Overview of Presentation - University of Florida · Where we fit into the big picture of citrus...

1

Changes in theCalifornia Citrus Industry

Mary Lu ArpaiaDept. of Botany and Plant Sciences

University of CaliforniaRiverside, CA 92521

Overview of Presentation

• CA Citrus Overview; where we have been and where are we going?

• Dealing with change and addressing the challenges

• Role of Citrus Research – the long view; planning for the future

California Citrus Industry; where we have been and where are we going?

Has it always been blue skies?Source: USDA-NASS; FAO

World United States California0

20

40

60

% of Total Production

OrangesTangerinesGrapefruitLemonsOther

Where we fit into the big picture of citrus production

Crop Season for CA Citrus

Source: CDFA, CA Agricultural Statistics Service

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Grapefruit

Lemons

Navel Oranges

Valencia Oranges

Tangerines

CA Ranking(350 Crops)

CA Share ofUS Production

Grapefruit 50 11%

Lemons 22 86%

Oranges, All 13 21%

Tangerines, All 57 25%

2

California Citrus Exports - 2001

Source: CA Agricultural Statistics Service, CDFA

Oranges(6)

Lemons(19)

Grapefruit(29)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Canada Hong Kong/China JapanSouth Korea Taiwan Other

Where do we grow Citrus?

• Grown commercially throughout state

• Historical Base is southern CA

• Industry has moved north (~70%) to SJV

• Wide range of soils, climate and other environmental constraints

CA Citrus Acreage 2002

Source: 2002 California Citrus Acreage Report, CA Agricultural Statistics Service

Navel Oranges

Valencia Oranges

Lemons

Grapefruit

Pummelos and Hybrids

Tangerines, All

Lime

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Acres (Thousands)

Bearing Non-Bearing

Regional Citrus Distribution - 2002

Source: 2002 California Citrus Acreage Report, CA Agricultural Statistics Service (12/02)

Navel Oranges

Valencia Oranges

Lemons

Grapefruit

Pummelosand Hybrids

Tangerines, All

Limes

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Desert So. CA Inland Sacramento ValleyCoastal San Joaquin Valley Other

Distribution of California Citrus 1930 - 2002


1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1988 1998 20020

50

100

150

200

250

300

350Cartons (1,000)

Sacramento Valley San Joaquin Valley Southern California

Total peak acreage in 1940’sShift to San Joaquin Valley starting in 1950’s due to increased water availability and urban pressure in southern CA

Grapefruit, Pummelos and Hybrids Distribution 1930 - 2002


1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1988 1998 20020%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Lemon Distribution 1930 - 2002


1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1988 1998 20020%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Valencia Orange Distribution 1930 - 2002


1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1988 1998 20020%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Navel Orange Distribution 1930 - 2002


1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1988 1998 20020%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


3

Navel OrangeExpanded rapidly including pigmented navels; market stretched to nearly 10 monthsMainly fresh

Primarily San Joaquin ValleyIncreasing urban pressure; environmental constraints; air pollution

Navel Orange Production, 1988-2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Lbs (Thousands) per acre

Navel Orange Returns, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

2

4

6

8

10Value ($/carton)

Fresh Market Processing

Navel Orange Utilization, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

20

40

60

80

100Cartons (thousands) (Thousands)


Source: CDFA, CA Agricultural Statistics Service; 37.5 lb carton

Valencia OrangeOlder trees in southern CA; small fruit size; crease/puff problemsCompetition from navels and other fruit during summer mo.

Rapid loss of southern CA acreage due to increasing urban pressure and alternative cropping

Valencia Orange Returns, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

5

10

15

Value ($/carton)


Valencia Orange Utilization, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

20

40

60

Cartons (thousands) (Thousands)


Valencia Orange Production, 1988-2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

10

20

30



LemonsProduction +/- stable~45% processedIntl. Competition??????

Primarily coastal CA, north of Los Angeles, Southern CA deserts High urban pressure

Lemon Utilization, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

10

20

30

40



Lemon Returns, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14Value ($/carton)


Lemon Production, 1988-2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

10

20

30


Source: CDFA, CA Agricultural Statistics Service; 38 lb carton

Grapefruit Production, 1988-2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

10

20

30


Grapefruit Utilization, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

5

10

15

20



Grapefruit Returns, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

2

4

6

Value ($/carton)


GrapefruitProduction +/- stableMostly fresh marketReturns poor

Mainly Southern CA deserts and warm Inland valleysHigh urban pressure




Navel Oranges

Valencia Oranges

Lemons

Grapefruit


Tangerines, All

Lime

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Acres (Thousands)

Bearing Non-Bearing

What a difference 4 years makesPummelos and Hybrids - 1998

Source: 1998 California Citrus Acreage Report, CA Agricultural Statistics Service (5/12/99)

Chandler

Melogold

Oro Blanco

Shaddock

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Acres

Bearing Non-Bearing

Pummelos and Hybrids - 2002


Chandler

Melogold

Oro Blanco

Other

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Acres

Bearing Non-Bearing

4

TangerinesMany new plantings – knowledge base lackingPlaying catch-up

New UC releases – unknown potentialPlantings statewide – will know more in a few years

Tangerine Production, 1988-2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

5

10

15

20


Tangerine Utilization, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

1

2

3

4

5



Tangerine Returns, 1988- 2001

87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01

Production Year

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14Value ($/carton)





Navel Oranges

Valencia Oranges

Lemons

Grapefruit


Tangerines, All

Lime

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Acres (Thousands)

Bearing Non-Bearing

Some estimate this number could be as high as 20,000 acres or double CDFA figures!

Tangerines, All - 1998 vs 2002

Source: 1998, 2002 California Citrus Acreage Report, CA Agricultural Statistics Service

1998

2002

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Acres (Thousands)

BearingNon-Bearing

1998 vs 2002

Tangerines, All - 2002Tangerines/Mandarins

ClementinesDancy

FairchildGold Nugget

SatsumasOthers

TangelosMinneolaOrlando

OthersTangors/Temples

Royal MandarinsOthers

0 1 2 3 4 5

Acres (Thousands)

Bearing Non-Bearing

Tangerines, All - 1998

Minneola Tangelo

Other Tangelo

Fairchild

Satsuma

Other Tangerines

0 1 2 3 4 5

Acres (Thousands)

Bearing Non-Bearing

Increased plantingMore diversified

No varieties for future – unknownpotential

Shasta Gold (TDE 2) Tahoe Gold (TDE 3)

Yosemite Gold (TDE 4) Delite (W. Murcott)

Postharvest PhysiologyDealing with change and addressing the challenges

5

Considerations:

Regional Concerns

Statewide Concerns

National Concerns

Global Concerns

Regional considerationsCrop Issues

Varietal/Rootstock selectionFruit qualityEnvironmental adaptation

EnvironmentalWater - availability/qualityGround water - pollutionPesticide regulationsAir pollution (San Joaquin Valley)

Urban Encroachment/AttitudeIncreased regulationsCompetition for resources

Nitrate Groundwater Pollution and management of yield and quality

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5TOTAL N APPLIED ANNUALLY (LBS/TREE)

1.6

2.0

2.4

2.8

3.2

LEA

F N

ITR

OG

EN (%

)

1 2

4

12

C12C

1

2C 12

C

12

41

2

4

1 2 1

Method of ApplicationFoliar onlySoil onlyFoliar and soilControl

2000

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5N SOIL APPLIED ANNUALLY (LBS/TREE)

0

20

40

60

80

NIT

RA

TE (S

S) B

Y SO

IL E

XTR

AC

T (M

G/L

)

124

12C

1

2

C 12C

1

2

C

1

2

4

12

4

1

2 1

Method of ApplicationFoliar onlySoil onlyFoliar and soilControl

LEAF ANALYSIS NITRATE N IN SOIL EXTRACT

Project funded by CRB; 1997 - 2002

Nitrate Groundwater Pollution and management of yield and quality

Project funded by CRB; 1997 - 2002

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5NITROGEN APPLIED - LBS/TREE

0

YIEL

D -

% O

F M

AX

FOR

YEA

R

12

412C

12C

12

C

12

C

12 4

12

41 2 1

Method of ApplicationFoliar onlySoil onlyFoliar and soil Control

Mean for 2000, 2001, 2002

Impact on Yield

4.44.64.85.05.25.45.65.86.06.26.46.66.8

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

NITROGEN APPLIED - LBS/TREE

Peel

Thi

ckne

ss (m

m)

Foliar onlySoil onlyFoliar and soilControl

Peel Thickness

Summary• Increasing N results in increasing NO3-N below

root zone• Method of application can influence this• Maximum yield, less NO3-N below root zone

with combination of foliar and soil applied

• Peel thickness increases, peel firmness decreases with increasing N

• No other consistent differences in fruit quality were detected following storage.

Statewide considerations

Pesticide RegistrationMaintaining current materialsRegistration of new materials

Exotic PestsExclusion/Public Education

Disease ContainmentResearch Funding

Citrus Research Board

6

Citrus Peelminer, Marmara gulosa prefers to infest fruit but will also attack leaves and twigs

Leaf

Fruit

Twig

Bean thrips inside navel orange revealed after thin slices are cut through the fruit. They may appear black with few distinguishing characteristics (banding is not visible).

Adult bean thrips bodies are uniformly dark grayish-black. The front wings have transverse white bands with brown tips. Newly emerged adults are a dirty yellowish-brown with a darker head and retain the crimson blotches from the pupal stage for a short period of time.

BEAN THRIPS – quarantined pest in Australia

When feeding, the glassy-winged sharpshooter excretes copious amounts of watery excrement, which dries to give plants a whitewashed appearance.

The insect is one of the largest sharpshooters found in California. At about 12 mm (1/2 inch) in length, it is twice as large as other common species. Overall it is brown to blackish in color. The eyes are yellow with dark speckles and the abdomen is yellow and black.

Glassy-winged Sharpshooter

Can be found in bins of harvested fruit

Citrus Thrips

California Red Scale

Controlled in field by - biological control- chemical control

High Pressure Washer augments field control measures and has allowed for increasing of field “economic threshold”

High Pressure Washer

7

High Pressure Washer• HPW technology developed in South

Africa and Israel• Introduced commercially into CA

approximately 5 years ago• Most orange houses now have a HPW unit• Houses w/out HPW may use OPP

(orthophenylphenate) over first few brushes or detergent with neutral cleaner

HPW Damage

Scale Removal Pre Wash

Post Wash

Green moldPenicillium digitatum

Sour rotGeotrichum candidum

Blue moldP. italicum

Wound pathogens are CA’s biggest concern –always looking for control alternatives

Before harvestMinimize woundsReduce grove inoculumPrompt transport to packline

After harvestMinimize wounds and fruit dropsReduce packinghouse inoculumUse soak tanks & fungicidesStore at 50°F or below as soon as possible

Green and Blue molds

Before harvestMinimize wounds, avoid fruit to soil contactHarvest in afternoon, avoid wet periodsPrompt transport to packline

After harvestMinimize wounds and packline inoculumUse carbonate soak tanks, wash with SOPP; wax with GA and/or 2,4-DStore at 50°F or below as soon as possible, use boxes that isolate fruit into small groups

Sour rot Brown rot Phytopthora spp.

8

Before harvestCopper or fosetyl-Al fungicidesAvoid splashing or standing water, good drainage under trees, skirt pruned upPrune tree to open canopyPrompt transport to packline

After harvestUse heat in soak tanks

Brown rot Maintaining existing fungicides and registering new materials

Re-visiting old methodologies, improving what we have – Dr. J. Smilanick– Optimizing tank/drench treatments – Near harvest grove treatments (Topsin)– Optimizing biocontrol agents in the

postharvest environmentNew fungicides and resistance management

strategies – Dr. J. Adaskaveg

Resulting effectiveness

HIGHEST

LOWEST

WARM/HOT WATER

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE WATER

LIGHT WAX

HEAVY WAX

Fungicide dissolved in

15 J. Smilanick – USDA,ARS

Resulting effectiveness

HIGHEST

LOWEST

Immersed in or pressurewashed with solution

Float in or drenched with solution

Brief overhead spray

Fungicide applied to fruit by

J. Smilanick – USDA,ARS

Grove spray fungicide to protect fruit during degreening

A thiophanate methyl (Topsin M) application one week before

harvest effectively protected the harvested fruit from green mold infection during degreening or

during storage.


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Gre

en m

old

% a

fter d

egre

enin

g or

sto

rage

None 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000

Inoculum density

Topsin

Control Kern Co. Lindcove1 Lindcove2


9

Grove spray fungicide to protect fruit during degreening

It would greatly facilitate managementof the development of benzimidazole-

resistant molds that occurred as a result of grove applications

if more postharvest fungicides of other mode-of-action classes

were available.


New classes of fungicides for postharvest decay control in the US

Sterol biosynthesis inhibitors HydroxyanilidesPhenylpyrroles

Scholar(fludioxonil)

stone & pome fruit, kiwi, citrus,

pomegranate

- Reduced risk fungicides

Elevate (fenhexamid)stone & pome

fruit, kiwi, pomegranate

Elite (tebuconazole)

sweet cherry

Endura (boscalid)

Strobilurins

Abound (azoxystrobin,pyraclostrobin)

citrus

Pyridines

PH-066(pyrimethanil)citrus, stone, &

pome fruits

Anilinopyrimidines

Mixture: Pristine (stone fruit)

J. Adaskaveg – UC, Riverside

Efficacy of fungicides against postharvest decays

Fungicide Fungicide class Penicillium decay

Sour rot

Gray mold

Brown rot

Rhizopus, Mucor, etc.

Imazalil SI-Triazole +++ - +++ +++ ---

TBZ Benzimidazole +++ - +++ +++ -

SOPP Phenolic ++ ++ ++ - +

Tebuconazole SI-Triazole +++ ++ +++ +++ +

Fludioxonil Phenylpyrrole +++ - +++ +++ +++

Fenhexamid Hydroxyanilid - - +++ ++ -

Azoxystrobin Strobilurin ++ - + + +

BAS516 Strobilurin/Pyridine + - +++ +++ +++

PH-066 Aninilopyrimidine +++ - +++ ++ -

Overall ratings based on our efficacy evaluations during field and lab studies.Rating: +++ = excellent; ++ = very good; + = some activity; - not active.Color code: Pink = reduced risk, gray = not reduced risk.


- Follow the RULES of Fungicide Stewardship-

Rotate between different classes of fungicides or use mixtures prior to the development of resistance.Use labeled rates and use only when needed.Limit total number of fungicide applications of any one class to 1 per fruit lot.Educate yourself about fungicide activity, mode of action, and class.Sanitation with the use of multi-site mode of action materials (sanitizers and fungicides) is essential in an integrated management program .

Anti-Resistance Strategies for Postharvest Fungicides- Post-Registration Strategies -

Postharvest guidelines for the three new fungicides and currently registered fungicides will be in place for the 2003-2004 season.


National ConsiderationsCompetition for market share

With other commodities and Citrus ImportsMarketing and Promotion

TX and FL Promotional CampaignsImports

Trends in Produce Consumption5 a Day Program; Convenience FoodsFood Safety

Pesticide Regulations/EPAExotic Pests

Global ConsiderationsTrends in Citrus Production

Increase plantings of soft citrusExport Markets - How secure is the Pacific Rim?

The Japanese – Increased competitionHong Kong/China - What's the future

Global Trade AgreementsChanges at CODEX

10

Postharvest PhysiologyCoordinating strategic planning and meeting the

challenges

Citrus Research BoardThe Citrus Research Program (officially, the California

Citrus Improvement Program)Grower-funded and grower-directed program established in 1968 under the California Marketing Act as the mechanism enabling the state’s citrus producers to sponsor and support needed research. Administered by the Citrus Research Board

3 components to the program– General Research– Quality assurance (CCQC)– Variety improvement and registration (Citrus

Clonal Protection Program)

CA Citrus Quality Council (CCQC)Mission

Act as an advocate for the CA citrus industry in response to programs or problems which arise in state, national or international arenas and which affect the industry generally in areas of quality control, quarantine matters, technical assistance, international compliance or other related issues

Oversight of regulatory and registration activity that impacts citrus qualityReregistration of SOPP, 2,4-D and Section 18 activity

Works with NAPPO/CODEXDeals with quality assurance issues that arise

CRB funds ongoing research and activities in

Plant Management and PhysiologyPlant Improvement Plant Pathology EntomologyExotic PestsPostharvest

Citrus Clonal Protection Program (CCPP)

Funding responds to needs and strategic planning objectives

1968 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002

Funding Year

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%Percentage of budget

CCQC CCPP Plant ManagementPlant Improvement Plant Pathology EntomologyPostharvest Special Projects

1968 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002Funding Year

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000Amount Funded ($) (Thousands)

Funding has increased ~10 fold since 1968

The role of CRBCOORDINATION and VISION

• With decreasing state and federal funds, the CRB provides or assists in procuring funding for critical research efforts

• Funds both short and long-term research• Funds both research to solve today’s “real-

life” problems and also the “look to the future”

• Increasing coordination and assistance in outreach programs– Grower Seminars, “Breakfast With….”– Postharvest Seminars for packinghouses– Subtropical Fruit News and other printed

materials

11

Postharvest PhysiologyThank you for your attention

Overview of Presentation - University of Florida · Where we fit into the big picture of citrus...

Documents

Transcript of Overview of Presentation - University of Florida · Where we fit into the big picture of citrus...