in arizona agriculture .. . 1968

in arizona agriculture .. . 1968

agriculture in arizona

Y THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA AT TUCSON

APRIL

XX

Number 2

1968

47044 -Seoe#t l/ea

.. .

' a ßoøh aj Idem-a/des

a

AGA

RAG

From time to time we have shared this space with others, with spokesmen for agriculture who express some of our own views ( as well as their own) in a manner pleasing to us and to our readers.

Such is the editorial by Ralph

Reynolds, editor of "The Furrow," in the current issue of that sprightly little magazine produced by the John

Deere Company, the large farm machinery manufacturer.

\ir. Reynolds writes as follows, under the catchy title : "Is Ag a Drag?"

-

All the talk about sweeping change in cities, rockets into outer space, supersonic transportation, automated medicine, electronic communications, the hippies

.

.

.

all this seems almost humdrum when I see what's happening on modem farms.

We read in the city press that agriculture is changing, that this is the age of ag abundance and ag technology. We even hear some reserved expressions of admiration and gratitude for the accomplishments of farmers.

But these reports, welcome as they are, don't begin to tell our story.

Our story is this: Agriculture has come alive, it swings, it's where the action is.

Modern farming is a hotbed of vitality and creativity, where exciting new ideas are flourishing and innovation is the order of the day; it is the grass roots of change and progress in North America. Seems like an extravagant way to tell it, but that's our story.

There may be some urban people who still believe that farming is dull business and farmers are dull folk.

Let them think that way. We have no time for city provincials; they've been left behind for good.

If they don't perceive what's going on out on the acres now, they sure won't 10 years from now. Agriculture is the nation's biggest business and it's growing faster in productivity and efficiency than any other.

You know that already.

The point I want to make here is that farming is also the liveliest industry.

Nowadays rural air fairly sings with change and progress. Wherever you look in rural North America and you

see daring and inquisitive men at

work doing bold and imaginative things.

Within the past few months, for instance, Furrow editors have talked with farmers who are fertilizing with carbon dioxide, breeding their own crops, b u i l d i n g solar- conditioned barns, storing grain under refrigeration, using computers, regulating the breeding cycle of sows and cows. Last year we described some moves farmers and farm scientists are making that are of great importance to everyone in North America including the fantastic but realistic goal of extinguishing entire species of insects and disease germs.

Ahead, we see soaring efficiency from new field machines and farmyard equipment, plants re- shaped and manipulated by spray -on chemicals, massive changes in livestock breeding. Last year, farm operators used a host of inputs that were unheard of 10 years ago and they're now eyeing new ones for this year and next. The caliber of modern farmers can be judged by the fact that they are demanding progress, suggesting ideas, quickly testing and grasping those new practices that have real promise.

This is not to suggest that modern farm life is without troubles, or that modern farmers live a life of perpetual stimulation and excitement.

Agriculture continues to struggle with harsh economic problems, and there are seasons of relative tranquility on most any farm. But to the city guy who remembers only the old agriculture, or especially to that young square who really isn't with it yet, I want to say: Man, ag is no drag. It's where the action is.

:

Dean

College of Agriculture and

School of Home Economics

lattetin.a.

Bulletins

1968 Arizona Agriculture, A -54

Johnsongrass Control in Arizona,

A -53

Folders

What Cotton Variety for 1968 ?,

F -137

Arizona Farm & Home Publications List, F -68 (revised)

IN THIS ISSUE

Prof. Stanley

Sugar Beet Loss

Variable Cotton Rows

Cotton Silage

Screwworm

Arizona National

Natural Recharge

Herbicide Residues

Sorghum

Protein Needs

Coming Events

Farm Radio

UA Students

New Safflower

10

12

14

16

18

3

20

22

22

23

24

A half hour in the garden, morning and night, will total a day's work by the end of the week.

PROGRESSIVE

AGRICULTURE IN

ARIZONA

MARCH - APRIL

1968

Volume XX Number 2

Published bimonthly by the College of Agriculture, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, Harold

E. Myers, dean.

Entered as second -class matter

March 1, 1949, at the post office at

Tucson, Arizona, under the act of

August 24, 1912.

Second class postage paid at Tucson, Arizona.

Reprinting of articles or use of information in Progressive Agriculture in Arizona, by newspapers and magazines, is permitted, with credit.

Editor: John Burnham.

Editorial Board Members

:

Nancy

Bagott,

John Burnham,

C.

Curtis

Cable Jr., W. R. Kneebone, J. W.

Stull, and Director G. E. Hull, ex officio.

March -April

6

8

Page 2

READING THE BOOK of accolades from

Arizona livestock industry leaders, from former staff colleagues, and students, Prof.

E- E. B. Stanley sits in his old office, always identified by the large cow hide bearing brands of Arizona cattlemen.

LIVESTOCK INDUSTRY

HONORS PROF. STANLEY,

ON STAFF 47 YEARS

It wasn't a very big College of Agriculture in those days.

It enrolled 118 students, and had 2.5 staff members in just 11 depart-

ments. And it was slow getting around. Most travel was by train, to Phoenix or other points in the state.

The girl reporter from The Arizona Daily Star would glean three stories from a professor's trip just to Phoenix - one story say-

'king he was going, and for what purpose; the second day a story

g y

marking his return and his com-

Page 3

Progressive Agriculture

ments on the trip.

That was in 1920, when a young ranch boy just graduated from Montana State College at Bozeman joined the staff in the UA Department of

Animal Science.

Forty -seven years later, Prof. E. B.

Stanley recalled those early days when the Animal Science staff took him to lunch and presented him a handsome leather- covered book of personal and departmental memoirs.

Included are warm greetings and accolades from Pearl and Lee Te Poel on behalf of the Arizona National

Livestock Show; from longtime colleague ( and former student ) Dr. W. J.

"Bill" Pistor; from Chuck Lakin of

Tolleson; from another former colleague, Dr. B. P. "Bart" Cardon of

Erly -Fat Livestock Feed Co., from the Finleys and Bixbys and Horrells,

Dobsons, Benedicts, and Boices all oldtime Arizona cattlemen families, and from another former student, UA

Vice President Marvin "Swede" Johnson.

The letters are long in number, warm in praise, tender with memories of days past. Jack Speiden has a recollection of a helpful incident, and so does Walt Fathauer and from the Boswell Ranches, vice president Bob Mc-

Micken. They're all there, and to mention a few is not to offend those unmentioned.

Quiet, unpretentious, always eagerly helpful and gracious, "Ernie" Stanley loves them all.

E. B. Stanley, in 1920, came to a college and a state far different from today.

In his day he served under seven deans

Working, Thornber,

Ball, Burgess, Hawkins, Eckert, Myers.

He found a cattle industry which was little more than the cowboy control of cattle on the ranges.

Prof. Stanley, who was named acting head of Animal Science in 1923 and head in 1925, remembers that with exception of Prof. Harold Schwa

len and Dr. W. J. Pistor in the early days most Agriculture staff were outsiders, from the east and midwest.

There was a necessary period of adjustment, of learning the problems of a rough new land where mountain soils were sparse, rainfall the same, and all plant and animal life vastly different from that "back east."

But problems were solved. Charlie

Pickerell, then an Extension animal

( Continued on Page 22 )

aeci Rat &zuSeS

Siscvi ßeel 1'a2d

By R. B. Hine, D. L. Johnson, J. L. Sears,

Earl Ruppel, O. C. Zirkle

A soil -borne fungus, Pythium aphanidermatum, has been shown to be responsible for a serious root rot of mature sugar beets in the Safford, Eden, Bryce, and

Thatcher areas of Graham County, Arizona.

High disease incidence occurred during July and

August, 1967 but decreased during September and

October. Total loss in the area was approximately 30 percent, with losses in individual fields ranging from about 10 to 50 percent. The disease, although known to occur in California and Colorado, has not previously been reported from Arizona.

It has, at present, been found in commercial plantings only in the Safford area although experimental plantings at Marana, Arizona were also affected. The unusual severity of the disease in land new to sugar beets prompted this report.

Above ground symptoms of the disease included leaf yellowing, wilting, and eventual plant collapse.

Fungal invasion of the mature root resulted in an extensive, firm, black root rot which eventually destroyed the entire plant. A naturally diseased root is shown in the photo. Localized areas in some fields had up to 80 percent mortality, whereas the disease was well scattered in other fields.

Other diseases known to occur in Arizona which have somewhat similar symptoms include southern Sclerotium rot

( Sclerotium rol f sii) and Texas root rot (Ph ymatotrichum omnivorum)

.

Both fungi live in the soil, cause a root decay, and eventually kill the plant. Sclerotium rot, however, may be distinguished from the other two diseases by the production of small, round, tan to dark brown sclerotia resembling mustard seed found on the diseased root and in the soil, along with abundant, white cottony, fungus mycelium.

Texas root rot causes a rather soft, brownish decay on mature beet roots and produces fungal strands on the infected beet which may be seen with a hand lens.

Identification of the Pythium disease requires isolation and identification of the pathogen from diseased roots.

Pythium aphanidermatum, which has a wide host range among cultivated plants, has undoubtedly been long present in these fields.

The fungus lives in the soil and initiates disease only when favorable environmental conditions exist and a susceptible host is present. Water is necessary for the production of a motile swimming spore which is the infective fungal unit. No disease occurs unless these spores are produced. The optimum temperature for fungal growth and spore production was shown to be high, occurring between 85 and

100 °F. Growth and spore production was reduced below these optimum temperatures and at

60 °F sparse growth and little spore production occurred.

It is ease significant that highest disincidence occurred during months when soil temperatures and

NATURALLY DISEASED sugar beet rot

(left),

(right)

.

sen) .

compared with a healthy root

(Photo courtesy of Fred Knuht-

March-April Page 4

rainfall were optimum for pathogen development.

( See table)

.

Official rain records for July (1.79 inches) are somewhat deceiving, however, as many fields received 3 to 5 inches of

'rain

in heavy showers shortly after irrigation.

Thus, excessive moisture during periods of high soil temperatures apparently triggered the disease epidemic.

Although Pythium aphanidermatum has been described from other states as a damping off pathogen of sugar beet seedlings, this phase of the disease did not develop under Safford conditions. Greenhouse studies in soil temperature tanks demonstrated that the fungus was a serious pathogen only when soil temperatures were high.

Sugar beet seedling death in similarly infested soil at 75 °F was approximately 50% less than at 95 °F.

Thus, low soil temperatures during

February plantings ( See table) allowed seedling growth but inhibited pathogen development. The decline of disease incidence in the field with decreasing soil temperatures in September and October is a further manifestation of soil temperature effects.

There was no correlation between root knot nematode, a common sugar beet problem in the Safford area, and

Pythium root rot as some of the most severely diseased fields were free of infection.

Analysis of soil samples from several typical fields with high disease incidence revealed high soluble salt levels

( 3500 to 7210 ppm ), high exchangeable sodium levels ( 14.5 to

22.5% ) and a high soil reaction (pH

7.9 to 8.2)

.

CONTROL

Any technique preventing or minimizing excess moisture situations, such as proper field leveling and avoidance of over -irrigation ( particularly during periods of high soil temperature) should be practiced. Land preparation to increase water penetration also is desirable.

Plant beds should be raised as high as practical for better drainage. Although there are no known practical methods for chemical control, the above cultural techniques

, should minimize disease losses.

R. B. Hine and D. L. Johnson are Extension Plant Pathologists, University of Arizona, Tucson; J. L. Sears is County Agent in Charge, Graham County; E. G. Ruppel is a Plant Pathologist with the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research

'Service, Crops Research Division at Mesa,

Arizona; and O. C. Zirkle is associated with

Spreckels Sugar Company, Safford, Arizona.

Page 5

Progressive Agriculture

Average Monthly High and Low Soil Temperatures and Total Monthly

Rainfall at the University of Arizona Experimental Station, Safford,

Arizona'.

Temperature °F

2 inch depth

Month high low

8 inch depth high low

Rainfall

(in inches)

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.

51

61 70 78

38

86 94

98

95

89 71

56

46

53 59

66

76

81

77

73

54 44

44

51

59

68

42

50

57 63

0.09 0.09 0.11

0.20

75

84

88

86 81

67 53

70 79 84

82

78 61 51

0.26 0.08

1.79 2.77 1.16 0.56 0.31

Soil temperatures taken at 2 and 8 inch soil depth from an unshaded plot.

Recent Journal Articles Listed

1264

1265

1266

1267

1268

1269

1270

1271

1272

1273

1274

1275

1276

1277

1278

1279

"The Xerophytic Cuciirbita of Northwestern Mexico and Southwestern United

States" by W. P. Bemis and Thomas W. Whitaker

American Naturalist

"Organ and Gland Weights of Rats Chronically Exposed to 22° and 35° C." by D. E. Ray, C. B. Roubicek and M. Hamidi

Growth

"Variation in the Lipid Content of Three Bovine Muscles as Determined by Two

Methods of Extraction" by J. A. Marchello, F. D. Dryden and D. E. Ray

Journal of Animal Science

"Flowering and Fertility of Alfalfa

Growth" as Influenced by Inbreeding and Stage of Plant by M. K. Miller and M. H. Schonhorst

Crop Science

"Pollen Growth of Alfalfa in vitro as Influenced by Inbreeding, Grouping of Grains on the Medium, and Greenhouse Versus Field Growth of Plants" by M. K. Miller and M. H. Schonhorst.

Crop Science

"Boundary Flow in Laboratory Permeameters Used to Stimulate Recharge by Cyclic

Water Spreading" by B. K. Worcester, T. H. McIntosh, and L. G. Wilson

Water Resources Research

"Concepts of Water Conservation and Efficient Water Use As Related to Water

Policy" by Wayne Clyma

Agricultural Engineering

"Variation in the Fatty Acid Composition of Three Bovine Muscles

Different Methods of Lipid Extraction" as Affected by by J. A. Marchello, F. D. Dryden and D. E. Ray

Journal of Animal Science

"The Relationship of Certain Chemical Constituents of Beef Muscle to its Eating

Quality" by F. D. Dryden, J. A. Marchello and D. E. Ray

Journal of Food Science

"On the Optimal Application of Irrigation Water" by Robert A. Young, William E. Martin and Sidney Yakowitz

Journal of Farm Economics

"Effects of Climatic Factors on Daily Valencia Fruit Volume Increases" by T. A. Hales, R. G. Mobayen, D. R. Rodney

Hort Science

"Registration of Mesa -Sirsa Alfalfa" by M. H. Schonhorst, M. W. Nielson, R. K. Thompson, F. V. Lieberman, P. D.

Keener, and E. L. Nigh, Jr.

Crop Science

"Digestible Protein Requirements of Calves Fed High Energy Rations Ad Libitum" by R. W. Gardner

J. Dairy Science

"Aspects of the Drought Tolerence in Creosotebush ( LARREA DIVARICATA)" by R. E. Saunier, H. M. Hull, and J. H. Ehrenreich

Plant Physiology

"The Effect of High Environmental Temperature on Growth and Body Composition of Rats"

Growth by C. B. Roubicek and C. B. Theurer

"Antemortem Diagnosis of Bovine Cysticercosis Due to Taenia Saginata" by L. W. Dewhirst

Proceedings of the United States Livestock Sanitary Association

eeIIe

Va4ia4le

-

Raw Spacifri9 Cut

CaSIS aid saue Wale4?

By Allan D. Halderman, Robert E. Briggs and

W. E. Larsen

Cotton growers in the Southwest are constantly looking for

ways to reduce costs, increase yields,

and use less water. Each new idea is carefully considered to see if it can be made a part of a suc-

cessful cotton production system.

There are many things to consider planting, weed and insect control, irrigation, harvesting

.

.

.

more.

and many

At the 1965 Western Cotton Production Conference, Dr. Longenecker of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station at El Paso, reported on his research studies of variable -row cotton. Two observations had stimulated his interest:

1.

2.

Water losses by evaporation occur from the soil in the unshaded furrow.

In skip -row cotton fields, the outside row is taller and produces more cotton - and 70% to 80% of the bolls on the outside row are on the skip side!

Could these facts be utilized to help cotton growers? The object of the

Texas research project was to answer this question. Variable rows like those in Figure 1 were tried.

Results of the Texas studies encouraged several Arizona cotton growers to try the system.

In 1966, Travis

Jones, a grower near Buckeye, planted

125 acres on a 27 inch - 53 inch spacing and 175 acres on a 34 inch - 46

Using machinery on inch spacing.

hand, he shaped a bed similar to that used by Longenecker; the same narrow irrigation furrow but a shallow, non -irrigated furrow instead of the wide bed.

Jones estimated a water savings of

The authors are Extension Agricultural

Engineer, Associate Professor of Agronomy, and former Extension Agricultural Engineer, respectively.

1.6 acre -feet per acre over the conventional system with every -row irrigation. He reported a more uniform boll set than in previous years.

Excavation revealed as much or more root development on the dry side of the row as on the furrow side.

These observations may be related to soil aeration. The 27 -53 -inch crop was picked with a modified one -row

International Harvester; the 34-46 inch with a Rust picker. In spite of

very heavy pink bollworm damage, the yield was 900 pounds of lint per acre.

Mr. Jones planted on a 30 inch

-

50 inch spacing in 1967. There were some harvesting problems but these undoubtedly can be overcome. He plans to plant variable -row cotton in

1968. Russell Schlittenhart, near Casa

Grande, planted about 75 acres of 30 inch

- 50 inch in 1966 and estimated a yield increase approximately equivalent to plant 4, skip 4.

Chuck Farr,

Maricopa

County

Agent, and Extension Specialists took soil samples in the Jones field on a profile grid to study salt concentration and distribution. Results show the variable -row method can help reduce the salt in the planted row during germination a n d emergence.

( See Figure 2. ) the furrow sweeps salt past the plants and into the bed.

This happens because moisture from

An experiment

The University was conducted on of Arizona Experiment Farm at Marana in 1967 to compare the normal 40 -inch row spacing with a variable -row spacing of 30 -50 inches. Two varieties were used with four replications. One replication was discarded for yield comparisons as a large portion was heavily infested with Cotton Root Rot.

The two varieties were Stoneville

213 and Arizona Experimental 6024, which is a sister line and very similar to Hopicala. The variable row planting is shown in Figure 3.

The entire field received a pre

planting irrigation. The 40 -inch spacing treatment was irrigated four times during the season; the variable -row was irrigated five times. Siphon tubes were calibrated and measurements made to determine water delivery to each spacing treatment and replication. Varieties within a spacing rep, cation were not divided by a bord and could not be irrigated separately.

The 40 -inch plots were irrigated In every furrow except for the first two irrigations which were alternate -furrow.

Approximately 14.5 inches of water were delivered to the variable -row; about 17.5 inches to the 40 -inch treatment. These amounts were in addition to the pre- planting irrigation.

The last irrigation of the variable

-row on August 29 was primarily for the

6024, since it is later than Stoneville 213.

in maturity

No severe harvesting problems were encountered using one -row spindle pickers. Small areas were gleaned to it determine the field losses.

Statistical

March -April

Page 6

analysis indicated that there was an actual yield difference between the spacing treatments in favor of the regular

40 -inch planting.

Calculated yield with the 40 -inch spacing was

974 pounds of lint per acre compared to 839 pounds for the 30 -50 -inch cotton, a difference of 135 pounds of lint per acre.

The varieties were also significantly different. Yields of Stoneville 213 and

Arizona Experimental 6024 were 979 and 833 pounds of lint per acre respectively; thus 146 pounds in favor of Stoneville 213. There was no significant interaction between spacing and variety.

Irrigation timing is obviously an important consideration. Since less water was applied to the variable row at each irrigation than to the 40 -inch planting, the variable row was irrigated more frequently and required one extra irrigation.

Thus, the relationship between soil moisture, atmospheric conditions and the plant fruiting patterns differed for the two treatments.

These considerations, which would vary from field to field and from year to year undoubtedly affect yield results.

In summary, there have been both positive and negative results from variable -row spacing. In areas of high water cost or water shortage it is an alternative method to consider. Further research with the practice may define improved methods of managing variable -row cotton for reduced costs and a lower water requirement.

w

0

6

12

18

13 1/2 oz-

IRRIGATION

FURROWS

74"

54

26"

54" 26" >

FIGURE 1- Sketch of Variable -Row Cotton Spacing.

54"

PLANTED

ROW

IRRIGATED FURROW

GROUND

SURFACE

6

0

6

12 18

INCHES FROM PLANTED ROW

FIGURE 2 - Salt Distribution in Bed Profile.

(Extressed as ECe x 103)

24 30

Page 7

Progressive Agriculture

FIGURE 3 - Variable -Row Cotton at Marana, 1967.

Screwworm Eradication Reduced to a Barrier Program

*,.,...

, i4Yä:

R%:.

.

THE SCREWWORM FLY is about twice the size of the housefly.

It is difficult to distinguish from other flies, but has a bluish -green body with three dark stripes along the back, and an orange - colored head.

PROTECTING ANIMALS from cuts and scratches and treating unavoidable wounds such as the navel of newborn calves are recommended for preventing screwworm infestation.

By Dr. Ted Rea, Dr. L. N. Butler,

Dr. John R. Tweed, and Dr. Floyd Smith

As a scourge of the livestock industry, the screwworm has little equal. It has, for 125 years, been a major cause of livestock losses which have amounted to more than

$100,000,000 annually.

The screwworm, so named because of the tapering appearance of the larvae, is actually a maggot which hatches from eggs deposited by a female screwworm fly around the edge of man made or natural wounds on livestock.

Since screwworms feed on living tissue they can cause serious debilitation or death of the animal host.

An intensive eradication campaign for the past 10 years against this pest has for all practical purposes eliminated it from the United States.

Eradication has been accomplished by the release of screwworm flies sterilied by exposure to radioactive

Cobalt 60.

The sterilization of the flies is done during the pupae stage at the sterile-fly-production plant located at Mission, Texas.

The screwworms involved at the production plant are reared at the average rate of about 115,000,000 flies per week.

The sterilized pupae are packaged in cardboard cartons and stored under humidity and temperature conditions developed to such a perfection that the fly will emerge about the same time the cartons are dropped from aircraft.

The release of sterile flies creates a situation in screwworm infested areas whereby the "so- called" artificial fly population overwhelms the natural population through breeding practices unique for the screwworm

Dr. Rea Veterinarian in Charge, Animal Health Division, U. S.

Department of Agriculture, located at Phoenix; Dr. Butler is Executive Secretary of the State Livestock Sanitary Board, Phoenix;

Dr. Tweed is Assistant Veterinarian in Charge, Animal Health

Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture, located at Phoenix, and

Dr. Smith is Epidemiologist, Animal Health Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture, located at Douglas, Ariz.

REARING LARGE NUMBER of sterile screwworm flies needed for the eradication program requires tremendous numbers of larvae. They are fed on a mixture of animal flesh, dried blood and other ingredients.

After feeding for three to five days, the larvae migrate from this food mixture to water

- conveying troughs in the floor under grates.

They are then carried to the pupation room for the next stage in their life cycle.

fly.

The significant fact about the breeding practices is that the female screwworm fly breeds only once in her lifetime.

If bred by a sterile male fly, reproduction of the species beyond the egg stage is not possible.

Officially the screwworm has been eradicated from the entire United States, including the Southwest.

This does not mean that some areas in the Southwest still are not involved in the screwworm program.

Portions of

Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California have been

March -April

Page 10

included in a designated barrier zone due to the fact that these areas are still suffering some migration of the screwworm fly from Mexico. To strengthen this barrier zone a similar zone has been designated in Mexico.

Actually, at this stage of eradication, the program is more properly designated as a barrier program.

Because of the geographical location of the screw

worm problem, in U. S. and Mexican states on both sides of the international border, collaboration of ranchers and livestock health officials of both countries has been required in this program. The success of the program is a tribute to such cooperation, with Mexican officials and ranchers working as vigorously to eradicate the screw-

The barrier zone established in the United States and in Mexico will keep the screwworm from gaining a foothold once again in the United States.

This zone must receive the concentrated efforts of program officials, livestock owners, state governments, and both the

United States and Mexican federal governments.

Mexican and American inspectors operate as a network within the barrier seeking infestations, encouraging rancher cooperation, and coordinating ground activities with the systematic and strategic sterile fly aerial bombardment.

Major emphasis is placed on areas where over -wintering of the screwworm is possible.

Isolated areas in northern Sonora, Chihuahua and Baja California receive concentrated treatment of sterile flies during winter months when native fly populations are at the lowest.

Climatic conditions affect screwworm activity in two ways.

Screwworm flies are most active and prolific during warm humid weather.

During dry seasons, fly activity generally will be confined to areas of highest moisture content ( river valleys and irrigated regions ) and total livestock population will generally be lower due to poor desert grazing. During and following wet periods, however, all factors encourage the fly; natural migration is possible to all areas.

Large numbers of cattle are moved into desert grazing areas.

Ranching activities increase with a resulting increase in susceptible wounds.

The barrier is not a continuous wall of sterile flies along the border as might be expected. There are desert areas where screwworm activity rarely if ever occurs.

Other areas are affected only during certain periods of the year.

To disperse flies most effectively within the barrier, constant epidemiological studies are conducted.

In the event a screwworm case is reported by a rancher or an inspector, the exact location is reported to the Screwworm Distribution Center at Douglas.

Planes l

F_

l ' i

1

AFTER LARVAE HAVE pupated, about 31,500 are placed in each canister, the canisters then automatically carried into a

Cobalt -60 chamber, where the screwworm flies are sexually sterilized by exposure to gamma rays.

The remote control mechanism, lead shields and constant checking protect persons working on this project as well as other persons in the vicinity.

worm as their counterparts in the United States.

Eradication of the screwworm has saved the livestock industry and the consumer many millions of dollars more than the cost of the program.

Savings to the producer alone in locating and treating infested wounds of livestock has amounted to many millions of dollars annually.

The major savings, however, have been in preventing weight losses, low productivity, and death in affected livestock.

Wildlife has also benefited tremendously by the program.

Page 11

Progressive Agriculture

RANCHERS CAN HELP to make the eradication program successful by collecting maggots or eggs present in wounds and sending them to a county agent, livestock inspector or a veterinarian for positive identification.

are dispatched and 100,000 sterile screwworm flies are released at this point. The infested area receives three such sterile fly treatments.

In addition, the ground forces make thorough epidemiological studies to determine the extent of infestation and where it came from.

The livestock owner is encouraged to participate in a spraying program to supplement the sterile fly drop.

As long as migration of fertile flies from the south remains a threat, reinfestation of the United States is possible.

Constant vigil will be necessary.

Rapid collection and submission of larvae is a must.

Treating wounds with an effective medication is as important today as it was before eradication occurred.

aeddie

A

Learning and fun

are when UA College of Agricultui manship contests at the univen

Student showmen are judged

(,

The livestock

- university -otoo

Pictures on these pages were to

ABOVE, Judge Frank Owenby presenting

Champion Horse Trophy to Pam DeGreen.

LEFT, Mary Price putting final touches on her Hereford heifer prior to showing.

ABOVE, Walter Fathauer, president of

Arizona Hereford Assn., presenting

Champion Hereford Showman trophy

John L. Sullivan, eventual grand champi showman of the '67 Little Arizona Shin

BELOW, Dr. John Marchello, Block &

Bridle Club advisor, presents Champion

Dairy Showman trophy to Bill Gibbons.

ABOVE, Bill Cahn, awards superb' an award to Greg Darnall.

/VGtioal

khe

Little

r2ompete each April in show-

sell Avenue farm in Tucson.

ey do in fitting and showing.

g the horses - is not judged.

! 967 contest.

ABOVE, Jack Pond of Valley National

Bank, presenting Reserve Grand Champion Showman trophy to Bill Frerichs.

tE, Ernest Hussman, able superintit of the UA farms at Tucson, pre the Champion Swine Showman tro-

Corinne Waterhouse.

RIGHT, Corinne Waterhouse holds her

Champion Swine Showman trophy.

BELOW, Judge Frank Owenby congratulates Judi Frerichs, Reserve Champion

Showman, horse division.

;7 Little Arizona National, presents

T23S

FIGURE

T 22S

T2IS

T20S en

2

D

AMADO

'//1/ln...

TUBAC

---

CARMEN

/

!/s.,--.iM!

-0

TI9S

/.

T18S T17S i.

CONTINENTAL

SAHUARITA

TI6S TI5S

T 145

T13S

CORTARO

RECORDE R

TI2S

RILLITO i é

//IT .

_

RIVER

,ti D

.,,,,., ,...,

_._

.

, ,.,,

` .l'

~ ;r z

1-0-,

U of A

Ì

,,

il

/N

`I

!r

, r

.

'U of A

FARM

II

II m

QRO

N rm

LEGEND

-- 01- 5' RISE

® V-I0) RISE

IOC -20' RISE

®

201 -40' RISE

®

OBSERVATION WELL

TOWN LOCATION uW* TUCSON CITY LIMITS

RECHARGE IN TUCSON

NOGALES

BASIN OF SANTA CRUZ VALLEY

.IÇ

1965 -66

APP

SCALE

N

0

2

4

6

MILES

-

TANQUE

VERDE

`II.

r

CREEK rn m

NATURAL RECHARGE

IN TUCSON BASIN

By WayneClymo and Richard J. Shaw

Groundwater is the dominant source of water for

a l

l uses within the Tucson area. I n 1965, groundwater use within the Tucson Basin amounted to 140,000 acre feet. Of this amount, 80,000 acre feet were used by municipal and industrial consumers and 60,000 acre feet were used for agriculture.

Schwalen and Shaw ( 1 ) have estimated that the average annual groundwater recharge amounts to 40,000 acre feet in the Tucson Basin.

Thus, there is a deficit or annual overdraft of groundwater use of 100,000 acre feet. This overdraft results in the continuous decline of water levels in much of the Tucson Basin. This overdraft is a primary concern of business, industrial, municipal, and professional leaders of the community.

The Agricultural Engineering Department of the University of Arizona has been studying groundwater conditions in the Tucson Basin since 1905.

Since 1946, these studies have been intensified through cooperation with

The co- authors are Assistant Agricultural

Engineers, Agricultural Experiment Station.

The Tucson Basin extends from the Santa

Cruz County line to the Rillito narrows and extends transversely to the end of the groundwater aquifer or the surface drainagedivide.

the city of Tucson and Pima County.

The basic objective of this study has been to make annual measurements of water levels in wells within the Tucson Basin and to inventory the annual use of water within the basin.

Schwalen and Shaw

( 2 ) have described the procedures used in this study.

The primary use of the data collected by the Agricultural Engineering Department has been to supply information on the annual use of water within the Basin and to determine, for the benefit of the public, the location and depth of existing groundwater supplies within the basin.

With the current concern for planning future water supply needs for the Tucson area, data collected by the

Agricultural Engineering Department in the unusually high runoff year,

1965 -1966, provides important information pertinent to the discussions of water problems within the area. Analyses of these data show the nature of the water problems within the Tucson Basin and suggests procedures that should be used to solve these problems.

The combination of an unusually large amount of rainfall and snow melt within the basin resulted in exceptional amounts of runoff down the

Rillito Creek and the Santa Cruz River during the winter of 1965 -1966.

Periods of high flows occurred. But in general, over a period of approximately three months, runoff of several days duration occurred frequently.

This unusual volume and duration of runoff resulted in substantial amounts of groundwater recharge to the aquifer through the stream bed.

Figure 1 shows the changes in water

March -April Page 14

levels in wells immediately adjacent to the Santa Cruz River and Rillito

Creek from the spring of 1965 to the spring of 1966. The rises in water levels along the Santa Cruz River were greater and more extensive than for any prior period of record.

Rises of over 10 feet extended one to three miles wide and as much as

10 miles long from south of Carmen to north of Amado. Other significant rises occurred near Continental and

Sahuarita.

Rises up to five feet occurred in a continuous reach from about six miles north of Nogales to just south of the Tucson city limits.

Figure 2 shows the decline of water levels from first measurement to the lowest water level of record. The feet of recovery of water levels as of the spring of 1966 also is shown. The ratio of these two changes is the percent recovery and is also presented.

This graph shows that from the International Boundary to the Santa Cruz

County line, water levels recovered to the highest level ever measured.

The aquifer immediately adjacent to the stream was essentially full or at the ground surface.

Substantial recoveries, up to 40 percent of the total decline over the years since pumping began, also occurred in wells along the Santa Cruz River from Amado to Rillito.

Figure 1 also shows the rise in water levels along the Rillito Creek from recharge to groundwater caused by runoff during the winter season of

1965 -1966. Note that in a large area below the confluence of

Tanque

Verde and Pantano Wash, rises in excess of 40 feet occurred. At almost all areas along the Rillito rises of five or more feet occurred with some rises of 20 feet.

These rises in water levels along the Santa Cruz River and Rillito Creek are evidence of the potential for recharge of the Tucson Basin aquifer provided water is available for recharge.

No rise in water levels occurred within the interior of the basin away from the streams. The continuing program of water level measurements has shown that even in 1965 -66, when the greatest rise occurred in an area adjacent to the streams, the interior of the basin continued its decline in water levels.

In Figure 3 the University of Arizona Campus well is representative of the wells in the interior basin that

'have declined continuously since

heavy pumping began. The well near

Page 15

Progressive Agriculture

FIGURE 2

HYDROGRAPH

SANTA CRUZ VALLEY

SPRING 1966

% OF RECOVERY

FEET OF LOSS FROM FIRST TO

LOWEST WATER LEVEL OF RECORD

FEET OF RECOVERY FROM LOWEST

WATER LEVEL TO SPRING 1966

100

90

80

100

90

80

70

70

60

0

50

50 i;

40

40

30

30

20

20

10 o

T24S T23S T22S

T215

T205

T19S

TITS

\.

.._

T155

-..

,

-

_

---

--

H

;--

T14S T135

7125

TI6S

10

0

TOWNSHIPS

Sahuarita, Ariz. shows the same continuous decline except the rate of decline decreased during 1965 -66. Wells in the interior basin do continue their decline even during years of maximum recharge.

Their declines are in direct proportion to the draft on the aquifer. Therefore, these areas should receive minimum pumpage in order to sustain a minimum pumping lift within the time interval that water is expected to be pumped from the area.

Rise of water levels by recharge from stream flow is shown in Figure

3 by the University of Arizona Farm well which is near the Rillito Creek.

Also in Figure 3 the well near Carmen, Ariz. in Santa Cruz County indicates the effects of recharge from stream flow.

The water level rose higher than any level previously recorded. This well is near the Santa

Cruz River.

The Cortaro recorder well is near the river and responds to recharge from the river ( Figure 3)

.

The small undulations represent river recharge.

However, since approximately 1947 no continuous decline in water levels has occurred.

This is the approximate

Continued on Page 17) o

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

ó

FIGURE 3

HYDROGRAPHS OF REPRESENTATIVE WELLS IN

TUCSON BASIN AND SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

LEGEND

CORTARO RECORDER - - -

U of A FARM

U of A CAMPUS

SAHUARITA, ARIZ.

CARMEN, ARIZ.

O m u'I m

Ñ m

Ñ a+

\\

m

"

rn

YEARS rn

O m

N,

\_

m

O m o

20

40

60

80

100

_ a.

o

120

140

O

160 r` m

HERBICIDE RESIDUES

IN IRRIGATED

SOILS

By K. C. Hamilton and H. F.

Arle

Profitable production of many crops in Arizona depends on proper use of herbicides to control weeds. While certain herbicides selectively control weeds, their residues in the soil sometimes affect succeeding crops. Herbicide activity in the soil decreases as it is broken down by soil microorganisms and plants.

Volatilization, chemical decomposition, leaching and adsorption may also decrease the activity of herbicides in the soil.

The rate of inactivation has been studied in Arizona for more than a decade. Frequently, our field experiments on weed control are followed by plantings of susceptible crops to determine if toxic levels of herbicides persist. These tests have shown that some heribicides, such as isopropyl

N- phenylcarbamate

(IPC ) c h l o r o a l ly l and

2diethyldithiocarbamate

( CDEC ), are rapidly inactivated in the soil and do not cause residue problems under our conditions.

Persistence of residues in the soil is also studied by applying herbicides in excess of recommended or registered rates and by determining their effect on following crops. At Mesa, several herbicides were applied to the soil and incorporated with a disk in 1963.

The soil contained 42% sand, 37% silt, and 21% clay. The area was planted to barley and safflower each winter, and to cotton and sorghum each summer, until 1966. The effects of herbicides on each planting are summarized in Table I.

There was great variation in the susceptibility of these crops to different herbicides. Disodium methanearsonate ( DSMA) had no visible effect on crops. 3- amino- 1,2,4-triazole ( amit r o l e )

,

2,2- dichloropropionic a c i d

( dalapon )

, and 2,3,6 -trichlorobenzoic acid ( 2,3,6 -TBA ) severe injury to caused slight to the first planting of barley and safflower.

4- amino- 3,5,6trichloropicolinic acid ( picloram,

5bromo - 3 - sec - butyl - 6 - methyluracil

( bromacil)

, and 3- (3,4- dichloro-

Dr. Hamilton is an Agronomist, University of Arizona, Tucson; and Mr. Arle is an

Agronomist, Crops Research Division, Agricultural Research Scry ice, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Phoenix.

This is a report on the current status of research on weed con-

It does not contain weed trol practices.

control recommendations, nor does it imply that the herbicide uses discussed have been registered.

All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate state and federal agencies before their recommendation and use.

Table 1

Crop Injury Following Applications of Herbicides to the Soil in 1963 at Mesa.

Treatment

Pounds

Herbicide per acre winter

1964

Percent crop injury summer

1965 winter summer

1966 winter picloram

2,3,6-TBA bromacil diuron dalapon amitrole

DSMA

5

15

15

40

120

120

120

95

95

100

100

60

4

0

75

0

100

100

0

0

0

0

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Winter crops were barley and safflower.

Summer crops were cotton and sorghum.

Table H - Cotton Yields Following Annual Applications of and Diuron to the Soil at Tolleson.

Monuron

Treatment

Pounds

Pounds per acre of seed cotton in

Herbicide per acre 1954

1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960

1961

1962

Monuron

0.8

Monuron

1.6

Diuron

Diuron

Untreated

0.8

1.6

4390

3200 1950

2940

3290 3070 3210

1750

2520

4640 3720 1920 3020 3390 2620

3230 1430

1650

4690 3680 2220 3200 3340 3200

3370 2090

2520

4530 3550 2200 2940 3470

3620 3360

1820

2080

4620 3560

2110

3000 3340

3110 3280 1910

2430 phenyl) -1,1- dimethylurea ( diuron) injured or destroyed the first two or three plantings. After 18 months no herbicide persisted in the soil in sufficient amounts to injure crops. This and other tests have shown that under irrigated conditions the activity of most herbicides rapidly decreases.

Persistence vs. Accumulation

When referring to herbicide residues we often confuse the terms "persistence" and "accumulation ".

Persistence occurs when a herbicide applied in one crop affects succeeding crops.

Residues of diuron applied in cotton, or of atrazine applied in sorghum, may persist in the soil and injure susceptible small grains and vegetables planted after the treated crops is harvested. Persistence of herbicide residues is influenced by many factors, such as type of herbicide, rate and time of application, soil conditions, cropping history, rainfall, irrigation patterns, and type of cultivation.

Accumulation is the progressive increase of a herbicide in the soil resulting from repeated applications.

It may occur when a herbicide persists past the time of any re- application. In

Arizona accumulation of herbicides has not been a problem in irrigated crops where herbicides were used as recommended.

Research on accumulation of herbicides requires long -time experiments.

In a test at Tolleson from 1954 until

1962 3- ( p- chlorophenyl) -1,1- dimethylurea ( monuron) and diuron were ap-

March -April

Page 16

plied to the soil each year as layby treatments in cotton. The soil contained 20% sand, 57% silt, and 23% clay. Persistence of herbicides in the soil was evaluated by determining their effects on cotton ( Table 2) and other plants. In some years residues of monuron and diuron persisted after cotton harvest, in other years little or no residues remained.

Herbicides did not affect crop yield in the first 7 years of this test. In the eighth year the yield from plots treated annually with 1.6 lb. /A monuron was lower than that from untreated plots. In the ninth year the yield from plots treated with 1.6 lb. /A of either monuron or diuron was lower than that from the untreated plots.

Possibly these decreases resulted from accumulation, but we believe that they may have resulted from persistence or injury from that years treatment. Cotton yield generally was not affected by annual herbicide applications, although yields from all plots decreased because of continuous cotton production. A similar test is now in progress with herbicides such as a,a,a-trifluoro

-

2,6

dinitro

-

N,N

dipropyl

- p -

toluidine

( trif luralin) dimethyl 2,3,-

5,6-tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA)

, and 2,4 -bis (isopropylamino ) -6 -methylmercapto-s- triazine (prometryne)

.

Lack of Irrigation Prolongs

Residues

Although herbicide residues do not normally accumulate in irrigated croplands and persistence can be minimized, each year thousands of acres of crops are affected by herbicide residues. One reason for crop injury is the belief that all herbicides disappear from irrigated croplands with time.

Residues of many herbicides usually decrease with time if the land is irrigated. When land is fallow without irrigation, however, loss of herbicides may be extremely slow.

Herbicides applied in a crop may remain despite

1, 2, or more years of fallow.

When using herbicides, each grower should determine if residues which may affect the next crop persist.

If used as recommended, herbicides usually will not create a residue problem. However, conditions in a field or on a farm may cause herbicides to persist.

Persistence may occur in fields with variable soils or in those that receive improper or too little irrigation after treatment. This problem increased in areas with little rainfall and low temperatures. The grower should recognize these hazards and adapt his cultural practices to minimize possible injury to crops.

Page 17

Progressive Agriculture

Water Recharge...

date that rapid growth in the population of Tucson resulted in sewage flows down the Santa Cruz River sufficient to stabilize water levels. Thus, sewage recharge has equaled water pumped from this section of the Tucson Basin and the river is the method of supplying the water to the aquifer.

A study by Schwalen, et al.

(3 ) showed that for 1961 -1965, an average annual recharge of approximately 70,-

000 acre feet resulted from above normal flood flows in the Rillito Creek and Santa Cruz River. In the 1965-

1966 season, the volume of recharge was approximately 150,000 acre feet for Rillito Creek area and the reach of the Santa Cruz River from Santa

Cruz County line to Rillito narrows.

This volume is substantially greater than the average annual recharge rate to the basin. It is the greatest recovery in water levels ever measured during the over 60 years that studies have been made within the Tucson Basin.

The 1965 -66 data provide strong evidence of the potential for recharge within the Tucson Basin.

Surface storage of water in the arid

Southwest is subject to heavy losses from evaporation, and incurs the high expense of reservoir construction.

Storage of water within underground basins should be considered as an alternate means for storing water for future use. The groundwater aquifer that has been dewatered by the years of pumping is an excellent storage site for water.

The Tucson Basin aquifer has a very large potential for rapid rate of recharge and has also the capability of very large volumes of recharge.

Large volumes can be recharged provided that :

(1) Natural runoff water is available, or ( 2) Additional sources of water are obtained. Various proposals have been made for obtaining the additional water. Increasing natural runoff by treating the watershed, and importation of water through the

Central Arizona Project, are two such proposals.

The source of water that is a renewable supply within the Tucson

Basin comes from natural recharge in

Santa Cruz and the Rillito Creek areas and underflow from the mountains.

For optimum utilization of this resource, wells to recover this water

should be located adjacent to the

recharge areas. This means that wells for optimum utilization of the groundwater should be located immediately adjacent to the Santa Cruz River and

Rillito Creek. This permits maintain-

( Continued from Page 15) ing water levels at a relatively low level so that maximum recharge occurs. If the water level in the aquifer rises to the stream bed surface, the rate of natural recharge is substantially decreased.

If the water level is maintained a distance below the bottom of the stream bed, then maximum infiltration occurs.

If the re-

charge rate for the Rillito Creek area was continued on an annual basis with no controlled pumping to remove the water, the volume of recharge would be on the order of 50,000 acre feet annually.

With controlled pumping to maintain the maximum rate of infiltration within the streambed, the average annual recharge volume can exceed 500,000 acre feet.

SUMMARY

Water level data are very important for determining the availability and supply of our groundwater resources.

These data also provide the only

means for determining future needs for increased water supplies. Within the Tucson Basin an average annual overdraft of groundwater of approximately 100,000 acre feet occurs.

In some years this overdraft is less because of a high volume of recharge for that year.

Except for 1965-66, overdraft occurs every year and results in continuous declines of water levels in much of the area.

Proper management of water supplies within the Tucson Basin requires recognition that an overdraft of groundwater exist s.

Supplemental sources of water are required.

Importation of water and water harvest-

ing within the basin are possible

sources of additional water. Data indicate that the depleted groundwater reservoir is an excellent storage site.

The stream beds, especially Rillito

Creek, are an excellent location for introducing water in the groundwater reservoir.

1.

2.

3.

REFERENCES

Schwalen, H. C. and R. J. Shaw. "Progress Report on Study of Water in the

Santa Cruz Valley Arizona."

Report

Number 205, Department of Agricultural Engineering, The University of

Arizona, Tucson, Nov., 1961, pp. 16 -18.

Schwalen, H. C. and R. J. Shaw. "Water in the Santa Cruz Valley."

Bul.

No. 288, Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station, 1957.

Matlock, W. G., H. C. Schwalen and

R. J. Shaw. "Progress Report on Study of Water in the Santa Cruz Valley."

Report Number 233, Department of

Agricultural Engineering, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Sept.,

1965.

pp. 25 -27.

SORGH UM

4tcwd P ai die 49eS

By Robert L. Voigt

ses: Grasstape

Sorghum (Sudaigrass

What is sorghum? For what is it used?

As our population becomes more urban in nature these ques-

tions become quite common. Also as our Agricultural industry be-

comes broader and more specialized, those in more "removed" areas

of the industry desire more specific information to round out a

sometimes vague understanding.

MANY USES of sorghum depicted in UA

College of Agriculture lobby display.

ARIZONA FIELD of grain sorghum.

Combination of good seed, good land and the most sophisticated crop management procedures, leads to immense yields.

kilitark-

SORGHUM -SUDANGRASS hybrid offspring, in center rows, is heading out. Note large leaves of sorghum "mother" on the right and height and open heads of sudangrass

"father" on the left.

The hybrid yields prodigious quantities of forage for livestock.

Sorghum apparently is a native of tropical Africa.

However, the exact story of its domestication is lost in the shadows of the past. A painting of a harvest field of sorghum exists on the walls of the tomb of Amenembes in

Egypt, dating from over 2,200 years before Christ.

Sorghum culture has been known in India at least since the time of

Christ, and known in China by the third Century A. D. These and many other isolated records indicate an early and extensive domestication of this plant.

Originating in the tropics of the

Old World, sorghums are now grown in the temperate zones of both hemispheres.

grown between parallels of latitude it

The bulk of the crop is

40° north and south. In some areas is found as far north as latitude

45° or more.

Sorghum belongs to the family

Gramineae, tribe Andropogoneae.

Sorghum volgare includes the annual sorghums with 10 pairs of chromosomes. As most families have a few relatives who would rather stand at the bank of a stream with a fishpole than do much useful work, so sorghum has a questionable country cousin,

Johnsongrass, ( with 20 pairs of chromosomes ) which lines Arizona ditch banks, steals water intended for more useful crops, and causes agricultural expense in chemicals and labor used to eradicate or repress it.

The sorghums grown in the United States are classified according to use as grain

The author is an Associate Professor of

Plant Breeding, Department of Plant Breeding, University of Arizona.

March -April

Page 18

sorghum, sorgo, broomcorn, sudangrass, or special purpose sorghum.

Sorghum, at earlier stages of growth, looks much like corn, another member of the grass family.

However, the grain head of sorghum is terminal on the top of the stalk like a wheat or barley head but much larger 4 to

12 inches long. The flowers ( without petals )

, of which there are hundreds in a single head or panicle, are perfect.

That is, each floret normally has its own male and female parts.

Its stems or stalks range in height from 1 or 2 feet up to 15 or more feet in height. A leaf arises from every node and there may be anywhere from around 15 up to nearly 30 nodes over the total lifetime of different varieties of sorghum. Not all leaves will be present at once, as the seedling leaves soon disappear. The number of nodes and length of internodes help determine height. There may be some extra stalks or tillers arising from the base of the plant at ground level, depending upon the plant population density.

There are many variable characteristics in sorghum such as height sweet or non -sweet pith, dry or juicy stalks, dense to loose panicle

( seed head ), awned or awnless lemmas, different colors of seed through white, red, brown, and yellow. These more obvious differences and many others make it possible to utilize sorghum for many different purposes.

Other genetic variations in sorghum, such as differing maturities or rates of floral initiation and differing responses to temperatures, make sorghum adaptable to many different environments.

Such characteristics are valuable in making sorghum a world -wide crop.

Sorghum has the ability to postpone

"heading out" under periods of moisture shortage and then proceed with heading, blooming and seed production when moisture becomes more plentiful. Such a characteristic makes sorghum a "better bet" in areas of questionable moisture than corn, which does not possess this ability to

"wait out" a dry spell. However, sorghum yields under such adverse conditions are not quite what would be obtained under optimum growth conditions.

How do we utilize sorghums? The whole plant may be used seed or grain, stalk, leaves and all for one purpose or another.

Particular parts of the plant may be "harvested" at different stages of plant development depending upon the use of the plant part. Grain is harvested at maturity.

The whole plant may be cut off, at an earlier stage of plant development, chopped up and made into silage. The whole plant can be cut when near maturity and dried in "whole plant" form for fodder. "Sugary" types can be processed for s u g a r, similar to sugar cane. An extremely long panicle type of sorghum is used to make all of our brooms. It is called "broomcorn" but is a sorghum.

The more grassy sorghums, such as sudangrass, are suitable as a temporary pasture crop for grazing. They can be cut green, chopped and fed to livestock immediately as "green chop" or cut, dried and stored as hay.

Sorghum vulgare and sudangrass readily hybridize, producing an intermediate type of plant suitable for about every purpose of either sorghum or sudangrass except high grain production.

If you should get out into a sorghum field that is headed out and find the sorghum heads from waist to shoulder high

you are in a

"grain" sorghum field. If you find you can barely reach the heads or the only blue sky is a little patch straight up, then you are in a "forage" sorghum type field ( assuming you are normal height)

.

The grain is ultilized primarily as a livestock feed but specialized varieties, among other things, yield high quality starch, a waxy endosperm for adhesive, sizing and glues, and corneous seeds which pop like popcorn.

There are many industrial uses for sorghum grain. In fact, it is commonly said ( and proven ) that about anything that can be made from corn can also be made from grain sorghum. A

( Continued on Page 23)

Page 19

Progressive Agriculture

LA ESCOBA (the broom) is symbol of office of the housewife. Broomcorn, grown through the

Southwest, is a sorghum cousin.

WHILE FORAGE sorghums grow tall, the grain sorghum varieties are short; note comparison here with field corn.

HARVESTING GRAIN sorghum on a UA experimental farm. New varieties, hybrids and crop practices are constantly being adapted to commercial use.

PROTEIN

NEEDS

OF YOUNG

CALVES

By Robert W. Gardner

Protein supplements can be deleted from calf starter rations provided the calf is given free access to concentrate

mixes con-

taining barley, and is supplied good quality alfalfa hay in un-

limited amounts. This means sub-

stantial savings in feed costs without a detrimental effect on calf gains or health.

This conclusion has been reached in the second phase of a study to find calf starters which provide proper nutrients, palatability and low -cost gains.

Protein quality and ration palatability were investigated in an earlier experiment ( Progressive Agriculture in Arizona Vol. XVIII, No. 1, 1966)

.

An observation common to both experiments was the dramatic effect of higher energy intake on rate of growth.

Satisfying their appetites with palatable grain combinations and hay has allowed calves to approach more nearly their genetic potential in growth and yet the cost of the gains have been surprisingly low.

Thirty -six

Holstein heifer calves were divided into three groups as they were taken from their dams at three days of age. Each group was offered

starter rations containing equal

amounts of digestible energy levels but different levels of protein, adjusted by substituting soybean oil meal for barley.

All ration ingredients

( Table 1) were ground and pelleted as a complete feed in order to avoid feed sorting.

Milk was limited to the amounts shown in Table 2. The calves were fed and housed individually. The rations were fed free choice. Feed consumption was recorded daily and calf weights were observed weekly. Gains

This is one of a series of reports, in Progressive Agriculture in Arizona, on research findings by Dr. Gardner when he was a member of the UA Dairy Sciante Department staff.

He is now at Brigham Young

University.

and feed utilization were calculated on the basis of growth from birth to

200 lb. body weight.

A second phase of the experiment

Table 1 Growth period 1

(birth to 91 kg)

Ingredients

Ration

1

2

3

Barley

64.5

58.0

51.0

Alfalfa hay

20.0

20.0

20.0

Soybean oil meal 3.0

9.5

16.5

Molasses

10.0

%

10.0

10.0

Salt

Dicalcium

1.0

1.0

1.0

phosphate

Aurofac loa

Vitamin A

1.0

0.5

1.0

0.5

1.0

0.5

( 30,000 I.U. /g ) 0.022

0.022

0.022

Crude protein

11.9

14.7

16.9

Digestible protein

8.5

11.3

12.5

a Chlortetracycline

( aureomycin) g /kg supplement.

at

10.0

was to consider the protein requirements of calves in the weight range of 200 -400 lb. Accordingly, three different rations

( Table 3 ) containing three graded levels of protein but equal energy content were fed to the heifers over this weight range. The calves were arranged in treatment groups such that an equal number of the calves on each of the three previous protein levels were included in

Table 2

Milk Feeding Plan

Daily Feed

Calf Age

(days)

0-3

4 -7

8 -14

15 -35

Whole Milk

(lb. /10 lb.

body wt.)

On cow

1

0.5

36 -42

Weaned by 42 days

Skim Milk

(lb. /10 lb.

body wt.)

0.5

1.0

0.5

March -April

Page 20

HERE ARE THREE calves weighing 95 pounds (birth size)

;

200 pounds (end of

Growth Period 1) , and 400 pounds (end of

Growth Period 2)

.

The two larger calves consumed the rations containing the low

-

F- est protein levels (Rations 1 and A)

.

`The picture portrays thrifty, healthy calves with no harmful effects from the low protein levels.

Conformation and bone structure were not affected adversely by the rations.

the groups fed the new levels. Grains and hay were offered separately, free choice, during this second phase.

The influence of protein levels on ration digestibility was observed in digestion trials. All rations were compared relative to efficiency of utilization of digestible protein and energy for growth.

Growth rate as measured by both daily gains and body measurements were not significantly affected by differences in protein levels used in the rations ( Table 4. )

.

This is rather surprising with a realization that a protein supplement comprised only 3% of Ration 1 during growth period one and no protein supplement was added to Ration A which was fed during the second growth period. Growth responses during the second growth period were not influenced by the protein levels consumed during the first period.

Most calf starter rations are current-

'ly formulated to contain 16 to 24 protein under the assumption that any less would reduce growth rate and subject calves to ill health. An important factor in the consideration of

Table 3 Growth period 2

(91 to 181 kg)

Ingredients

Ration

A

B

%

C

Steam rolled barley

Dry rolled milo

Soybean oil meal

Molasses

Ground limestone

Salt

48.3

45.2

5.0

1.0

0.5

Vitamin A ( 30,000

I.0 /g)

0.008

Crude protein

9.2

Digestible protein

Alfalfa hay

Crude protein 16.0

5.1

Digestible

' protein 11.9

43.4

40.1

43.4

6.7

5.0

1.0

0.5

0.008

0.008

11.8

14.0

8.5

40.1

13.3

5.0

1.0

0.5

9.1

Page 21

Progressive Agriculture protein levels is the amount of feed a calf will consume each day, and the amount of energy in the feed. Too frequently calf feeders concern themselves with protein levels without any consideration of the amount of energy allowed the calves each day. The results of this and previous studies indicate that energy requirements have

been underestimated and protein

levels overemphasized in attempting to obtain rapid and economical calf growth.

Using different levels of protein did not change the total feed or digestible energy requirement for equal weight gains.

Efficiency of feed utilization is summarized in Table 4.

The feed cost of raising each calf from birth to 200 lb. was about $1 less for calves fed Ration 1 (11.9% protein) than for those consuming

Ration 3 (16.9% protein) because of the added costs of protein supplements in Ration 3. A difference in feed costs of $4.72 was noted in comparing Ration A ( 9.2% protein) with

Ration C (14.0% protein) in the 200 lb. gain from 200 to 400 lb. body weight.

The lowest protein precentages used in the rations studied were not low enough to reduce the digestibility of the total ration.

Calf health was excellent on all rations, with no death losses and limited scours only during the early milk feeding stage.

Approximately 18 -19% of t h e weight gain of young Holstein calves is protein, the remainder being water, fat and minerals. The calves consuming Ration 1 converted 24 lb. of apparently digestible protein to an estimated 19 lb. of body protein, or a conversion value of 80 %. The protein conversion value was 53% for the calves fed Ration 3. The animal industry has been criticized for the inefficient conversion of feed protein to animal protein for human consumption.

Obviously this situation is the result of feeding excessive levels of protein needlessly.

The secret of a successful feeding program for replacement calves is unlimited access to palatable grains and alfalfa hay. Attempting to raise young calves on strictly roughage rations to reduce feed costs often proves to be more costly in both feed dollars and time than allowing calves to grow at

their potential rate by free choice

grain -hay selection.

In the western area inclusion of barley as the main component of grain rations and alfalfa hay as the roughage seem to assure adequate protein levels when calves can satisfy their appetites with these feeds.

( Continued on Page 22)

Table 4

Summary of average daily gains, total feed consumption, and daily feed consumption.

Rations

Av. Daily Gains

( post weaning )

Av. total feed consumption

( post weaning)

Alfalfa hay fed separately

Daily feed consumption

(post weaning)

Alfalfa hay

Feed /lb. gain

1

Period I

(birth -200 lb.)

3

1.6

2

( lb..)

1.6

1.6

185

4.4

2.8

201

188

4.4

2.7

4.2

2.8

A

2.5

716 668

792

17:3

8.8

2.2

4.4

Period 2

(200 -400 lb.)

B

( lb..)

2.4

182

8.1

2.2

4.3

C

2.4

151

9.7

1.8

4.7

Table 5 -- Average feed costs.

Rations

I

2

$

3 A

$

B

C

Ingredients and manufacturing costs /ton

Alfalfa hay /ton

Av. Feed costs'

73.86

76.94

80.26

8.39

8.86

9.41

$35.00

65.68

68.95

72.23

26.51

26.24

31.23

I Feed costs include all solid feeds from birth by growth periods. Milk costs are not included.

Prof. Stanley...

husbandryman, preached the gospel of better herd sires. Dr. Pistor talked animal health. Prof. Stanley himself

"sold" ranchers on supplemental feeding.

And among them and others there was born a new industry in Arizona agriculture the drylot feeding or "finishing" of range cattle.

"I am proudest of the people I

brought to our department

Bill Pis tor the veterinarian, Lee Scott the animal scientist, "Bart" Cardon, the animal nutritionist, and W. G. "Bill" Mc-

Ginnies the range scientist," says Prof.

Stanley. Scott is deceased, but Pistor and \ I cGinnies are still on the UA staff, although no longer in Animal

Science. Dr. Cardon is a leading Arizona businessman catering to the needs of the livestock industry.

Those early workers are credited with devising and perfecting the salt meal range supplement idea which is still in use. Hungry range cattle, if offered a grain or meal feed in a feeder out on the range, would consume it all in a hurry. Stanley added salt to the cottonseed meal, the salt a "governor" to restrict the animal's intake of the meal.

Range cattle eat the mixture when hungry enough, but sparingly.

"One of the best things I ever did for the university was hiring Ernie

( Continued from Page 3)

Hussman," said Prof. Stanley. "Ernie was working as a cowboy on the Larimore ranch when we were running those early salt -meal experiments.

I hired him as a UA herdsman, and today, as superintendent of the UA Tucson farms, he is one of the able and necessary cogs in the College of Agriculture operation," said Stanley.

Other important research accomplishments of Prof. Stanley and his associates in those early days included an economic study of range cattle and sheep production in Arizona, and the first and still most authentic study of salt and water consumption by range cattle. Also still valid is an early but complete analysis of range grasses, including the seasonal rise and fall of carotene content.

Another study involved carcass evaluation of Hereford cattle, forerunner by 22 years of today's

Performance Registry International. The animal scientists in this university, with

Prof. Stanley directing and participating in the work, made a classic study

15 years ago of dwarfism in beef cattle, proving that dwarfism is genetic and not caused by nutritional or other environmental factors.

Prof. Stanley himself obtained his master's degree at Iowa State, took advanced study at the University of

Wisconsin, was set to get a Ph.D.

later, but in the agreed year, 1938, all sabbaticals were cancelled.

Most important to this university,

"Ernie" Stanley and "Bill" Pistor traveled the state and carried the gospel of better livestock management to the cattlemen and sheepmen. They became close friends with those in the industry, establishing a warm rapport which has not since been equalled.

Out of those years came the Stanley

-

Pistor scholarship given to UA students in the livestock fields.

Ernie Stanley himself is a lifetime and honorary member of the cattlemen's, the sheepmen's and the Hereford breeders' state associations. Last year he retired from the department, and today he is still with his longtime colleague, Bill Pistor, working with the UA Brazilian and foreign student programs. He retired as department head emeritus. Prof. Stanley still has a keen interest in his old department and great pride in its continuing accomplishments.

"I guess I'm retired but I'm still working," says Ernie Stanley with that warm smile which is his trademark.

After nearly half a century of working for this university, serving the livestock people of the state, it's hard to quit.

MARCH

7 - Annual Bull Sale UA River

Road Farm, Tucson.

12 - Maricopa County Nutrition

Seminar, Phoenix.

12 -14 - Artificial Insemination Work shop, Phoenix.

16

FFA Field Day -U of A

Campus.

APRIL

1- 4 -

13

20

Conference on Control of \ I :crobial and Chemical Contamination of Foods, Phoenix.

Home Citrus Clinic, Ralt River Citrus Farm, Tempe.

Home Citrus Clinic, Salt River Citrus Farm, Tempe.

MAY

2

Cattle Feeders' Day at UA

Farms, Tucson.

JUNE

3- 7

Annual Town and Country

Life Conference, UA Campus, Tucson.

Protein Needs...

( Continued from Page 21)

KAWT, Douglas - Livestock

Report

6 :20 a.m. and

12 :10 p.m. Monday thru Saturday.

Maricopa County

KOOL, Phoenix

- Garden

Show Sat., 8:45 a.m.

KOY, Phoenix Farm Report

Mon. thru Fri., 6:50 a.m.

Sat., 6:55 a.m.

KOOL, Phoenix

Sat., 5:40 a.m.

-

Mon. thru.

KTAR, Phoenix

(radio &

TV) Mon. thru Fri., 5:55

a.m.

KPHO, Phoenix

Sat., 5:45 a.m.

- Mon. thru

KUPD, Phoenix

Mon. thru

Fri., 5:50 a.m. and 12:28

p.m.

Dairymen are tempted to use their regular dairy cow rations to feed to their calves because of ease of handling. There are some nutritional considerations which are counter to use of these rations.

Firstly, antibiotics are not added to cows' rations and are useful in calf growth response during the first three months of growth; secondly, supplemental calcium should be included in a grain mix for calves when fed free -choice; thirdly, a supplementary source of Vitamins A and

E are recommended when calves are on the grain rations. The author has found that the following amounts are satisfactory in a ton of feed and add but little to the total cost: (1) aureofac 10 ( aureomycin, 10 g /lb. of mixture )

,

1.0 lb.;

( 2 ) calcium carbonate

( ground limestone)

,

20 lb.; (3) vitamin A ( 30,000 I.U./g), 1/2 lb.;

(4) vitamin E ( tocopherol acetate at 20,-

000 I.U./lb.), 5 oz.

March -April Page 22

SORGHUM...

(Continued from Page 19) long list of uses includes alcohol, synthetic rubber, dyes, plastics and many, many more.

As a human food, grain sorghum

ranks as the third

most important world crop after wheat and rice. Grain sorghum is one of the major food crops in Asia and Africa.

Presently less than 5 percent of our sorghum production in the U.S. is directly utilized in some form or other for human consumption. The other 95 percent or more of sorghum production is utilized for livestock feed in one form or another.

As a food, sorghum may be utilized more successfully as a meal for making pancakes, corn bread, mush, puddings, etc.

It can also be mixed with wheat flour where desired in the same way as corn meal.

Grain sorghum flour does not possess leavening properties because of the absence of gluten in the protein.

A comnartive analysis of grain sorghum flour and wheat flour is given below:

Grain Sorghum

Flour

Wheat

Flour year period Arizona increased annual production by 296 %!

from 3,788,-

000 bushels to 15,015,000 bushels.

For a comparion, wheat in

the

United States went from an average annual production in 1949 -58 of 1,092,

071,000 bu. to 1,310,642,000 bushels in 1966.

Thus wheat production in the United States increased only 20% in this same 12 year period.

Both increases in acreages and increased yields per acre contributed to the increased total production figures.

Perhaps the greatest single cause for this jump in production per unit of land area was the advent of successful commercial hybrid seed available to growers starting in the period of 1956 -1958.

In fact sorghums, like

a lot of people I know, enjoy our

Arizona climate so well that in 1967 the Arizona state average grain yield of 81 bushels per acre ( 4536 pounds per acre) again was highest in the nation.

Individual fields reportedly have yielded from 10,000 to 12,000 pounds per acre ( 180 to 215 bushels per acre) . As an example the March

-

April 1966 issue of this magazine shows a picture (p. 18) of Mr. Joe

Sheely, of Tolleson, Arizona harvesting a 1965 grain sorghum production of 11,0511/2 pounds per acre (197.3

bushels per acre)

.

1

Protein

9.16%

Carbohydrates

79.39%

Ash

Fiber

0.80%

0.65%

Fat

(

3.10%

- Mg. per lb. -

Thiamin

Riboflavin

Niacin

Iron

0.85

0.40

11.74

16.3

10.50%

76.10%

0.40%

0.33%

1.45%

0.26

0.225

4.05

3.60

Sorghums have been transformed by plant breeders from the tall forage type of 30 years ago to a short plant

( grain type ) with early maturity.

Thus it is well suited to modern ma-

chine harvest, and is adapted to a

much greater area of the world to meet mankind's current food needs.

Evidence of this transformation is shown in acreage and production figures.

On a worldwide basis, data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations shows an annual world production of

31,400,000 metric tons of sorghum in

1963 -64 for a 134 per cent increase in 13 years over the 13,440,000 metric tons annual average produced in

1948 -53.

An example of the current value of sorghum to the Arizona economy may be illustrated by 1967 USDA figures showing a total value of $23,371,000 from 254,000 acres of sorghums. All other cereal grains grown in Arizona

( barley, wheat, corn) added together gave a total value of $18,716,000 from

274,000 acres.

These 254,000 acres of sorghums grown in Arizona in 1967 compared to only 248,000 acres of all cottons.

( Political pressures in the form of government programs are illustrated here)

.

Sorghum is a "fast moving" crop as it changes in character, changes in use, increases in production and becomes a more important part of mankind's food supply.

How about joining me now in a cup of coffee and some Chocolate Midgets:

In the United States the "grain sorghum" production went from a 1949-

58

10 -year average bushels to 720,415,000 bushels in 1966.

'This about 12 Y ears.

Page 23 of 261,008,000

In this same 12

1 z cup margarine

'

3/4 cup sugar cup chocolate syrup

2 eggs, unbeaten

%2 cup milo cup wheat flour

1/ teaspoon baking powder cup chopped nuts

1 teaspoon vanilla

Melt margarine in saucepan; add sugar,

Progressive Agriculture chocolate syrup and mix thoroughly. Cool slightly and stir in eggs, one at a time.

Sift together flours and baking powder.

Add to chocolate mixture along with nuts and vanilla. Mix well.

8x8 -inch in 350 - degree oven.

serve.

Pour batter into pan, which has been lightly greased and floured. Bake for 35 minutes

Cut in squares to

Grain sorghum flour is not available on retail grocery shelves, but can be purchased from Harvest Queen Mills in Plainview, Texas.

UA Student Delegates

At Agronomy Sessions

James M. Shea, President and Roberta Stevenson, Corresponding Secretary of the University of Arizona

Crops and Soils Club were official

representatives of the Club at the

American Society of Agronomy meetings held November 5 -10 in Washington, D. C. The American Society of

Agronomy is the professional organization for some 6,000 crops and soil specialists in agricultural industry,

Gov e r n m e n t and in Universities.

There is a very active undergraduate student section of the society representing local clubs throughout the country.

at institutions

Miss Stevenson was not only an official delegate, but as winner of the local speech contest, competed in the national contest at Washington in a field of 18 local winners from as many states.

Although she did not place, she gave an excellent speech.

Mr. Shea is a Senior in Agronomy specializing in turfgrass management.

Miss Stevenson is a Junior in Agricultural Chemistry and Soils.

Three student essays were also submitted to the National American Society of Agronomy Essay Contest in

May of 1967. James Conway, former undergraduate major in Ag. Chem. &

Soils currently graduate student in soils at Colorado State, placed sixth in national competition. His essay, entitled

"Extra -terrestrial

Soil

Science", discussed the problems associated with interplanetary space travel in relation to soil conditions which may exist on Mars.

Student travel to Washington, D. C.

was made possible through grants from Associated Students, Chevron

Chemical Co., Arizona Cotton Planting Seed Distributing, and Valley

Feed and Seed Company.

Dart---- New Safflower for the Salt River Valley

By George H. Abel

Arizona growers in the Salt River

Valley can now plant a new safflower variety named Dart. This variety has been released by the Crops Research

Division of the U. S. Department of

Agriculture and the Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station.

Dart has been compared to Frio and Gila in 10 yield trials over a 5year period at the University of Arizona Branch Experiment Station at

Mesa. It has been tested at the Yuma and Marana Branch Experiment Stations to a lesser extent. Research data point to the Salt River Valley as the best area for growing the variety.

At Mesa, Dart has an average of

40.5

percent oil and yields

3,572 pounds of seed per acre ( See table)

.

Oil production is

1,447 pounds per acre.

Dart is 1.6 units higher than

Frio in percent oil, and 4.8 higher than Gila; approximately 200 and 500 pounds per acre higher in seed yield, and approximately 100 and

350 pounds per acre higher in oil.

Dart is a selection in the F7 generation from a cross between A5731 -5 and 61114- 29- 9 -4 -9. Line A5731 -5 was developed in Arizona by the Crops

SEEDS OF SAFFLOWER varieties.

Left to right - Dart, Frio and Gila.

Research Division and the Arizona

Agricultural Experiment Station. The original cross was made at Beltsville,

Maryland, and selections in the segregating populations were made at

Mesa. The other parent was a high oil line received from Pacific Oilseeds,

Incorporated, Woodland, California.

Dart, like Frio, is tolerant to cold in the seedling and early growth stages.

Both the plant and seed type are

more uniform than Frio. The plant is as tall as Frio and taller than Gila.

Dart has more resistance to lodging than Frio or Gila.

The seed of Dart has a gray -striped hull which is one of the several seed mutations discovered and described in recent years. The mutation causes thin areas to appear in the pericarp or outer portion of the hull.

These thin areas are in thin strips extending

Table 1.

Comparison of Dart with Frio and Gila in 10 Replicated Yield

Trials at Mesa, Arizona, Over a 5 -Year Period.

Variety Seed yield, lbs. /acre

Oil Oil, lbs., /acre

Bushel weight

Height, inches

Dart

Frio

Gila

3572

3377

3048

40.5

38.9

35.7

1447

1314

1088

40

41

42

51

50

47

Official Publication of the

College of Agriculture and

School of Home Economics

The University of Arizona along the vertical length of the seed.

The thin hull character reduces the proportion of hull to the meat in the seed.

This results in a higher percentage of oil in the seed and a greater oil production per unit volume of seed. A comparison of seeds of the three varieties is shown in the accompanying photo.

The flowers of Dart are yellow in both fresh and dry condition. Blooming and maturity occur essentially at the same time as in Frio.

Dart is tolerant to the two prevalent races of Phytophthora drechslei

Tuck, the fungus which causes root rot of safflower.

Seed can be purchased from the

Arizona Crop Improvement Association in care of the Department of

Agronomy, University of

Arizona,

Tucson, Arizona. The Crops Research

Division does not handle seed.

This paper is a joint contribution of the

Crops Research Division, Agricultural Re search Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, and the Agronomy Department, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.

The author is a Research Agronomist,

Crops Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Mesa, Arizona.

Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement