Org vegsoyprodn 2008

The World Vegetable Center

AVRDC

Integration of Production Technologies

for Organic Vegetable Soybean


AVRDC

AVRDC Organic Vegetable Soybean Research Team

Crop & Ecosystem Management Unit • Dr. Chin-Hua Ma, Soil Scientist and Project Leader

• Dr. Peter Juroszek, Weed Management Agronomist

• Dr. Manuel C. Palada, Crop Management Specialist

• Mr. L. H. Chen, Senior Field Assistant

• Ms. Ida Tsai, Research Assistant

Entomology Unit – Pest Management • Dr. Ramasamy Srinivasan, Entomologist

• Ms. Mei-Ying Lin, Principal Research Assistant

• Mr. Fu-Cheng Su, Principal Research Assistant

Mycology Unit – Disease Management • Dr. Tien-Chien Wang, Mycologist

• Mr. Chien-Hua Chen, Principal Research Assistant

Nutrition Unit – Quality Evaluation • Dr. Ray-Yu Yang, Associate Specialist & Biochemist

• Ms. Wan-Jen Wu, Research Assistant

• Ms. Ying-Chuang Chen, Laboratory Assistant

Legume Breeding Unit – Variety Evaluation • Dr. Motoki Takahashi, Associate Plant Breeder

• Ms. Miao-Rong Yan, Principal Research Assistant


AVRDC

Manuel Celiz Palada

Vegetable Production/Ecosystem Specialist

Head, Crop & Ecosystem Management Unit, AVRDC

Education: PhD Hort Science-Vegetable Crops, Univ. of Florida; MS Agronomy,

Univ. of the Philippines; BS Plant Science, Central Philippine Univ.

Positions held: Research Professor, Univ. Virgin Islands USA; Senior Agronomist, IITA

Nigeria; Research Scientist, Rodale International, USA; Senior Research

Assistant, IRRI Philippines; Asst Professor, Central Philippine University

Research and development work: Field and vegetable crops production, sustainable

agricultural systems, farming systems research/extension/training, organic/ecological

agriculture, agroforestry systems, multiple cropping/cropping systems, small farm

development, microirrigation, indigenous and specialty vegetable crops, herbs and spices,

medicinal and aromatic plants/herbs, peri-urban agriculture.

International work experience: More than 35 years in profession. Has worked in South,

Southeast & Central Asia, West, Central & East Africa, the Caribbean & South Pacific.

Traveled to >40 countries.

Publications: 30+ peer reviewed journal articles; 90+proceedings; 80+ abstracts; 55

technical bulletins; edited 5 conference proceedings and gave >100 technical presentations

in national, regional and international scientific meetings and conferences.


AVRDC

Outline

• Introduction

• Objectives

• Cultivar evaluation

• Soil and fertilizer management

• Insect management

• Disease management

• Weed and crop management

• Quality improvement - nutrition

• Expected impacts

• Summary


AVRDC The role of

AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center

____

Research that promotes development


AVRDC

Founded in 1971 as the Asian

Vegetable Research and Development

Center with a research focus on Asia

Now: The World Vegetable Center with

a global mandate

Its research and extension are not-for-

profit

Its products of research are global

public goods

Staff: Increasing - almost 350

worldwide (2007)

48 Internationally Recruited Staff

293 Nationally Recruited Staff

Budget: Over US$ 18 millions (2007)


AVRDC

Focus of AVRDC

HEALTH

Vegetables are the most

affordable and available

source of essential

micronutrients

- - -

Vegetables are a healthy

answer to malnutrition

and obesity

- - -

Improved safety for

producers and

consumers through safer

production

INCOME

Vegetables create more jobs

than other agricultural

activity

- - -

Vegetable production helps

create new income

opportunities along the

value-added chain

- - -

High value vegetables

provide marketing

opportunities

DIVERSITY

Preserving and working with

diversity is an investment for

the future

- - -

Diverse varieties are the

source for applied breeding

- - -

Vegetable production and

processing diversifies

economic activities and

income

Training and capacity building for sustainable impacts!


AVRDC

Mission and Strategy

Mission:

“Alleviate poverty and malnutrition in the developing world through increased production and consumption of safe vegetables.”

Strategy: “To build partnerships and mobilize resources

from the private and public sectors to promote production and consumption of safe vegetables in the developing world.”

From production to consumption … to peri-urban

and urban areas From rural …


AVRDC

Priority outcomes of research for development

Increase productivity Enhance nutrition

and income

Ensure food

safety

Reduce pesticide

misuse

Increase

sustainability

Protect the

environment

Gender: Focus on

women Empower the poor


AVRDC

Vegetable Soybean in Taiwan

• Number 1 processed frozen food for export.

• One of the most important cash crops

• Good quality, proper moisture content, high sugar content, better flavor.

• Increased yield and improved quality – key points for enhancing superiority in international markets.


AVRDC

Challenge

Increasing concern on

environmental quality, human

health and safer agricultural

products has led to the

development of organic

agriculture, hence, organic

vegetable soybean.


AVRDC

Challenge

• Development of cultivation

technologies and expansion of

export markets for organic

vegetable soybean is a challenge

for sustainable organic vegetable

production and enterprise.


AVRDC

Vegetable Soybean

• High protein, P, Ca and isoflavone

• Nutrition value higher than other

beans

• Low fertilizer requirements

• Shorter growth duration

• Symbiotic N fixing ability suitable for

organic farming – leguminous crop


AVRDC

Project Objectives

• Integrate production technologies

and standard cultivation knowledge

for organic vegetable soybean.

• Provide production guidelines for

organic vegetable soybean farmers.

• Extend improved production

technologies for organic vegetable

soybean to other farmers in the

tropics.


AVRDC

Since the summer of 2004, fields of total 6 ha area are in conversion from conventional to organic farming (see fields in blue color). In addition to vegetable crops, arable crops, green manure species, catch crops, banana, and tropical fruit trees are also grown in order to increase the biodiversity and stability within the system.

Organic

research

fields

AVRDC Organic

Experimental Field

Plots 81-84

Plots 75-77

(3.97 ha)

(1.92 ha)

Organic plots

Organic plots


AVRDC

Land Preparation for Organic

Vegetable Soybean


AVRDC

Laying out plots


AVRDC

Laying out plots and treatments


AVRDC

`

Integration production technologies

for organic vegetable soybean

- An AVRDC’s Approach

2008.1.30

Maejo University, Chiang Mai

Innocula-

tion

Balanced

fertilization

Varietal difference Effects on Isoflavone Compare between organic & conventional

Select the best from local varieties

Integrated production technologies for organic VSB

Disseminate the technologies through field demo &

field guide

Integrated developed disease/pest technologies

Develop new technologies

Variety Evaluation

Organic-IDM

Research on production technologies

of organic vegetable soybean

Organic-IPM

Organic-IWM

Crop & Fertilizer Manage-

ment

Evaluation pod/seed

quality

Field Trial for OVSB in Spring 2006

AVRDC, Taiwan

Field Trial for OVSB in Autumn 2006

AVRDC, Taiwan

Field Trial for OVSB in Spring 2007

AVRDC, Taiwan

Field Trial for OVSB in Autumn 2007

AVRDC, Taiwan


AVRDC

Standards for graded pods of VSB

• Vegetable soybean is grain soybean harvested

at R6 stage while the pods are still green and

fully developed. The seeds of vegetable soybean are commonly larger, sweeter and more tender

than grain soybean.

• Export standard graded pods are green pods

without diseases and pest damages, with two or more seeds per pod, pod size with width 1.3 cm and pod length 4.5 cm, in 500 g pods contain

about 150~170 pod numbers.

• Other requirements are: gray pubescence on pod, short cooking time, easy-to-squeeze pod texture after cooking, and sweet taste.


AVRDC


AVRDC

Cultivar Evaluation

• V1 – Cha-Mame (fragrant)

• V2 – Tainan – ASVEG 2

• V6 - Kaohsiung 6

• V9 – Kaohsiung 9

Vegetable Soybean Varieties

Tainan-AV No.2

Days to maturity in spring is 85 , and 71 days in autumn. It is a mid to late maturity variety

Resistant to Downy mildew powdery mildew

Graded pod yields in spring is 10.7 t/ha, 8.7 t/ha in autumn.。

Pod large and green with good flavor and tastes

KS-No. 6

Medium maturity

variety, days to

maturity is about 73.

Graded pod yields in spring is 8.3 t/ha, 5.9 t/ha in autumn.

Seeds tasted the sweetest among all cultivated varieties.

Susceptible to

Anthracnose.

High yielding variety

Graded pod yields in

spring is 8.9~9.8 t/ha,

and 9.0~9.5 t/ha in

autumn.

Higher graded pods

with three seeds per

pod.

Good flavor and taste

：better than KS -6.

But the seeds are

harder than KS-6.

KS-No. 9

Chamame

Japan’s variety

With Taro-flavor,

high sweetness

With brown seed

skin color, white

flower color

Very early

maturity, yield is

lower than other

variety


AVRDC

Yield of Vegetable Soybean Varieties

under Organic Management System

AVRDC, Taiwan

Variety Total pod yield (t/ha)

SP-2006 AU-2006 SP-2007 Mean

Cha-Mame 12.5 ab 9.7 a 10.8 a 11.0

Tainan –

ASVEG 2

14.0 a 10.4 a 11.2 a 11.9

Kaohsiung 6 11.8 b 7.1 b 8.5 b 9.1

Kaohsiung 9 13.6 a 9.2 a 10.3 a 11.0

SP = Spring

AU = Autumn

Mean separation in columns by Tukey’s Test, P<0.05.


AVRDC

Yield of Vegetable Soybean Varieties

under Organic Management System

AVRDC, Taiwan

Variety Graded pod yield (t/ha)

SP 2006 AU 2006 SP 2007 Mean

Cha-Mame 8.3 a 5.9 a 6.3 a 6.8

Tainan –

ASVEG 2

8.3 a 5.2 ab 4.5 b 6.0

Kaohsiung 6 7.6 a 4.5 b 4.6 b 5.6

Kaohsiung 9 7.6 a 5.2 ab 5.2 b 6.0

SP = Spring

AU = Autumn

Mean separation in columns by Tukey’s Test, P<0.05


AVRDC

• TN-AV2 produced the highest total pod yield,

followed by KS9 and V1-Chamame. However,

the differences were not significantly

different. The growing period for TNAV2 was

the longest, and that for Chamame was the

shortest.

• As the graded pod yields were compared,

Chamame had the highest graded pod yield,

followed by TNAV2 or KS-9. The differences

among varieties were also not significant.

Chamame variety has great potential to be

cultivated in organic farming system.

Evaluation of varieties


AVRDC

Fertilizer Treatment

Trt Solid Organic Fert

(kg N/ha)

Basal Side 1

R1

Organic Fert Solution

(kg N/ha)

Side-dressed at

15 DAS R1 R4 R5

Index of total

pod yield

F3 as 100

VI V2 V6 V9

F1 60 - 7.5 7.5 - - 104 101 106 99

F2 60 - - 7.5 7.5 - 105 105 99 98

F3 60 15 - - - - 100 100 100 100

F4 60 15 - - 7.5 7.5 99 106 100 100

V1 = Cha-Mame

V2 = Tainan ASVEG-2

V3 = Kaohsiung 6

V4 = Kaohsiung 9


AVRDC

Fertilizer management

2006 2006 2007 2006 2006 2007

SpringAutumn Spring SpringAutumnSpring

F1 13.1 a 9.0 a 10.4 a 8.0 a 5.1 a 5.4 a

F2 13.0 a 8.9 a 10.0 a 7.8 a 5.1 a 5.0 a

F3 12.8 a 9.1 a 10.2 a 8.0 a 5.1 a 5.1 a

F4 13.0 a 9.3 a 10.1 a 7.9 a 5.4 a 5.2 a

Graded pod Yield

(t/ha)

Fertilization

Treatment

Effectsoffertilizationtreatmentsontotalpodyieldsandgradedpod

yieldsoforganicallygrownvegetablesoybeaninthreecropping(mean

of 4 varieties).

Total pod Yield

(t/ha)


AVRDC

Fertilizer Management

The effects of fertilizer treatment on total pod yield

varied among varieties. However, there were no

significant differences among different fertilization

methods. These results might be due to small

differences in the fertilizer treatments. Side dress applied

at early growing stage appeared slightly better than

applied at later growing stage.

VSB seeds were inoculated with local strains of rhizobia

before sowing. Solid Organic fertilizer, equivalent to 60-

90 kg N/ha was broadcasted as basal fertilizer, then

15~30 kg N/ha of solid organic fertilizer was side-dressed

along the beds and banked with soils by manual

cultivator at flower initiation or R1 stage. Liquid organic

fertilizers were supplemented at flowering initiation

stage and pod filling stages.


AVRDC

Major and minor insect pests:

Soybean webworm (Omiodes indicata) is the major pest after third week of sowing, whereas common armyworm

(Spodoptera litura) and Taiwan tussock moth (Porthesia taiwana) are the minor insects in the initial stages of crop growth.

The population of soybean webworm increased continually from fourth to seventh week after sowing. Bean pod borer

(Maruca vitrata) occurred during the pod formation stage in this season.

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) consisting of sex pheromones and sticky paper traps, bio-pesticides such as

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), neem and nucleopolyhedrovirus (NPV) have been followed to manage the major insect pests.

IPM was demonstrated against an untreated Check.

Pest monitoring:

Sucking insects such as leafhopper, whitefly and thrips were monitored using insect adhesive trap paper (IATP) at

weekly intervals from the date of sowing. Sex pheromone traps were used for Spodoptera exigua, S. litura and

Helicoverpa armigera.

Pest management:

During the first leaf stage of the crop growth, Bt and neem were sprayed for preventing stem, root and leaf-miner

damages. Application of neem after two weeks of sowing (WOS), combined application of Bt and neem after five WOS

and combined application of Bt and MaviNPV after seven WOS were followed to control foliage-feeding and pod-

damaging insect pests in the IPM plots.


AVRDC


AVRDC

Insect Pests and Their Management

in Organic Vegetable Soybean

Insect pests monitored at regular intervals

from two weeks after sowing

Tomato Fruitworm,

Helicoverpa armigera

Beet Armyworm,

Spodoptera exigua

Defoliators feeding on the leaves in early stages


AVRDC

Common Armyworm,

Spodoptera litura

Soybean Webworm,

Omiodes indicata

Cabbage looper,

Trichoplusia ni Taiwan Tussock moth,

Porthesia taiwana

Major defoliators feeding on the

leaves throughout the season


AVRDC

Stink bug, Nezara viridula

Aphid Leafhopper

Major sucking insect on the pods

Major sucking insect on the leaves


AVRDC

Limabean podborer, Etiella zinckenella (Major pod borer in Spring season)

Bean podborer, Maruca vitrata (Major pod borer in Autumn season)


AVRDC

Integrated Pest Management

• Insects were regularly monitored

from sowing to harvest during

autumn 2006 (7 Sept to 17 Nov),

spring 2007 (14 Feb to 4 May) and

autumn 2007 (1 Oct to 15 Dec)


AVRDC

Integrated Pest Management

• Sex pheromone traps for: Spodoptera exigua, S. litura and Helicoverpa armigera

• Yellow sticky paper traps for: whitefly and small green leafhopper

• Neem spray for: early season sucking insects and defoliators

• Neem and Bt sprays for: defoliators 3x during the growing season

• Blue sticky paper traps for: thrips

• Spraying of MaviMNPV for: legume pod borer in autumn season


AVRDC

IPM for major insect pests on

organic vegetable soybean

• Sex pheromone traps for S. exigua, S. litura and H. armigera throughout the growing season

• Yellow sticky paper traps for whitefly and small green leafhopper throughout the growing season

• Spraying of neem for early season sucking insects and defoliators and

• Spraying of neem and Bacillus thuringiensis (Xentari) for pod-borers three times during the growing season


AVRDC

Observations Autumn 2006

• Leaves slightly defoliated by tomato fruitworm (H. armigera), common armyworm (S. litura) and beet armyworm (S. exigua).

• Soybean webworm (Omiodes indicata) and Taiwan tussock moth (Porthesia taiwana) were promising defoliators.

• Whitefly (Bemisia tabaci), thrips (Megalurothrips usitatus) and small green leafhopper were the major sucking insects.

• Limabean pod borer (Eteiella zinckenella) and legume pod borer (LPB), Maruca vitrata were the major pests on the pods.


AVRDC

Observations Spring 2007

• Leaves were slightly defoliated by tomato fruitworm and beet armyworm early in season

• Common armyworm, soybean webworm and Taiwan tussock moth were promising defoliators, but population was lower than in 2006.

• Stink bug (Nezara viridula), aphids and small green leafhoppers were the major sucking insects.

• Limabean pod borer was the major pest attacking the pods.


AVRDC

Observations Autumn 2007

• Soybean worm (O. indicata) and

common armyworm were the

major insect pests observed four

weeks after sowing.

• Taiwan tussock moth, thrips and

small green leafhopper were the

minor insect pests.


AVRDC

Yield of vegetable soybean in

different treatments (2006)

Treatments Total pod yield

(t/ha)

(Mean ± SD)

Graded pod

yield (t/ha)

(Mean ± SD)

Integrated Pest

Management (IPM)

9.94±0.50 7.12±0.56

Check 6.02±0.48 3.15±0.38

t (d.f.=7) 13.22** 16.45**

P <0.0005 <0.0004


AVRDC

Damage by Lima bean pod borer

and total pod yield, Spring 2007

Treatment Pod damage by

lima bean pod

borer (%)

Total pod yield

(t/ha)

IPM (organic)

Conventional

Control

(untreated

4.01 b

1.78 c

10.67 a

9.93 b

13.77 a

9.00 c

LSD (p<0.05)

LSD (p<0.01)

2.23

3.03

0.51

0.69


AVRDC

Differences in total and graded pod yield

between organic IPM and control plots,

Autumn 2006

Treatments Total pod yield

(t/ha)

(Mean + SD)

Graded pod yield

(t/ha)

(Mean + SD)

IPM

Control

(untreated)

9.94 + 0.50

6.02 + 0.48

7.12 + 0.56

3.15 + 0.38

t (d.f. = 7)

P

13.22**

<0.0005

16.45**

<0.0004

Significance of differences was calculated (**p<0.01 and

*p<0.05) using paired t-test.


AVRDC


AVRDC

Disease Management of

Organic Vegetable Soybean

C. H. Chen & T. C. Wang

AVRDC-The World Vegetable Center


AVRDC

Disease Control

For effective controlling soil-borne diseases at seedling stage, plants in the plot of Treatment

D1 were drenched with Trichoderma harzianum T2 strain (100X) started at 10 days after sowing,

and followed by 3 more applications at one week interval.

For controlling disease infection on stems, leaves, and pods at mid-growth stage, plants in the

plots of Treatments D2 and D3 were sprayed with Bacillus subtilis strains Y1336 (500X) and WG6-

14 (100X) respectively, at 30 days after sowing and continued by 3 more applications at one week

interval.


AVRDC

Major fungal diseases of

organic vegetable soybean

1. Root rot (Rhizoctonia solani)

2. Anthracnose (Colletotrichum

truncatum)


AVRDC

Root rot

Causal agent: Rhizoctonia solani

Symptom and

occurrence:

Characteristics of root rot

include inadequate stands

and death of young seedlings.

The presence of dark brown

or reddish lesions on the

stem or lower main root is

evidence of seedling disease.

Seedling roots are often

blackened and decayed.


AVRDC

Management of root rot

1) Practice rotation

2) Solar sterilization by transparent plastic film

mulching

3) Planting high quality seed

4) Seed treatment utilizing effective antagonists such

as Trichoderma spp.

5) Soil amendment or drenching with Trichoderma spp.

at the seedling stage


AVRDC

Anthracnose

Causal agent: Colletotrichum truncatum

Symptoms and occurrence:

Late infections occur during bloom

or early pod development when

conditions are wet and humid for a

prolonged period. The fungus

produces an abundance of spores

which infect and kill lower branches,

leaves, and young pods. Symptoms

appear on stems, pods, and petioles

as red or dark brown areas. Later

these areas are covered with black

fruiting bodies (acervuli). Infection

of young pods results in empty pods

at maturity. Pods infected later

contain shriveled or moldy seed,

and may have dark lesions on the

seed coat.


AVRDC

Management of anthracnose

1) Planting high quality seed

2) Seed treatment utilizing warm water (520C

for 30 min)

3) Applying effective antagonists such as

Thrichoderma spp., Bacillus subtilis, or

Streptomyces spp. between bloom and pod

fill


AVRDC

The efficacy of antagonists on disease control of vegetable

soybean production in spring, 2007

Treatment

Root

rot (%)1

Downy

mildew

(%)2

Soybean

rust (%)2

Anthracnose

(%)3

Graded

pod yield

(t/ha)4

TRICHODERMA 3.26 c5 9.86 a 24.86 a 44.51 a 5.33 a

Trichoderma

harzianum 7.95 b 8.19 a 28.06 a 45.29 a 4.98 ab

Bio-Bac（Bacillus

subtilis） 12.57 a 8.89 a 24.03 a 42.85 a 5.19 ab

BIO-DEFENDER

（Streptomyces） 15.17 a 9.44 a 27.16 a 45.95 a 4.72 ab

Control 14.30 a 8.89 a 24.72 a 48.06 a 5.07 ab

1Percentage of plants infected. 2Percentage of foliage area infected. 3Percentage of pod no. infected. 4Calculated based on pod weight of the harvest area.

5Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to the Duncan’s test at P<0.05.


AVRDC

The efficacy of antagonists on disease control of vegetable

soybean production in fall, 2007

Treatment Root rot

(%)1

Anthracnose

(% )2

Graded pod

(%)3

Trichoderma spp.

amended

（特克德）

11.33 c4 10.23 a 43.37 ab

Trichoderma spp.

spraied

（特克德）

38.33 ab 8.44 b 49.57 ab

Bacillus subtilis

（台灣寶） 41.67 a 5.81 c 50.05 ab

Streptomyces spp.

（菌老大） 33.67 b 5.50 c 52.82 a

Control 37.67 ab 9.81 ab 41.35 b

1Percentage of plant no. infected. 2Percentage of pod no. infected. 3Weight percentage within a sample size of 1 kg for each replication.. 4Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to the Duncan’s test at P<0.05.


AVRDC

Other Diseases Observed in

Vegetable Soybean

• Downy mildew (Peronospora manshurica)

• Rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi)

• Purple blotch (Cercospora kikuchii)

• Bacterial pustule (Xanthomonas axonopodis

pv. Glycines)


AVRDC

Integrated disease management

for vegetable soybean

1) Planting resistant cultivars

2) Selecting high quality seed

3) Field sanitation

4) Proper field operation

5) Controlling disease timely and

effectively


AVRDC

Peter Juroszek & Hsing-hua Tsai

AVRDC, Organic Vegetable Program

Crop & Ecosystem Management Unit

COA Organic Vegetable Soybean Project:

Weed management

Field experiment sown on 7 September 2006

Preliminary results before soybean harvest


AVRDC

Weed Control

Plastic mulch and frequent manual removal of weeds (15, 22, 28, and 35 DAS) generated the

highest efficacy with more than 90 % reduction of total weed ground cover (but not a low-cost

solution)

Vinegar (6 % acetic acid) applied twice (15 and 22 DAS) significantly reduced ground cover of

broadleaf weeds (>70 %) such as Amaranthus spinosus, A. viridis and Trianthema

portulasastrum, but not including ground cover of grasses and Cyperus rotundus.


AVRDC


AVRDC

Materials and Methods

• Growing season:

7 Sept 2006 (dry season)

14 Feb 2007 (dry-wet season)

• Treatments:

1 – Untreated control

2 – Vinegar application

3 – Plastic mulch cover

4 – Hand hoeing


AVRDC

Materials and Methods

• Plot size: 4 raised beds, 1 m wide x 3 m long

• Furrow space: 50 cm

• Seeding rate: 3 seeds per hill 12 cm apart in double rows

• Plant population: 33,333 plts/ha

• Biopesticides: Xentari-Bt, BioFree-Neem

• Irrigation: furrow


AVRDC

Treatments

• Vinegar: 2006 = 6% acetic acid,

commercial food grade – post

emergence, 2x (15 and 22 DAS) 2007

= one application at 16 DAS, hand-

sprayed over weeds.

• Plastic mulch: surface prior to sowing

• Hoeing: 15 DAS (2006), 20 DAS (2007)


AVRDC

Field trial treatments (RCBD with 3 replications)

Untreated control (‘Untreated‘, negative control plots)

Vinegar application at 6 % acetic acid (‘Vinegar‘, food-grade)

Plastic mulch cover (‘Mulch‘)

Weeds frequently removed (‘Weed free‘, positive control plots)

Vinegar was applied by hand sprayer twice at 15 DAS and 22 DAS,

avoiding drift to the crop canopy to minimize crop injury

Application in the morning between 8 and 9 a.m.

Sunny weather and no rainfall after application


AVRDC

Weed management approach in organic farming

Vinegar application might be effective??

In the USA, vinegar application (10, 15, and 20 % acetic acid

content) successfully controlled broadleaf weeds including

Chenopodium album, Amaranthus species, Abutilon theophrasti

(e.g. Radhakrishnan et al., 2003)

• Vinegar at the 5 % acetic acid concentration gave variable

results.

The presented study aimed at generating basic knowledge

concerning the use of foliar applied vinegar for weed control in

organic farming without taking into account the economic

aspects.


AVRDC

Weed abundance just before vinegar application at 15 DAS,

dry season 2006


AVRDC

First vinegar (6 % acetic acid) application at 15 DAS using a hand sprayer; applied

between 8-9 a.m. at a sunny day without rainfall, dry season 2006. The vinegar

spray was directed to the weed canopy to avoid crop canopy injury!


AVRDC

Effects of vinegar 2 hours after its application on Amaranthus and small grasses, 2 March 2007


AVRDC

Effect of vinegar application at 18 DAS (3 days after first vinegar application)


AVRDC

Effect of vinegar at 28 DAS (13 days after first vinegar application, 6 days

after the second vinegar application), broadleaf weeds not apparent any more


AVRDC

Treatments of trial replication 2 at 32 DAS; crop ground cover values > 95 %


AVRDC

Weed fresh biomass and total and graded pod yield of

organic vegetable soybean under four weed

management treatments

Treatment Weed biomass

(g/m2)

2006 2007

Total pod yield

(t/ha)

2006 2007

Graded pod yield

(t/ha)

2006 2007

Untreated

Vinegar

Mulch

Hoeing

963.3 a 7555.6 a

48.9 b 5604.9 b

1.4 c 5.3 c

0.3 c 0.0 c

8.5 b 3.0 b

9.4 ab 5.2 b

10.7 a 11.1 a

9.7 ab 11.3 a

6.1 b 1.3 b

7.0 ab 2.3 b

8.2 a 5.7 a

7.0 ab 5.8 a

Results within columns with different letters behind are significantly different (Tukey’s Test, P<0.05

Note: in both years Amaranthus species were most dominant and influenced the outcome of

results


AVRDC

Summary of results gained in the dry season 2006/2007

Plastic mulch and frequent manual removal of weeds gave highest

efficacy with more than 90 % reduction of weed ground cover

independent of weed species and season (not a low-cost solution)

Vinegar (6 % acetic acid) applied twice at 15 DAS and 22 DAS did not

significantly reduce ground cover of grasses and had virtually no effect

on Cyperus rotundus

Vinegar applied twice at 15 DAS and 22 DAS significantly reduced

total ground cover of broadleaf weeds (up to >70 %) including

Amaranthus spinosus, A. viridis, Trianthema portulacastrum

However, results could not be confirmed in the rainy season 2007

because after vinegar application subsequent weed emergence occured

Vinegar application (6 % acetic acid) may be in the dry season a

possible approach when susceptible bradleaf weeds are dominating the

field, under conditions of less subsequent weed emergence (e.g. avoid

all irrigation practices such as over-head irrigation that would favour

subsequent weed emergence). Do not apply vinegar at the crop canopy

of soybean because it will kill your soybeans like the broadleaf weeds!


AVRDC

Nutrition

Quality Evaluation


AVRDC

Taste Test for Vegetable Soybean


AVRDC

Nutrient content and pod color value of vegetable

soybeans as influenced by growing season

(averaged over varieties and farming systems)

Season Isoflavone (mg/100 g d.w.)

Dry Matter

(g)

Protein

(g)

Oil

(g)

Sugar

(g)

Color

Spring

Autumn

41.4 a

67.8 b

30.4 b

32.1 a

38.7 a

38.2 b

19.9 a

19.8 a

8.5 b

12.9 a

3.58 a

3.80 a

n = 18 in both seasons for isoflavone analysis, otherwise n = 48 in spring

and n = 42 in autumn.

Nutritional quality of vegetable

soybean by seasons

b a

a b

a a

a a

a a

b

a

0

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

Color

value

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Dry matter

(%)

Protein (%) Sugar (%) Oil (%)

Va

lue

s

Spring

Autumn

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Isoflavone

(mg/100g)

Source: Ma and Yang, AVRDC, unpublished data


AVRDC

Nutrient content and pod color value of vegetable

soybeans as influenced by farming system

(averaged over varieties and growing seasons)

Farming

System

Isoflavone (mg/100 g d.w.)

Dry Matter

(g)

Protein

(g)

Oil

(g)

Sugar

(g)

Color

Conv.

Organic

58.3 a

50.9 b

31.8 a

30.8 b

36.7 b

39.8 a

20.4 a

19.4 b

11.1 a

10.1 b

3.92 a

3.51 b

n = 18 in both farming systems for isoflavone analysis, otherwise n = 39 in

conventional farming system and n = 51 in organic farming system.

Nutritional quality of vegetable

soybean by farming types

a b

a b

b a

a b

a b a b

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Dry matter

(%)


Va

lue

s

Conventional

Organic

0

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

Color

value

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Isoflavone

(mg/100g)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Dry matter

(%)


Va

lue

s

Conventional

Organic

0

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

Color

value

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Isoflavone

(mg/100g)


Variation of total isoflavone content

among vegetable soybean varieties

b

a

a

c c

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Chamame TNAV2 KS5 KS6 KS9

Tota

l is

oflavones (

mg/1

00g)



AVRDC

Summary of Results on

Nutritional Quality • Effects of variety and farming system are

significant on all 6 quality traits.

• Seasonal effect was significant except for oil content and color values.

• No significant effect of organic fertilizer was shown on quality traits.

• Season x farming system and season x variety interactions were significant for all 6 quality traits.

• Farming system x variety interaction was significant only for dry matter, color and isoflavone, however, when season was added, the effects were significant on protein, oil, sugar and isoflavones.


AVRDC

Isoflavones

• Growing season and variety were major factors in influencing isoflavones.

• About 1.5-fold higher isoflavones were obtained in autumn compared to spring growing season.

• Difference in isoflavones between farming systems was significant only in spring for 3 out of 4 varieties.

• Conventional farming system produced higher quantities of isoflavones than organic system.

• Highest isoflavones was obtained from Da Da Cha-Man and KS 9 in autumn regardless of farming system.


AVRDC

Sugar

• Influenced by growing season.

• About 1.5-fold higher free sugar content was obtained from autumn crop compared to spring crop.

• Difference in sugar content between farming systems was significant in 2 out of 4 varieties (Da Da Cha-Man and KS 6) grown in spring and significant in 2 out of 4 varieties (Da Da Cha-Man and KS 9) grown in autumn.

• Higher sugar contents were obtained in conventional than organic farming system except for Da Da –Cha-Man grown in autumn.


AVRDC

Dry Matter

• Conventionally produced vegetable

soybeans have significantly higher

dry matter content compared to

organically grown soybean regardless

of growing season and variety.

• In this study, farming system was a

major factor influencing dry matter

content.


AVRDC

Protein

• Farming system and variety had

significant influence on protein

content.

• Higher protein content was obtained

from organic system compared to

conventional system.

• Highest protein content was obtained

from variety KS 5 grown in spring

under organic system.


AVRDC

Oil

• Higher oil contents were obtained

in 3 out of 4 varieties grown in

spring under conventional

farming system.


AVRDC

Pod Color

• Color values from 1 to 6 indicate a range of color from deep green to yellowish green.

• Higher color values are favored.

• Slightly but significantly higher color values were observed in 3 out of 4 varieties in spring and 2 out of 4 in autumn.


AVRDC

Conclusions

• Conventional farming system produced vegetable soybeans with higher dry matter, isoflavones, oil and color values than organically grown soybeans.

• Organically grown soybeans are higher in protein content than conventionally grown soybeans.

• Seasonal effect is a major factor influencing some quality traits especially for total isoflavones and sugar contents.

• Overall, conventionally and organically produced vegetable soybeans have almost similar nutritional qualities.


AVRDC

Expected Impacts • Increased yield potential of new vegetable

soybean varieties under organic system.

• Development of technologies for pest, disease and weed management.

• Development of balanced fertilization technologies to reduce fertilizer application and decrease negative impacts on environment.

• Production of healthy, safe and higher quality organic vegetable soybean enhancing industry and export market.

• Improved human health through promotion and consumption of nutritious organic vegetable soybean.


AVRDC

Summary

• Integration of technologies including improved high yielding varieties, balanced fertilization, integrated pest, disease and weed management leads to the production of organic vegetable soybean with comparable nutritional quality and yield as conventionally grown soybean.


AVRDC

Organic Vegetable Soybean Field Day


AVRDC


AVRDC

Acknowledgement

• This research project was made possible from the grant provided by the Taiwan Council of Agriculture (CoA).

• The Research Team highly appreciate the technical support and cooperation of Tainan DAIS, National Chun Ching University and other research institutes in Taiwan.

• The hard work and assistance of AVRDC field and laboratory technicians as well as field labor are highly appreciated.


AVRDC

Acknowledgement

• The Research Team is grateful to Dr. & Professor Aphiphan Pookpakdi, Dr. Ruangchai Juwattanasomran and Mr. Daruphun Sansiriphun for their visit to AVRDC last December 2007 and for inviting Dr. Manuel Palada to visit Chiang Mai and share knowledge and experience in organic vegetable soybean production with researchers, extension workers and farmers who are involved in vegetable soybean production.


AVRDC

Org vegsoyprodn 2008

Technology

Transcript of Org vegsoyprodn 2008