treatment ReplicationSoil Sample Date
1Post-Harvest: 11/06/15
7
root knot nematodes were significantly (Table 5) less in the Mid-Summer Nimitz treatment (783
counts per 500 cc soil) compared to the untreated Control (1,450 counts per 500 cc soil) in the
combined plots (Table 11 in Appendix 2) and diverged away from the Control (Fig. 2).
The yield of kiwifruit in the Mid-Summer treatment was significantly greater than the Untreated
(Fig. 4). There was no difference between treatments in the average weight of fruit, total soluble
solids content of fruit, or fruit maturity as measured by skin pressure (Table 2). There was also no
difference between treatments in the grade of fruit (Table 3 and Fig. 5) or in trunk growth (Table
16 in Appendix 2) during the 2015 growing season.
Fruit samples from every treatment replication in the trial were collected at harvest and tested for
fluensulfone residue by OMIC USA, Inc. Fluensulfone residue in the fruit (peel + flesh) was
reported as ND (not detected) in all samples (Appendix 4).
Table 2. Yield and fruit quality in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch, Poplar, CA.
Nimitz Application
Rate
Untreated (Control) none applied 225.2 b 112 ns 6.5 ns 20.1 ns
Post-Harvest1
3.5 pts/acre 214.6 b 116 ns 6.7 ns 19.5 ns
Mid-Summer2
3.5 pts/acre 325.4 a 112 ns 6.4 ns 19.6 ns
1 Nimitz application date on the post-harvest application treatment: November 13, 2015.
2 Nimitz application date on the mid-summer application treatment: July 27, 2015.
3 TSS - the total soluble solids in the fruit juice as estimated by measuring Brix.
4 Skin pressure test - the pressure required to rupture the fruit skin.
Numbers in a column followed by the same letters are not significantly (LSD .05) different from each other.
Total
Yield Ave. Weight
lbs per plot grams
TSS3
°Bx
SP4
Fruit
psi
Treatment
8
Table 3. Average fruit grade of each treatment in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch, Poplar, CA.
45 42 39 36 33 30 27 25 23 20
Untreated (Control) 0.3% ns 0.1% ns 0.7% ns 1.4% ns 2.4% ns 7.5% ns 15.3% ns 17.8% ns 17.7% ns 22.9% ns 8.6% ns 5.3% ns
Post-Harvest 0.6% ns 0.2% ns 1.0% ns 2.0% ns 2.5% ns 7.0% ns 14.2% ns 14.3% ns 15.0% ns 19.9% ns 11.0% ns 12.2% ns
Mid-Summer 0.5% ns 0.2% ns 1.2% ns 2.2% ns 2.6% ns 8.3% ns 14.9% ns 17.0% ns 14.4% ns 19.3% ns 9.3% ns 10.1% ns
Numbers in a column followed by "ns" are not significantly (LSD .05) different from each other.
TreatmentUndersize
Percent of Total Yield
18 or Larger
Table 4. Randomized complete block ANOVA probability (ρ) values - Kiwi-1 trial location.
Dependent ANOVA
Variable ρ Value1
Nematode Soil & Plant Analyses
soil nematode population on 07/17/15 0.34846
soil nematode population on 09/01/15 0.02947
soil nematode population on 10/29/15 0.14558
nematode elutriation from roots on 11/2015 0.29073
gall rating of roots on 11/2015 0.32709
Yield & Fruit Quality
total yield from each plot 0.02596
average fruit weight 0.75966
fruit total soluble solids (TSS) 0.50708
fruit skin pressure test (SP) 0.27353
trunk circumference on 06/23/15 0.14891
trunk circumference on 11/11/15 0.13833
delta trunk circumferences 0.69542
Fruit Grade
Undersize 0.65620
Grade 45 0.75675
Grade 42 0.77376
Grade 39 0.82033
Grade 36 0.99256
Grade 33 0.93886
Grade 30 0.95465
Grade 27 0.177052
Grade 25 0.25525
Grade 23 0.71759
Grade 20 0.76056
Grade 18+ 0.18478
1 probability (ρ) values that are less than 0.05 means that there is a 95% confidence level that a significant difference
between treatment means occurred (highlighted in red in the table).
2 Welch's test (used when varainces are heterogeneous).
9
Kiwi-1 Trial Summary - These results indicate that the Mid-Summer (July 27th) treatment (3.5
pints Nimitz per acre rate) slightly reduced soil root knot nematode populations thirty-six days
after the Nimitz application, but did not sustain this level of control later (94 days after Nimitz
application) in the growing season. Fewer root knot nematodes were elutriated from the roots in
the Mid-Summer treatment compared to the Control, but not significantly due to high variance
between treatments. Gall formation on the roots was not significantly reduced in the first year of
Nimitz application. Total fruit yield was significantly greater in the Nimitz Mid-Summer
treatment. Fruit grade and fruit quality were not significantly improved by application of Nimitz.
This trial demonstrated a weak response to a late July application of 3.5 pints Nimitz per acre for
control of root knot nematodes in the soil and roots of kiwifruit. The post-harvest Nimitz treatment
will be evaluated in 2016.
Table 5. T test statistics for comparing all untreated (control + post-harvest) to the mid-summer treatment.
Variables (rows) containing probability values (ρ) highlighted in red indicate that there is a significant (95% confidence
level) difference between treatment means.
T-tests; Grouping: Treatment (Kiwi-1 2015 Nimitz Trial - Combined Controls 2)
Group 1: Untreated
Group 2: Mid-Summer
Variable
Mean
Untreated
Mean
Mid-Summer
t-value df p Valid N
Untreated
Valid N
Mid-Summer
Std.Dev.
Untreated
Std.Dev.
Mid-Summer
F-ratio
Variances
07/17/15
09/01/15
10/29/15
Root Elutr
Galls
Total Yield
Ave. Fruit Wt.
TSS
SP
Grade Under
Grade 45
Grade 42
Grade 39
Grade 36
Grade 33
Grade 30
Grade 27
Grade 25
Grade 23
Grade 20
Grade 18+
TCircum 6/23/15
TCircum 11/11/15
Delta Circum
728.400 364.2000 0.88687 8 0.401021 5 5 889.5852 227.6614 15.26850
1450.400 783.4000 2.21223 13 0.045464 10 5 617.0127 358.0814 2.96910
713.000 547.2000 1.04544 13 0.314872 10 5 328.7468 171.2124 3.68682
349.200 241.8000 1.38283 13 0.190009 10 5 128.8563 167.2997 1.68569
4.375 4.7500 -0.31502 13 0.757747 10 5 1.9764 2.5617 1.68000
219.890 325.4400 -2.35364 13 0.034988 10 5 89.1299 62.5516 2.03035
113.752 111.8786 0.41042 13 0.688179 10 5 8.7116 7.4060 1.38366
6.583 6.3751 0.93107 13 0.368787 10 5 0.4668 0.2273 4.21798
19.822 19.5667 0.47640 13 0.641700 10 5 0.9499 1.0363 1.19027
0.004 0.0051 -0.32582 13 0.749744 10 5 0.0048 0.0058 1.43527
0.001 0.0018 -0.45669 13 0.655432 10 5 0.0019 0.0032 2.78684
0.008 0.0119 -0.66819 13 0.515699 10 5 0.0085 0.0122 2.06002
0.017 0.0221 -0.53506 13 0.601643 10 5 0.0169 0.0178 1.11413
0.025 0.0260 -0.11981 13 0.906467 10 5 0.0212 0.0182 1.36361
0.073 0.0829 -0.39166 13 0.701657 10 5 0.0466 0.0471 1.01941
0.148 0.1488 -0.03348 13 0.973799 10 5 0.0506 0.0431 1.38127
0.161 0.1698 -0.48861 13 0.633256 10 5 0.0399 0.0142 7.89877
0.163 0.1442 1.23101 13 0.240127 10 5 0.0318 0.0194 2.69132
0.214 0.1934 0.59521 13 0.561925 10 5 0.0622 0.0660 1.12452
0.098 0.0934 0.18583 13 0.855448 10 5 0.0474 0.0407 1.35772
0.088 0.1007 -0.44000 13 0.667164 10 5 0.0599 0.0380 2.47642
39.802 43.1780 -1.79137 13 0.096532 10 5 4.0161 1.4786 7.37709
40.036 43.3160 -1.85213 13 0.086845 10 5 3.8144 1.1131 11.74370
0.234 0.1380 0.31997 13 0.754075 10 5 0.5604 0.5182 1.16964
10
Kiwi-3 Ranch Trial, Earlimart – The variability of soil nematode population within treatments
was high across all the summer sampling dates in this trial. Large coefficient of variations were
present in both soil and root measurements (Table 6). All measured variables were evaluated (and
corrected when required) for variance
homogeneity (Table B in Appendix 6) before
ANOVA tests were conducted. However, the
large variances reduced the sensitivity of
ANOVA to detect significant (95%
confidence level) differences between
treatments in soil nematode count means
(Table 9). However, trends in the data
indicate that Nimitz did have a beneficial
effect in reducing root knot nematode
population in the soil.
Root knot nematode soil populations in the
Control and Mid-Summer treatments
followed a trend similar to the trial at the
Kiwi-1 location. Soil populations were low
early in the season, then peaked in late
summer and declined after harvest (Fig. 6).
The Split Application treatment did not
follow this pattern and instead showed
consistently low root knot soil populations
beginning 61 days after the first Nimitz
application and lasting through the summer.
The two applications and higher rate (7.0
pints/acre) of Nimitz in the Split Application
treatment reduced soil nematode populations
better than the Control or the single
application (3.5 pts/ac) of Nimitz in the Mid-
Summer treatment. However, the nematodes
elutriated from the roots (Fig. 7) and galls on
the roots (Fig. 8) after harvest were the same
in the Mid-Summer and Control treatments.
Nematodes presence in the roots and galls
appeared to trend lower in the Split
Application treatment when compared to
either the Control or Mid-Summer
treatments.
11
Ta
ble
6.
Ro
ot
kno
t nem
ato
de s
oil p
opula
tio
n1,
roo
t in
fest
ati
on a
nd g
allin
g s
core
in t
he 2
015
Nim
itz
field
tri
al a
t K
iwi-
3 r
anch
, E
arl
ima
rt,
CA
.
Nim
itz
Applica
tio
nP
lot
Ra
te a
nd T
imin
gN
um
ber
05
/20
/15
06
/25
/15
07
/21
/15
8/2
6/2
015
10
/30
/20
15
Ro
ots
Ga
ll S
core
4
no
. p
er g
ram
ro
ot
0 t
o 1
0 s
core
Unt
reat
ed (
Co
ntro
l)no
ne a
pp
lied
13
672
564
933
824
912
146
3.7
5
none
ap
plie
d2
5509
1,6
97
1,6
97
1,7
82
1,0
25
279
6.2
5
none
ap
plie
d3
7764
218
909
1,2
39
416
152
3.7
5
none
ap
plie
d4
11
400
230
285
691
521
35
10.0
0
none
ap
plie
d5
13
672
721
455
485
774
122
3.7
5
Mea
n:
603
686
856
1,0
04
730
147
5.5
0
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
146
605
548
515
257
88
2.7
4
Va
ria
nce
:21,3
72
366,2
98
300,7
15
265,0
60
66,0
90
7,6
90
7.5
0
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
24.2
%88.2
%64.1
%51.3
%35.2
%59.8
%49.8
%
Sp
lit N
imitz
Ap
plic
atio
n23
.5 p
ts/a
cre
May
+ 3
.5 p
ts/a
c Ju
ly1
2964
661
800
1,4
36
1,0
03
169
6.2
5
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
26
364
570
497
533
851
156
2.5
0
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
38
339
485
448
661
868
13
1.2
5
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
410
473
1,3
58
885
588
506
137
2.5
0
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
515
679
1,9
27
1,2
36
648
451
30
2.5
0
Mea
n:
564
1,0
00
773
773
736
101
3.0
0
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
261
623
320
374
243
74
1.9
0
Va
ria
nce
:68,0
33
388,1
35
102,3
61
139,8
91
59,0
16
5,4
70
3.5
9
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
46.3
%62.3
%41.4
%48.4
%33.0
%73.3
%63.2
%
Mid
-Sum
mer
33
.5 p
ts/a
cre
July
11
--
1,4
71
1,1
27
322
558
10.0
0
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly2
4-
-503
800
288
90
0.0
0
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly3
9-
-497
1,7
33
496
68
0.0
0
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly4
12
--
1,5
27
618
505
42
8.7
5
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly5
14
--
1,0
67
1,5
15
456
92
10.0
0
Mea
n:
--
1,0
13
1,1
59
413
170
5.7
5
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
--
501
469
101
218
5.2
7
Va
ria
nce
:-
-250,8
08
219,6
99
10,2
77
47,4
21
27.8
1
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
--
49.4
%40.5
%24.5
%128.2
%91.7
%
1 s
oil s
amp
le d
epth
: 1 t
o 1
8 inch
es; ex
trac
tion m
ethod: si
evin
g su
gar
flota
tion.
2 N
imit
z a
pp
lica
tion d
ates
on t
he
split
app
lica
tion t
reat
men
t: M
ay 2
1, 2015 a
nd J
uly
24, 2015.
3 N
imit
z a
pp
lica
tion d
ate
on t
he
mid
-sum
mer
ap
plica
tion t
reat
men
t: J
uly
24, 2015.
4 G
all Sco
re: 0 =
none
(no g
alls
found o
n r
oots
), 5 =
med
ium
(one
or
more
gal
ls),
10 =
hig
h (
more
than
30%
of
roots
hav
e ga
lls)
.
Tre
atm
ent
Sa
mple
Da
teP
ost
-Ha
rvest
: 1
1/0
6/1
5
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
no
. ro
ot
kn
ot
nem
ato
des
per
50
0 c
c so
il
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
Replica
tio
n
12
There were no significant differences between treatments in total yield, average fruit weight, fruit
total soluble solids content and skin pressure tests for maturity (Fig. 9 and Table 7). Both the Split
and Mid-Summer Nimitz applications produced significantly more fruit in the medium 36 grade
size and less fruit in the larger 25 grade size compared to the Control (Fig. 10 and Table 8). In
general, production of more fruit in the 36 grade size is preferable to the larger 25 grade size. The
trunk growth of the Mid-Summer and Split Application treatments were not significantly different
from the Control (Table 20 and Fig. Q in Appendix 3) in the 2015 growing season
Fruit samples from every treatment replication in the trial were collected at harvest and tested for
fluensulfone residue by OMIC USA, Inc. Fluensulfone residue in the fruit (peel + flesh) was
reported as ND (not detected) in all samples (Appendix 4).
Table 7. Yield and fruit quality in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-3 ranch, Earlimart, CA.
Nimitz Application
Rate
Untreated (Control) none applied 233.1 ns 112 ns 5.6 ns 19.8 ns
Split Application1
3.5 pts/acre + 3.5 pts/acre 221.7 ns 106 ns 5.5 ns 19.6 ns
Mid-Summer2
3.5 pts/acre 149.7 ns 112 ns 5.9 ns 19.3 ns
1 Nimitz applications on the split application treatment: 3.5 pts Nimitz/acre on May 21, 2015 and 3.5 pts Nimitz/acre on July 24, 2015.
2 Nimitz application on the mid-summer application treatment: 3.5 pts Nimitz/acre on July 24, 2015.
3 TSS - the total soluble solids in the fruit juice as estimated by measuring Brix.
4 Skin pressure test - the pressure required to rupture the fruit skin.
Numbers in a column followed by the same letters are not significantly (LSD .05) different from each other.
SP4
psi
TreatmentTotal
Yield
lbs per plot
Ave. Weight
grams
TSS3
°Bx
Fruit
13
Kiwi-3 Trial Summary – A split application of Nimitz (3.5 pts/ac in late May + 3.5 pts/ac in late
July) showed trends in reducing soil root knot nematode populations 61 days after the first
application and lasting through the summer. A single application of Nimitz in mid-summer (3.5
pts/ac in late July) did not significantly reduce soil root knot nematode population during the
summer months compared to the Control. The less effective control of nematodes in the Mid-
Summer compared to the other treatments may be due to the low application rate (3.5 pts/ac) or
later application timing, or both. The number of nematodes elutriated from fall root samples and
the gall severity on roots both trended less for the Split Application compared to the Control and
Mid-Summer (3.5 pts/ac in late July) treatments, but high variance among the treatments made it
difficult to achieve significance at the 95% confidence level in this trial. The split application of
Nimitz produced significantly fewer large (grade 25) and more medium (grade 36) size fruit
compared to the control.
Table 8. Average fruit grade from each treatment in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-3 ranch, Earlimart, CA.
Untreated (Control) 0.3% ns 0.1% ns 0.6% ns 0.9% ns 1.2% c 5.9% ns 17.1% ns 21.5% ns 18.5% a 20.8% ns 8.5% ns 4.5% ns
Split Nimitz Application 1.6% ns 0.5% ns 1.8% ns 2.5% ns 4.4% a 10.6% ns 18.5% ns 18.0% ns 14.3% b 15.9% ns 6.2% ns 7.0% ns
Mid-Summer 0.9% ns 0.2% ns 1.4% ns 1.2% ns 2.3% b 6.2% ns 14.8% ns 17.0% ns 15.7% b 22.4% ns 9.9% ns 8.1% ns
Numbers in a column followed by the same letters are not significantly (LSD .05) different from each other.
TreatmentPercent of Total Yield
Undersize 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 25 23 20 18 or Larger
14
Table 9. ANOVA probability (ρ) values - 2015 Nimitz Trial, Kiwi-3 Ranch, Earlimart, CA.
Dependent ANOVA
Variable ρ Value1
Nematode Soil & Root Analyses
soil nematode population on 05/20/15 0.75652
soil nematode population on 06/25/15 0.49917
soil nematode population on 07/21/15 0.77846
soil nematode population on 08/26/15 0.48047
soil nematode population on 09/9/15 (12 in.) 0.86895
soil nematode population on 10/30/15 0.092482
nematode elutriation from root samples 11/06/15 0.70319
gall rating of root samples 11/06/15 0.271004
Yield & Quality Measurements
total yield from each plot 0.07563
average fruit weight 0.11237
fruit total soluble solids (TSS) 0.14101
fruit skin pressure test (SP) 0.56900
tree circumference 06/24/15 0.50527
tree circumference 11/27/15 0.59535
delta tree circumference 0.04583
Grade Measurements
Undersize 0.32612
Grade 45 0.09876
Grade 42 0.11584
Grade 39 0.08906
Grade 36 0.002173
Grade 33 0.05452
Grade 30 0.66002
Grade 27 0.12862
Grade 25 0.00285
Grade 23 0.17942
Grade 20 0.23028
Grade 18+ 0.23481
1 Variables containing probability values (ρ) highlighted in red indicate that there is a significant
(95% confidence level) difference between treatment means.
2 log10 transformed (to provide homogeneous treatment variances).
3 square root transformed (to provide homogeneous treatment variances).
4 Welch's non-parametric test for non-homogeneous variances.
15
Appendix 1
Trial and Plot Maps
Map 1: Kiwi-1 Ranch trial site field map
Map 2: Kiwi-1 Ranch plot map
Map 3: Kiwi-3 Ranch trial site field map
Map 4: Kiwi-3 Ranch plot map
17
Nimitz Field Trial
Kiwi-1 Ranch, Block 2
Block # I II III IV V
border border border border border
border border border border border
3 buffer 2 buffer 4 buffer 9 buffer 9 buffer
plants plants plants plants plants
row # 36 35 34 33 32 31 30
Ribbon
Color Treatments
orange 1 = mid-summer application (3.5 pts Nimitz/ac applied in July)
yellow 2 = post-harvest application (3.5 pts Nimitz/ac applied in October)
red 3 = untreated (control)
white border vines
3 9 12 156
1 3 2 12
2 8 11 145
2 1 3 33
1 7 10 134
3 2 1 21
N
W
S
E
19
Nimitz Field Trial
Kiwi-3 Ranch, Block 16
Block # I II III IV V
border border border border
border
border border border border
border
row # 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
Ribbon
Color Treatments
blue 1 = split application (3.5 pts Nimitz/ac applied in May + 3.5 pts Nimitz/ac applied in July)
green 2 = mid-summer application (3.5 pts Nimitz/ac applied in July)
red 3 = untreated (control)
white border vines
15
1
10
3
11
2
12
3
13
2
14
1
9
2
4
3
5
1
6
3
7
1
8
2
3
2
1
1
2
3
N
W
S
E
20
Appendix 2
Nematode & Yield Data: Kiwi-1 Ranch Table 10. Root knot nematode population
Fig. A. Root knot nematode soil
Fig. B. Root knot nematode roots
Fig. C. Root knot nematode gall score
Table 11. Root knot nematode population (untreated plots combined)
Fig. D. Root knot nematode soil (combined plots)
Fig. E. Root knot nematode roots (combined plots)
Fig. F. Root knot nematode gall score (combined plots)
Table 12. Yield and fruit quality
Fig. G. Kiwifruit yield
Table 13. Yield and fruit quality (untreated plots combined)
Fig. H. Kiwifruit yield (combined plots)
Table 14. Fruit grade
Fig. I. Fruit grade
Table 15. Fruit grade (untreated plots combined)
Fig. J. Fruit grade (combined plots)
Table 16. Trunk growth
Fig. K. Trunk circumference increase in 2015
21
Table 10. Root knot nematode soil population, root infestation and galling score in 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch, Poplar, CA.
Nimitz Application Plot
Rate Number 07/17/15 09/01/15 10/29/15 Roots2
Galls3
no. per gram root 0 to 10 score
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 1 291 601 788 192 5.00
none applied 2 5 442 1,418 357 264 0.00
none applied 3 9 261 1,103 362 409 2.50
none applied 4 11 333 1,430 749 522 3.75
none applied 5 14 2,315 1,624 694 308 6.25
Mean: 728 1,235 590 339 3.50
Std. Deviation: 890 401 213 129 2.40
Variance: 791,362 160,554 45,394 16,690 5.78
Coefficient of Variation: 122.1% 32.4% 36.1% 38.1% 68.7%
Post Harvest4 3.5 pts/acre 1 2 - 1,152 789 254 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 2 6 - 788 545 326 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 3 7 - 1,503 610 267 3.75
3.5 pts/acre 4 12 - 2,606 704 606 6.25
3.5 pts/acre 5 13 - 2,279 1,532 344 6.25
Mean: 1,666 836 359 5.25
Std. Deviation: 762 400 143 1.05
Variance: 580,254 159,952 20,379 1.09
Coefficient of Variation: 45.7% 47.8% 39.7% 19.92%
Mid-Summer5 3.5 pts/acre 1 3 267 970 441 100 8.75
3.5 pts/acre 2 4 370 315 550 90 2.50
3.5 pts/acre 3 8 521 491 560 275 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 4 10 39 1,006 367 242 2.50
3.5 pts/acre 5 15 624 1,135 818 502 5.00
Mean: 364 783 547 242 4.75
Std. Deviation: 228 358 171 167 2.56
Variance: 51,830 128,222 29,314 27,956 6.56
Coefficient of Variation: 62.5% 45.7% 31.3% 69.2% 53.9%
1 soil sample depth: 1 to 18 inches; extraction method: sieving sugar flotation.
2 root extraction method: Baermann Funnel procedure.
3 Gall Score: 0 = none (no galls found on roots), 5 = medium (one or more galls), 10 = high (more than 30% of roots have galls).
4 Nimitz application date on the post-harvest application treatment: November 13, 2015.
5 Nimitz application date on the mid-summer application treatment: July 27, 2015.
- - - no. root knot nematodes per 500 cc soil - - -
Treatment ReplicationSoil Sample Date
1Post-Harvest: 11/06/15
22
(the post-harvest treatment is combined with the untreated control)
Table 11. Root knot nematode soil population, root infestation and galling score in 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch, Poplar, CA.
Nimitz Application Plot
Rate Number 07/17/15 09/01/15 10/29/15 Roots2
Galls3
no. per gram root 0 to 10 score
Control (Untreated) none applied 1 1 291 601 788 192 5.00
none applied 2 5 442 1,418 357 264 0.00
none applied 3 9 261 1,103 362 409 2.50
none applied 4 11 333 1,430 749 522 3.75
none applied 5 14 2,315 1,624 694 308 6.25
Control (Post Harvest4) 3.5 pts/acre 1 2 - 1,152 789 254 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 2 6 - 788 545 326 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 3 7 - 1,503 610 267 3.75
3.5 pts/acre 4 12 - 2,606 704 606 6.25
3.5 pts/acre 5 13 - 2,279 1,532 344 6.25
Mean: 728 1,450 713 349 4.38
Std. Deviation: 890 617 329 129 1.98
Variance: 791,362 380,705 108,074 16,591 3.91
Coefficient of Variation: 122.1% 42.5% 46.1% 36.9% 45.18%
Mid-Summer5 3.5 pts/acre 1 3 267 970 441 100 8.75
3.5 pts/acre 2 4 370 315 550 90 2.50
3.5 pts/acre 3 8 521 491 560 275 5.00
3.5 pts/acre 4 10 39 1,006 367 242 2.50
3.5 pts/acre 5 15 624 1,135 818 502 5.00
Mean: 364 783 547 242 4.75
Std. Deviation: 228 358 171 167 2.56
Variance: 51,830 128,222 29,314 27,956 6.56
Coefficient of Variation: 62.5% 45.7% 31.3% 69.2% 53.9%
1 soil sample depth: 1 to 18 inches; extraction method: sieving sugar flotation.
2 root extraction method: Baermann Funnel procedure.
3 Gall Score: 0 = none (no galls found on roots), 5 = medium (one or more galls), 10 = high (more than 30% of roots have galls).
4 Nimitz application date on the post-harvest application treatment: November 13, 2015; combined with the control data since Nimitz was applied to this treatment after data collection.
5 Nimitz application date on the mid-summer application treatment: July 27, 2015.
Treatment ReplicationSoil Sample Date
1Post-Harvest: 11/06/15
- - - no. root knot nematodes per 500 cc soil - - -
23
Table 12. Yield and fruit quality from each plot in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch, Poplar, CA.
Nimitz Application Plot Total
Rate Number Yield Average Weight TSS1
SP2
lbs per plot grams °Bx psi
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 1 419.2 116 6.8 19.9
none applied 2 5 209.8 106 6.6 20.6
none applied 3 9 189.0 101 6.5 20.3
none applied 4 11 184.2 121 6.4 21.4
none applied 5 14 124.0 115 6.1 18.6
Mean: 225.2 112 6.5 20.1
Std. Deviation: 113.0 8 0.3 1.0
Variance: 12,773.6 65 0.1 1.1
Coefficient of Variation: 50.2% 7.2% 3.9% 5.1%
Post Harvest 3.5 pts/acre October 1 2 265.3 103 6.1 19.6
3.5 pts/acre October 2 6 112.3 107 7.0 19.3
3.5 pts/acre October 3 7 281.0 121 7.6 20.4
3.5 pts/acre October 4 12 243.0 122 6.1 20.0
3.5 pts/acre October 5 13 171.4 125 6.6 18.2
Mean: 214.6 116 6.7 19.5
Std. Deviation: 70.9 10 0.6 0.8
Variance: 5,030.0 96 0.4 0.7
Coefficient of Variation: 33.05% 8.45% 9.47% 4.33%
Mid-Summer 3.5 pts/acre July 1 3 425.1 116 6.5 21.0
3.5 pts/acre July 2 4 256.6 114 6.5 19.3
3.5 pts/acre July 3 8 326.2 117 6.3 19.2
3.5 pts/acre July 4 10 325.2 99 6.0 20.1
3.5 pts/acre July 5 15 294.2 114 6.5 18.3
Mean: 325.4 112 6.4 19.6
Std. Deviation: 62.6 7 0.2 1.0
Variance: 3,912.7 55 0.1 1.1
Coefficient of Variation: 19.22% 6.62% 3.57% 5.30%
1 TSS - total soluble solids.
2 SP - skin pressure test.
Treatment ReplicationFruit
24
(the post-harvest treatment is combined with the untreated control)
Table 13. Yield and fruit quality from each plot in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-1 ranch.
Nimitz Application Plot Total
Rate Number Yield Average Weight TSS1
SP2
lbs per plot grams °Bx psi
Control (Untreated) none applied 1 1 419.2 116 6.8 19.9
none applied 2 5 209.8 106 6.6 20.6
none applied 3 9 189.0 101 6.5 20.3
none applied 4 11 184.2 121 6.4 21.4
none applied 5 14 124.0 115 6.1 18.6
Control (Post Harvest3) 3.5 pts/acre 1 2 265.3 103 6.1 19.6
3.5 pts/acre 2 6 112.3 107 7.0 19.3
3.5 pts/acre 3 7 281.0 121 7.6 20.4
3.5 pts/acre 4 12 243.0 122 6.1 20.0
3.5 pts/acre 5 13 171.4 125 6.6 18.2
Mean: 219.9 114 6.6 19.8
Std. Deviation: 89.1 9 0.5 0.9
Variance: 7,944.1 76 0.2 0.9
Coefficient of Variation: 40.5% 7.7% 7.1% 4.8%
Mid-Summer 3.5 pts/acre July 1 3 425.1 116 6.5 21.0
3.5 pts/acre July 2 4 256.6 114 6.5 19.3
3.5 pts/acre July 3 8 326.2 117 6.3 19.2
3.5 pts/acre July 4 10 325.2 99 6.0 20.1
3.5 pts/acre July 5 15 294.2 114 6.5 18.3
Mean: 325.4 112 6.4 19.6
Std. Deviation: 62.6 7 0.2 1.0
Variance: 3,912.7 55 0.1 1.1
Coefficient of Variation: 19.22% 6.62% 3.57% 5.30%
1 TSS - total soluble solids.
2 SP - skin pressure test.
4 Nimitz application date on the post-harvest application treatment: November 13, 2015; combined with the control data since Nimitz was applied to this treatment after data collection.
Treatment ReplicationFruit
25
Ta
ble
14
. F
ruit
gra
de f
rom
ea
ch p
lot
in t
he 2
015
Nim
itz
field
tri
al a
t K
iwi-
1 r
anch
.
Nim
itz
Applica
tio
nP
lot
Ra
te a
nd T
imin
gN
um
ber
Und
ersi
ze45
42
39
36
33
30
27
25
23
20
18
or
Lar
ger
Unt
reat
ed (
Co
ntro
l)no
ne a
pp
lied
11
0.2
%0.0
%0.0
%0.4
%1.2
%4.6
%14.0
%13.4
%20.2
%27.7
%11.8
%6.4
%
none
ap
plie
d2
50.3
%0.0
%0.8
%1.6
%3.3
%12.5
%19.3
%22.8
%16.3
%16.0
%3.8
%3.3
%
none
ap
plie
d3
90.8
%0.3
%2.5
%4.9
%6.6
%15.2
%20.1
%16.8
%12.0
%14.8
%4.3
%1.6
%
none
ap
plie
d4
11
0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.7
%3.1
%8.7
%13.5
%21.5
%26.7
%14.1
%11.6
%
none
ap
plie
d5
14
0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.2
%0.2
%2.3
%14.7
%22.7
%18.4
%29.2
%8.8
%3.6
%
Mea
n:
0.3
%0.1
%0.7
%1.4
%2.4
%7.5
%15.3
%17.8
%17.7
%22.9
%8.6
%5.3
%
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
0.3
%0.1
%1.1
%2.0
%2.6
%5.9
%4.6
%4.7
%3.7
%6.9
%4.5
%3.9
%
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
124.3
%223.6
%165.5
%143.5
%109.0
%78.3
%30.0
%26.2
%21.1
%30.1
%52.8
%73.6
%
Va
ria
nce
:0.0
01%
0.0
00%
0.0
12%
0.0
41%
0.0
69%
0.3
48%
0.2
12%
0.2
19%
0.1
39%
0.4
76%
0.2
05%
0.1
53%
Po
st H
arve
st3
.5 p
ts/a
cre
Oct
ob
er1
20.9
%0.0
%1.3
%3.6
%5.0
%12.3
%23.3
%17.6
%13.6
%12.7
%4.7
%4.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e O
cto
ber
26
1.4
%0.6
%1.7
%3.4
%3.4
%8.9
%16.7
%15.7
%14.6
%16.2
%9.5
%8.0
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e O
cto
ber
37
0.1
%0.1
%1.0
%1.6
%1.5
%6.5
%12.7
%12.0
%15.6
%20.3
%9.9
%18.8
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e O
cto
ber
412
0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.3
%0.4
%2.7
%8.0
%11.8
%18.3
%27.9
%18.8
%11.8
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e O
cto
ber
513
0.5
%0.1
%1.0
%1.1
%2.4
%4.8
%10.6
%14.3
%13.0
%22.5
%12.2
%17.5
%
Mea
n:
0.6
%0.2
%1.0
%2.0
%2.5
%7.0
%14.2
%14.3
%15.0
%19.9
%11.0
%12.2
%
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
0.6
%0.2
%0.6
%1.4
%1.8
%3.7
%6.0
%2.5
%2.1
%5.8
%5.1
%6.0
%
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
104.0
%140.1
%62.3
%72.0
%70.6
%53.0
%41.9
%17.2
%13.8
%29.2
%46.5
%48.7
%
Va
ria
nce
:0.0
04%
0.0
01%
0.0
04%
0.0
21%
0.0
32%
0.1
39%
0.3
57%
0.0
61%
0.0
43%
0.3
39%
0.2
63%
0.3
55%
Mid
-Sum
mer
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly1
30.3
%0.0
%0.4
%1.3
%1.2
%4.4
%13.7
%17.9
%15.6
%23.2
%12.0
%10.0
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly2
40.7
%0.0
%1.1
%2.1
%2.2
%6.4
%12.4
%15.9
%13.9
%21.1
%9.3
%14.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly3
80.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.7
%2.2
%5.4
%12.6
%16.0
%16.8
%22.8
%12.8
%10.7
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly4
10
1.4
%0.7
%3.1
%5.3
%5.8
%16.1
%22.5
%19.0
%11.6
%7.6
%2.5
%4.3
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly5
15
0.1
%0.1
%1.3
%1.7
%1.6
%9.1
%13.2
%16.0
%14.2
%22.0
%10.1
%10.5
%
Mea
n:
0.5
%0.2
%1.2
%2.2
%2.6
%8.3
%14.9
%17.0
%14.4
%19.3
%9.3
%10.1
%
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
0.6
%0.3
%1.2
%1.8
%1.8
%4.7
%4.3
%1.4
%1.9
%6.6
%4.1
%3.8
%
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
113.8
%183.2
%102.9
%80.5
%69.8
%56.8
%28.9
%8.4
%13.4
%34.1
%43.6
%37.8
%
Va
ria
nce
:0.0
03%
0.0
01%
0.0
15%
0.0
32%
0.0
33%
0.2
21%
0.1
85%
0.0
20%
0.0
38%
0.4
35%
0.1
66%
0.1
45%
Tre
atm
ent
Replica
tio
nP
erc
ent
of
To
tal Y
ield
26
(the
post
-har
vest
tre
atm
ent is
com
bin
ed w
ith the
unt
reat
ed c
ont
rol)
Table
15. F
ruit
gra
de f
rom
each
plo
t in
the 2
015 N
imit
z fi
eld
tri
al at
Kiw
i-1 r
anch
.
Nim
itz
Applica
tion
Plo
t
Rate
and T
imin
gN
um
ber
Und
ersi
ze45
42
39
36
33
30
27
25
23
20
18 o
r L
arge
r
Cont
rol (
Unt
reat
ed)
none
applie
d1
10.2
%0.0
%0.0
%0.4
%1.2
%4.6
%14.0
%13.4
%20.2
%27.7
%11.8
%6.4
%
none
applie
d2
50.3
%0.0
%0.8
%1.6
%3.3
%12.5
%19.3
%22.8
%16.3
%16.0
%3.8
%3.3
%
none
applie
d3
90.8
%0.3
%2.5
%4.9
%6.6
%15.2
%20.1
%16.8
%12.0
%14.8
%4.3
%1.6
%
none
applie
d4
11
0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.7
%3.1
%8.7
%13.5
%21.5
%26.7
%14.1
%11.6
%
none
applie
d5
14
0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.2
%0.2
%2.3
%14.7
%22.7
%18.4
%29.2
%8.8
%3.6
%
Cont
rol (
Post
Har
vest
)13.5
pts
/acr
e1
20.9
%0.0
%1.3
%3.6
%5.0
%12.3
%0.0
%17.6
%13.6
%12.7
%4.7
%4.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e2
61.4
%0.6
%1.7
%3.4
%3.4
%8.9
%16.7
%15.7
%14.6
%16.2
%9.5
%8.0
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e3
70.1
%0.1
%1.0
%1.6
%1.5
%6.5
%12.7
%12.0
%15.6
%20.3
%9.9
%18.8
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e4
12
0.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.3
%0.4
%2.7
%8.0
%11.8
%18.3
%27.9
%18.8
%11.8
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e5
13
0.5
%0.1
%1.0
%1.1
%2.4
%4.8
%10.6
%14.3
%13.0
%22.5
%12.2
%17.5
%
Mean:
0.4
%0.1
%0.8
%1.7
%2.5
%7.3
%12.5
%16.1
%16.3
%21.4
%9.8
%8.8
%
Std
. D
evia
tion:
0.5
%0.2
%0.9
%1.7
%2.1
%4.7
%6.0
%4.0
%3.2
%6.2
%4.7
%6.0
%
Vari
ance
:0.0
00023
0.0
00004
0.0
00072
0.0
00285
0.0
00450
0.0
02173
0.0
03586
0.0
01593
0.0
01011
0.0
03872
0.0
02250
0.0
03585
Coeff
icie
nt
of
Vari
ati
on:
116.0
%166.7
%102.8
%98.8
%85.9
%64.0
%48.0
%24.8
%19.5
%29.1
%48.4
%68.3
%
Mid
-Sum
mer
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly1
30.3
%0.0
%0.4
%1.3
%0.0
%4.4
%13.7
%17.9
%15.6
%23.2
%12.0
%10.0
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly2
40.7
%0.0
%1.1
%2.1
%2.2
%6.4
%12.4
%15.9
%13.9
%21.1
%9.3
%14.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly3
80.0
%0.0
%0.0
%0.7
%2.2
%5.4
%12.6
%16.0
%16.8
%22.8
%12.8
%10.7
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly4
10
1.4
%0.7
%3.1
%5.3
%5.8
%16.1
%22.5
%19.0
%11.6
%7.6
%2.5
%4.3
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly5
15
0.1
%0.1
%1.3
%1.7
%1.6
%9.1
%13.2
%16.0
%14.2
%22.0
%10.1
%10.5
%
Mean:
0.5
%0.2
%1.2
%2.2
%2.4
%8.3
%14.9
%17.0
%14.4
%19.3
%9.3
%10.1
%
Std
. D
evia
tion:
0.6
%0.3
%1.2
%1.8
%2.1
%4.7
%4.3
%1.4
%1.9
%6.6
%4.1
%3.8
%
Vari
ance
:0.0
00033
0.0
00010
0.0
00149
0.0
00317
0.0
00443
0.0
02215
0.0
01855
0.0
00202
0.0
00376
0.0
04354
0.0
01657
0.0
01448
Coeff
icie
nt
of
Vari
ati
on:
113.8
%183.2
%102.9
%80.5
%89.1
%56.8
%28.9
%8.4
%13.4
%34.1
%43.6
%37.8
%
1 P
ost
-har
ves
t p
lots
wer
e tr
eate
d w
ith 3
.5 p
ints
Nim
itz p
er a
cre
on N
ovem
ber
13, 2015, af
ter
all y
ield
and n
emat
ode
dat
a had
bee
n c
ollec
ted, an
d t
her
efore
wer
e an
aly
zed
as
contr
ol (u
ntr
eate
d)
plo
ts.
Tre
atm
ent
Replica
tion
Perc
ent
of
Tota
l Y
ield
27
Table 16. Trunk growth measurements - Kiwi-1 trial location.
Nimitz Application Plot
Rate and Timing Number 6/23/2015 11/11/2015 Increase or Decrease
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 1 40.10 39.55 -0.55
none applied 2 5 39.03 38.88 -0.15
none applied 3 9 35.41 36.11 0.70
none applied 4 11 35.28 36.44 1.16
none applied 5 14 43.45 43.40 -0.05
Mean: 38.65 38.88 0.22
Std. Deviation: 3.43 2.94 0.69
Variance: 11.79 8.63 0.48
Coefficient of Variation: 8.9% 7.6% 311.8%
Post Harvest 3.5 pts/acre 1 2 42.41 42.22 -0.19
3.5 pts/acre 2 6 43.47 43.20 -0.27
3.5 pts/acre 3 7 33.34 33.85 0.51
3.5 pts/acre 4 12 45.20 46.06 0.86
3.5 pts/acre 5 13 40.33 40.65 0.32
Mean: 40.95 41.20 0.25
Std. Deviation: 4.61 4.55 0.48
Variance: 21.21 20.75 0.23
Coefficient of Variation: 11.2% 11.1% 193.7%
Mid-Summer 3.5 pts/acre 1 3 45.77 45.20 -0.57
3.5 pts/acre 2 4 42.71 42.58 -0.13
3.5 pts/acre 3 8 42.86 43.11 0.25
3.5 pts/acre 4 10 42.47 43.28 0.81
3.5 pts/acre 5 15 42.08 42.41 0.33
Mean: 43.18 43.32 0.14
Std. Deviation: 1.48 1.11 0.52
Variance: 2.19 1.24 0.27
Coefficient of Variation: 3.4% 2.6% 375.5%
Treatment ReplicationTrunk Circumference, cm
28
Appendix 3
Nematode & Yield Data: Kiwi-3 Ranch Table 17. Root knot nematode population
Fig. L. Root knot nematode soil
Fig. M. Root knot nematode roots
Fig. N. Root knot nematode galls
Table 18. Yield and fruit quality
Fig. O. Kiwifruit yield
Table 19. Fruit Grade
Fig. P. Fruit Grade
Table 20. Trunk growth
Fig. Q. Trunk circumference increase in 2015
29
Table 17. Root knot nematode soil population1, root infestation and galling score in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-3 ranch, Earlimart, CA.
Nimitz Application Plot
Rate and Timing Number 05/20/15 06/25/15 07/21/15 8/26/2015 10/30/2015 Roots Gall Score4
no. per gram root 0 to 10 score
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 3 672 564 933 824 912 146 3.75
none applied 2 5 509 1,697 1,697 1,782 1,025 279 6.25
none applied 3 7 764 218 909 1,239 416 152 3.75
none applied 4 11 400 230 285 691 521 35 10.00
none applied 5 13 672 721 455 485 774 122 3.75
Mean: 603 686 856 1,004 730 147 5.50
Std. Deviation: 146 605 548 515 257 88 2.74
Variance: 21,372 366,298 300,715 265,060 66,090 7,690 7.50
Coefficient of Variation: 24.2% 88.2% 64.1% 51.3% 35.2% 59.8% 49.8%
Split Nimitz Application2
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 1 2 964 661 800 1,436 1,003 169 6.25
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 2 6 364 570 497 533 851 156 2.50
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 3 8 339 485 448 661 868 13 1.25
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 4 10 473 1,358 885 588 506 137 2.50
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 5 15 679 1,927 1,236 648 451 30 2.50
Mean: 564 1,000 773 773 736 101 3.00
Std. Deviation: 261 623 320 374 243 74 1.90
Variance: 68,033 388,135 102,361 139,891 59,016 5,470 3.59
Coefficient of Variation: 46.3% 62.3% 41.4% 48.4% 33.0% 73.3% 63.2%
Mid-Summer3
3.5 pts/acre July 1 1 - - 1,471 1,127 322 558 10.00
3.5 pts/acre July 2 4 - - 503 800 288 90 0.00
3.5 pts/acre July 3 9 - - 497 1,733 496 68 0.00
3.5 pts/acre July 4 12 - - 1,527 618 505 42 8.75
3.5 pts/acre July 5 14 - - 1,067 1,515 456 92 10.00
Mean: - - 1,013 1,159 413 170 5.75
Std. Deviation: - - 501 469 101 218 5.27
Variance: - - 250,808 219,699 10,277 47,421 27.81
Coefficient of Variation: - - 49.4% 40.5% 24.5% 128.2% 91.7%
1 soil sample depth: 1 to 18 inches; extraction method: sieving sugar flotation.
2 Nimitz application dates on the split application treatment: May 21, 2015 and July 24, 2015.
3 Nimitz application date on the mid-summer application treatment: July 24, 2015.
4 Gall Score: 0 = none (no galls found on roots), 5 = medium (one or more galls), 10 = high (more than 30% of roots have galls).
TreatmentSample Date Post-Harvest: 11/06/15
- - - - - - - - - - - - no. root knot nematodes per 500 cc soil - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Replication
30
Table 18. Yield and fruit quality from each plot in the 2015 Nimitz field trial at Kiwi-3 ranch, Earlimart, CA.
Nimitz Application Plot Total
Rate and Timing Number Yield Average Weight TSS SP
lbs per plot grams °Bx psi
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 3 335.1 111 5.3 19.4
none applied 2 5 197.0 121 5.6 19.5
none applied 3 7 269.7 108 5.3 18.7
none applied 4 11 213.7 107 6.1 21.6
none applied 5 13 149.8 110 5.9 19.5
Mean: 233.1 112 5.6 19.8
Std. Deviation: 71.4 6 0.3 1.1
Variance: 5,091.4 32 0.1 1.2
Coefficient of Variation: 30.6% 5.1% 6.2% 5.6%
Split Nimitz Application 3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 1 2 404.6 114 5.1 19.5
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 2 6 63.0 120 6.0 19.4
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 3 8 303.3 97 5.7 20.1
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 4 10 153.2 101 5.3 19.9
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 5 15 184.3 100 5.2 18.9
Mean: 221.7 106 5.5 19.6
Std. Deviation: 133.6 10 0.4 0.5
Variance: 17,847.5 106 0.1 0.2
Coefficient of Variation: 60.3% 9.7% 6.6% 2.4%
Mid-Summer 3.5 pts/acre July 1 1 228.2 117 5.6 19.6
3.5 pts/acre July 2 4 116.9 120 6.0 19.4
3.5 pts/acre July 3 9 208.4 100 5.7 18.8
3.5 pts/acre July 4 12 58.7 114 6.1 19.4
3.5 pts/acre July 5 14 136.4 110 6.0 19.2
Mean: 149.7 112 5.9 19.3
Std. Deviation: 69.2 8 0.2 0.3
Variance: 4,785.4 65 0.1 0.1
Coefficient of Variation: 46.2% 7.2% 3.8% 1.6%
2 Nimitz application dates on the split application treatment: May 21, 2015 and July 24, 2015.
3 Nimitz application date on the mid-summer application treatment: July 24, 2015.
Treatment ReplicationFruit
31
T
able
19
. F
ruit
gra
de f
rom
ea
ch p
lot
in t
he 2
015
Nim
itz
field
tri
al a
t K
iwi-
3 r
anch
.
Nim
itz
Applica
tio
nP
lot
Ra
te a
nd T
imin
gN
um
ber
Und
ersi
ze45
42
39
36
33
30
27
25
23
20
18
or
Lar
ger
Unt
reat
ed (
Co
ntro
l)no
ne a
pp
lied
13
0.0
%0.1
%0.3
%0.8
%0.9
%5.6
%17.0
%25.3
%20.1
%20.0
%5.8
%4.0
%
none
ap
plie
d2
50.0
%0.0
%0.2
%0.0
%0.0
%1.1
%7.2
%15.2
%18.7
%32.7
%17.7
%7.2
%
none
ap
plie
d3
70.5
%0.1
%0.8
%1.3
%2.3
%8.7
%20.6
%20.1
%15.8
%18.1
%6.7
%4.8
%
none
ap
plie
d4
11
0.3
%0.1
%0.5
%1.1
%1.6
%6.8
%23.8
%26.2
%18.3
%15.2
%4.7
%1.4
%
none
ap
plie
d5
13
0.4
%0.0
%1.2
%1.4
%1.4
%7.3
%17.0
%20.8
%19.8
%18.0
%7.6
%5.1
%
Mea
n:
0.3
%0.1
%0.6
%0.9
%1.2
%5.9
%17.1
%21.5
%18.5
%20.8
%8.5
%4.5
%
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
0.2
%0.1
%0.4
%0.6
%0.9
%2.9
%6.2
%4.4
%1.7
%6.9
%5.3
%2.1
%
Va
ria
nce
:5
.632
E-0
66
.327
E-0
71
.726
E-0
53
.348
E-0
57
.246
E-0
58
.421
E-0
43
.901
E-0
31
.973
E-0
32
.849
E-0
44
.733
E-0
32
.769
E-0
34
.387
E-0
4
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
93.1
%91.3
%71.7
%60.9
%69.4
%49.1
%36.5
%20.6
%9.1
%33.0
%61.9
%46.4
%
Sp
lit N
imitz
Ap
plic
atio
n3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
12
0.1
%0.0
%0.5
%0.3
%1.1
%8.0
%17.0
%16.1
%16.5
%24.2
%10.0
%6.3
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
26
0.0
%0.5
%0.5
%0.8
%1.1
%1.6
%7.6
%17.5
%16.0
%27.8
%14.1
%12.5
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
38
5.5
%1.5
%4.7
%5.5
%6.8
%13.2
%16.4
%19.9
%11.5
%8.7
%1.2
%5.1
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
410
0.5
%0.3
%1.9
%2.1
%5.9
%15.7
%26.9
%21.3
%11.6
%8.3
%2.8
%8.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e M
ay +
3.5
pts
/ac
July
515
1.6
%0.4
%1.7
%3.5
%7.0
%14.7
%24.5
%15.2
%15.7
%10.4
%3.0
%2.3
%
Mea
n:
1.6
%0.5
%1.8
%2.5
%4.4
%10.6
%18.5
%18.0
%14.3
%15.9
%6.2
%7.0
%
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
2.3
%0.6
%1.7
%2.1
%3.0
%5.9
%7.6
%2.6
%2.5
%9.4
%5.5
%3.9
%
Va
ria
nce
:5
.363
E-0
43
.068
E-0
52
.937
E-0
44
.478
E-0
49
.119
E-0
43
.459
E-0
35
.802
E-0
36
.642
E-0
46
.230
E-0
48
.763
E-0
33
.068
E-0
31
.492
E-0
3
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
148.6
%103.8
%92.9
%86.3
%68.9
%55.4
%41.2
%14.3
%17.5
%59.0
%89.3
%54.9
%
Mid
-Sum
mer
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly1
10.0
%0.1
%0.2
%0.0
%0.9
%2.4
%11.6
%19.7
%19.7
%26.8
%9.7
%8.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly2
40.2
%0.0
%0.3
%0.3
%0.5
%3.0
%9.7
%13.0
%14.7
%30.3
%15.9
%11.9
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly3
91.0
%0.4
%3.0
%3.7
%4.6
%12.7
%27.8
%20.4
%14.8
%8.9
%2.3
%0.3
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly4
12
1.8
%0.3
%2.4
%1.4
%3.0
%3.9
%7.1
%14.3
%13.5
%28.1
%13.4
%10.8
%
3.5
pts
/acr
e Ju
ly5
14
1.3
%0.1
%1.2
%0.8
%2.4
%8.8
%17.7
%17.5
%15.5
%18.0
%8.2
%8.4
%
Mea
n:
0.9
%0.2
%1.4
%1.2
%2.3
%6.2
%14.8
%17.0
%15.7
%22.4
%9.9
%8.1
%
Std
. D
ev
iati
on:
0.8
%0.2
%1.2
%1.5
%1.7
%4.4
%8.3
%3.3
%2.3
%8.9
%5.2
%4.6
%
Va
ria
nce
:5
.913
E-0
52
.430
E-0
61
.561
E-0
42
.137
E-0
42
.746
E-0
41
.959
E-0
36
.861
E-0
31
.057
E-0
35
.519
E-0
47
.889
E-0
32
.727
E-0
32
.081
E-0
3
Co
eff
icie
nt
of
Va
ria
tio
n:
90.2
%81.6
%89.3
%117.3
%72.6
%71.6
%56.0
%19.1
%15.0
%39.6
%52.6
%56.5
%
Tre
atm
ent
Replica
tio
nP
erc
ent
of
To
tal Y
ield
32
Table 20. Trunk growth measurements - Kiwi-3 trial location.
Nimitz Application Plot
Rate and Timing Number 6/24/2015 11/27/2015 Increase or Decrease
Untreated (Control) none applied 1 3 30.29 30.78 0.49
none applied 2 5 31.56 31.72 0.16
none applied 3 7 31.71 31.96 0.25
none applied 4 11 31.12 31.51 0.39
none applied 5 13 30.03 30.38 0.35
Mean: 30.94 31.27 0.33
Std. Deviation: 0.75 0.66 0.13
Variance: 0.57 0.44 0.02
Coefficient of Variation: 2.4% 2.1% 38.8%
Split Nimitz Application 3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 1 2 33.63 33.97 0.34
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 2 6 30.35 30.31 -0.04
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 3 8 33.66 33.93 0.27
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 4 10 29.06 29.06 0.00
3.5 pts/acre May + 3.5 pts/ac July 5 15 35.34 35.73 0.39
Mean: 32.41 32.60 0.19
Std. Deviation: 2.60 2.79 0.20
Variance: 6.78 7.80 0.04
Coefficient of Variation: 8.0% 8.6% 103.5%
Mid-Summer 3.5 pts/acre July 1 1 29.77 30.19 0.42
3.5 pts/acre July 2 4 31.37 31.67 0.30
3.5 pts/acre July 3 9 31.75 32.38 0.63
3.5 pts/acre July 4 12 33.08 33.28 0.20
3.5 pts/acre July 5 14 30.14 30.88 0.74
Mean: 31.22 31.68 0.46
Std. Deviation: 1.33 1.22 0.22
Variance: 1.76 1.48 0.05
Coefficient of Variation: 4.2% 3.8% 49.1%
Treatment ReplicationTrunk Circumference, cm
33
Appendix 4
Fluensulfone Residue Analyses on Fruit
Kiwi-1 Trial, Poplar, CA
Kiwi-3 Trial, Earlimart, CA
42
Appendix 5
RCB ANOVA Statistical Analyses
Kiwi-1 Trial Location
Table A. Levene’s Test for homogeneity of treatment variances
Table 21. RCB ANOVA probability (ρ) values
43
Table A. Levene's Test for homogeneity of treatment variances - Kiwi-1 trial location.
Dependent Levene's Test
Variable ρ Value1
Nematode Soil & Plant Analyses
soil nematode population on 07/17/15 0.09566
soil nematode population on 09/01/15 0.07369
soil nematode population on 10/29/15 0.31196
nematode elutriation from roots on 11/2015 0.93449
gall rating of roots on 11/2015 0.36362
Yield & Fruit Quality
total yield from each plot 0.53420
average fruit weight 0.41898
fruit total soluble solids (TSS) 0.06213
fruit skin pressure test (SP) 0.86897
trunk circumference on 06/23/15 0.21451
trunk circumference on 11/11/15 0.20615
delta trunk circumferences 0.46747
Fruit Grade
Undersize 0.27366
Grade 45 0.42075
Grade 42 0.52796
Grade 39 0.89906
Grade 36 0.51956
Grade 33 0.28367
Grade 30 0.66769
Grade 27 0.01097
Grade 25 0.27521
Grade 23 0.69145
Grade 20 0.84730
Grade 18+ 0.331701 probability (ρ) values that are less than 0.05 means that there is a 95% confidence level that a significant difference
between treatment variances occurred (highlighted in red in the table).
44
Table 21. Randomized complete block ANOVA probability (ρ) values - Kiwi-1 trial location.
Dependent ANOVA
Variable ρ Value1
Nematode Soil & Plant Analyses
soil nematode population on 07/17/15 0.34846
soil nematode population on 09/01/15 0.02947
soil nematode population on 10/29/15 0.14558
nematode elutriation from roots on 11/2015 0.29073
gall rating of roots on 11/2015 0.32709
Yield & Fruit Quality
total yield from each plot 0.02596
average fruit weight 0.75966
fruit total soluble solids (TSS) 0.50708
fruit skin pressure test (SP) 0.27353
trunk circumference on 06/23/15 0.14891
trunk circumference on 11/11/15 0.13833
delta trunk circumferences 0.69542
Fruit Grade
Undersize 0.65620
Grade 45 0.75675
Grade 42 0.77376
Grade 39 0.82033
Grade 36 0.99256
Grade 33 0.93886
Grade 30 0.95465
Grade 27 0.177052
Grade 25 0.25525
Grade 23 0.71759
Grade 20 0.76056
Grade 18+ 0.18478
1 probability (ρ) values that are less than 0.05 means that there is a 95% confidence level that a significant difference
between treatment means occurred (highlighted in red in the table).
2 Welch's test (used when varainces are heterogeneous).
45
Appendix 6
RCB ANOVA Statistical Analyses
Kiwi-3 Trial Location
Table B. Levene’s Test for homogeneity of treatment variances
Table 22. RCB ANOVA probability (ρ) values
46
Table B. Levene's Test for homogeneity of treatment variances - Kiwi-3 trial location.
Dependent Levene's Test
Variable ρ Value
Nematode Soil & Root Analyses
soil nematode population on 05/20/15 0.19076
soil nematode population on 06/25/15 0.65043
soil nematode population on 07/21/15 0.51433
soil nematode population on 08/26/15 0.61457
soil nematode population on 09/9/15 (12 in.) 0.22141
soil nematode population on 10/30/15 0.04839
nematode elutriation from root samples 11/06/15 0.16007
gall rating of root samples 11/06/15 0.00378
Yield & Quality Measurements
total yield from each plot 0.16558
average fruit weight 0.18607
fruit total soluble solids (TSS) 0.28879
fruit skin pressure test (SP) 0.19857
tree circumference 06/24/15 0.01239
tree circumference 11/27/15 0.00426
delta tree circumference 0.20842
Grade Measurements
Undersize 0.05829
Grade 45 0.09510
Grade 42 0.18353
Grade 39 0.09537
Grade 36 0.00237
Grade 33 0.17377
Grade 30 0.67061
Grade 27 0.48347
Grade 25 0.39841
Grade 23 0.35339
Grade 20 0.84144
Grade 18+ 0.44471
Variables containing probability values (ρ) highlighted in red indicate that there is a significant
(95% confidence level) difference between treatment variances.
47
Table 22. ANOVA probability (ρ) values - 2015 Nimitz Trial, Kiwi-3 Ranch, Earlimart, CA.
Dependent ANOVA
Variable ρ Value1
Nematode Soil & Root Analyses
soil nematode population on 05/20/15 0.75652
soil nematode population on 06/25/15 0.49917
soil nematode population on 07/21/15 0.77846
soil nematode population on 08/26/15 0.48047
soil nematode population on 09/9/15 (12 in.) 0.86895
soil nematode population on 10/30/15 0.092482
nematode elutriation from root samples 11/06/15 0.70319
gall rating of root samples 11/06/15 0.271004
Yield & Quality Measurements
total yield from each plot 0.07563
average fruit weight 0.11237
fruit total soluble solids (TSS) 0.14101
fruit skin pressure test (SP) 0.56900
tree circumference 06/24/15 0.50527
tree circumference 11/27/15 0.59535
delta tree circumference 0.04583
Grade Measurements
Undersize 0.32612
Grade 45 0.09876
Grade 42 0.11584
Grade 39 0.08906
Grade 36 0.002173
Grade 33 0.05452
Grade 30 0.66002
Grade 27 0.12862
Grade 25 0.00285
Grade 23 0.17942
Grade 20 0.23028
Grade 18+ 0.23481
1 Variables containing probability values (ρ) highlighted in red indicate that there is a significant
(95% confidence level) difference between treatment means.
2 log10 transformed (to provide homogeneous treatment variances).
3 square root transformed (to provide homogeneous treatment variances).
4 Welch's non-parametric test for non-homogeneous variances.