Organic Blackberry Production Research

Bernadine StrikProfessor, Dept. Horticulture & NWREC

Collaborators:

Gil Buller and Emily Vollmer (Research Assistants)Renee Harkins, Javier Fernandez-Salvador, Emily Dixon (grad students)Luis Valenzuela-Estrada & George Cavender (Post-Docs)David Bryla & Chad Finn (USDA-ARS, HCRU)Yanyun Zhao and Mark Daeschel, Dept. Food Sci., OSUPenny Perkins-Veazie, Gina Fernandez, Charles Safley, Olha Sydorovych, Roderick Rejesus,

Mara Massell (North Carolina State Univ.)

Industry: Eric Pond (Riverbend farm, OR); Joe Bennett (formerly Small Planet Foods WA);Anthony Boutard (OR); Tom Avinelis (Homegrown Organics, CA, OR); Derek Peacock (Hursts Berry Farm, OR); Josh Beam (SunnyRidge, Dole, NC); Littau Harvesters Inc.and other industry contributors!

Funding to date:

OOCR $29,885 (2009)NCSFR $69,689 (2009-11)NIFA-OREI $2.4 million (2010-14)

Sub-projects:Systems for processed blackberries:

* Production system impacts on yield, quality, nutrient allocationStrik, Vollmer, Buller, Harkins, Fernandez-Salvador

* Irrigation management & root growth – Bryla & Valenzuela* Economic evaluation – Strik, Safley & Sydorovych* Cultivar adaptation – Strik, Finn, & Fernandez-Salvador* Fruit quality & impact of processing - Zhao & Cavender* Food borne pathogens – Daeschel & Sales

Systems for fresh blackberries (grower cooperator sites, OR & NC):Oregon:* Impact of cultivar 7 fertilizer source on yield & quality

Strik, Bryla, Fernandez-Salvador* Economic evaluation – Strik, Safley & Sydorovych* Fruit quality & healthful properties (storage) - Zhao & Cavender* Food borne pathogens – Daeschel & SalesNorth Carolina:* Economic evaluation – Fernandez, Safley & Sydorovych* Fruit quality & healthful properties (storage) - Perkins-Veazie* Food borne pathogens – Massel

Economic model to assess potential liability costs (food safety event) - ReJesus

Weed, Water, and Nutrient Management Practices for

Organic Blackberry ProductionBernadine Strik, David Bryla, and Renee Harkins

Dept. Horticulture, OSU, USDA-ARS/HCRU

Objectives

1. Impact of weed management on plant growth, weed pressure, and yield &

2. Biomass and nutrient accumulation and losses in establishing organic trailing blackberries

Objectives

3. Effect of post harvest irrigation &

4. Impact of training time (August or February) on established trailing blackberries

Note above treatments began in 2012

Study siteNorth Willamette

Research and Extension Center, Aurora, OR

• 1 acre planting

• TC planted June 2010 (5’ x 10’)

• Split-plot design with 5 reps

• Non-treatment guard rows & end plots

• A cereal rye/common vetch cover crop between rows

• Single lateral drip tube either suspended on trellis or under weed mat

Treatments• Cultivar

– ‘Black Diamond’ – ‘Marion’

• Weed management– ‘Control’ (weedy)– ‘Hand weed’– ‘Weed mat’

June 2010

Planting, May 17, 2012

July

201

0

Measurements•Soil nutrients (Oct.)

Methods

Febr

uary

201

1

Measurements•Primocane number•Primocane length•Primocane nutrientsCanes removed

July

201

1

Measurements – “off year”•Soil moisture & temperature•Leaf water potential•Primocane leaf tissue nutrient conc.•Soil nutrients (Oct.)Canes trained as they grew

Apr

il 20

12

Measurements – “on year”•Primocane number•Primocane length•Primocane nutrient conc.

July

201

2

Measurements “on year”•Soil moisture & temperature•Leaf water potential•Yield, berry weight, berry nutrient concentration•Floricane & primocane leaf tissue nutrient conc.

Aug

ust 2

012

Measurements – “on year”•Soil moisture & temperature•Leaf water potential•Floricane yield components & nutrient conc.•Soil nutrients (Oct.)

Results

Weed management treatments•Weed pressure was not high in 2010•Weed presence was greater by late 2011 and into 2012

April 20, 2011

May 5, 2012

Primocane weight, number, and length in Marion and Black Diamond during the first 3 years after plantingz

Fresh cane weight/plant (kg)  

Dry cane weight/plant (kg) Cane No./plant Length/cane (m)  

  Year 1Year

2     Year 1Year

2     Year 1 Year 2   Year 1 Year 2  Cultivar

Black Diamond 0.3 1.7 0.1 0.8 3.4 11.6 1.8 3.3Marion 0.3 2.4     0.1 1.0     3.4 8.6     3.2 6.9    

Weed management

Control - 1.4 b - 0.6 b 3.3 6.5 b 2.6 5.8 aHand weed 0.3 2.3 a 0.1 1.0 a 3.5 11.6 a 2.5 5.4 abWeed mat 0.3 2.6 a 0.1 1.1 a 3.3 12.2 a 2.5 4.1 b

Significance                                Cultivar (C ) NS 0.01 NS 0.05 NS <.0001 0.0012 <.0001

Weed management (W) NS 0.0008 NS <.0001 NS <.0001 NS 0.04CxW   NS NS   NS NS   NS NS   NS NS  ZYear 1=15 Feb 2011; Year 2=24 Feb 2012; yMean separation (in columns) by LSD test at P ≤ 0.05 (lowercase letters)NSNon significant

Primocane growth (DW)

Primocane growth (DW)

• Primocane growth (DW/biomass) on Feb. 2011 (reflecting growth in planting year), was not significantly affected by cultivar or weed management.

• In Jan. 2012, primocane DW (growth in 2011) was greater in ‘Marion’ than ‘Black Diamond’. Also, weedy ‘Control’ plots had the least primocane growth.

Black Diamond Marion0

0.20.40.60.8

11.2

2012 Aboveground biomass by cultivar February 2012

Weed management

Dry

wei

ght (

kg/p

lant

)

Control Hand weed Weed mat0.00.20.40.60.81.01.2

2012 Aboveground biomass by weed management February 2012

Weed management

Dry

wei

ght (

kg/p

lant

)

Primocane (leaf & cane) nutrients in winter

2011There were no significant effects of cultivar or weed

management on macronutrients N, P, & K.

2012For macronutrients N, P,

and K, canes from ‘Control’ or weedy plots had a lower

%N, P, and K relative to hand weed and weed mat

plots (P=0.04, <.0001, =0.002

respectively).

Control Hand weed Weed mat0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.81.0

1.2

1.4

2012 Percent of macronutrients by weed management in primocanes

Nitrogen Potassium Phosphorus

Weed management

Perc

ent (

%)

2011 Primocane leaf tissue nutrients, collected 18 Aug. 2011Macronutrients (%)   Micronutrients (ppm)

    N P  K Mg Ca S   B Fe Mn Cu Zn AlCultivar

Black Diamond 2.3 0.2 1.3 0.26 0.3 0.12 19.9 93.2 117.5 10.3 28.4 58.7

Marion 3.0 0.3 1.8 0.31 0.5 0.15   23.7 84.2 113.4   8.7 32.9 50.0

Weed managementControl 2.2b 0.2c 1.4b 0.29 0.5 0.11c 22.8 81.2 141.7a 8.5c 26.5c 52.9

Hand weed 2.9a 0.3b 1.6a 0.28 0.4 0.14b 21.3 108.3 107.8b 9.4b 30.6b 71.8

Weed mat 3.0a 0.3a 1.6a 0.29 0.4 0.15a 21.3 76.5 96.8b 10.6a 34.9a 38.4

Significance                                          Cultivar (C ) <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 NS NS <.0001 0.000 NS

Weed management (W) <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 NS NS <.0001 NS NS <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 NS

CxW   NS NS NS NS NS NS   NS NS NS NS NS NS

2012 Primocane leaf tissue nutrients, collected 31 July 2012    Macronutrients (%) Micronutrients (ppm)    N P  K Mg Ca S   B Fe Mn Cu Zn AlCultivar

Black Diamond 2.0 0.26 1.4 0.30 0.4 0.13 18.3 101.5 174.4 8.4 25.5 68.0

Marion 2.6 0.35 1.6 0.32 0.5 0.14   14.7 74.8 140.1 6.5 31.3 42.1

Weed managementControl 2.2b 0.30 1.4 0.31 0.4 0.131c 17.3 76.5b 172.9 7.3 27.7 44.4b

Hand weed 2.3ab 0.30 1.5 0.30 0.4 0.137b 16.1 102.2a 147.0 7.6 28.4 70.8aWeed mat 2.4a 0.31 1.5 0.31 0.4 0.144a 16.1 85.7b 151.9 7.4 29.1 50.0b

Significance                                          Cultivar (C ) <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.0004 0.0003 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.00 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001Weed management (W) 0.02 NS NS NS NS 0.00 NS 0.00 NS NS NS 0.00CxW   NS NS NS NS NS NS   NS 0.03 NS NS NS NS

zMean separation (in columns) by LSD test at P ≤ 0.05 (lowercase letters)NSNon significant

Off year

On year

Flor

ican

e le

af s

ampl

ing

2012

Floricane leaf tissue nutrient concentration

• Floricane leaves from weedy ‘Control’ plots had a lower %N than in either ‘Hand weed’ or ‘Weed mat’ plots.

Control Hand weed Weed mat0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Floricane leaf tissue Nitrogen

Weed management

Nitr

ogen

(%)

Note floricane leaves from ‘Control’ plots appeared yellow.

Floricane leaves collected 7 July 2012, at first black fruit.

Har

vest

201

2

2012 Machine-harvested yield by cultivar

30-Jun 5-Jul 10-Jul 15-Jul 20-Jul 25-Jul 30-Jul 4-Aug0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.02012 Mean plant yield by date

Black DiamondMarion

Date

Yiel

d (k

g/pl

ant)

Black Diamond

Marion0

5

10

15

2012 Mean plant yield by Cultivar

Cultivar

Yiel

d (k

g/pl

ant)

Cultivar Yield (kg/ha)Black Diamond 13,333 (6 tons/a)

Marion 11,555 (5 tons/a)

Weed management effects on yield

2012 Yield by weed management

5-Jul 9-Jul 12-Jul 16-Jul 19-Jul 23-Jul 26-Jul 30-Jul0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.8

Mean plant yield by weed management

Weed mat Hand weed Control

Date

Yiel

d (k

g/pl

ant)

Control Hand weed

Weed mat0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.02012 Mean yield by weed

management

Cultivar

Yiel

d (k

g/pl

ant)

Weed management Yield (kg/ha)Control (weedy) 8,000 (3.6 tons/a)

Hand weed 13,333 (6 tons/a)

Weed mat 16,000 (7.1 tons/a)

‘Black Diamond’ ‘Marion’

Berry weight

• ‘Black Diamond’ berry weight was greater than that of ‘Marion’ on every harvest date

• Plants in the weedy control had less berry weight on every harvest than in weed mat 5-Jul 9-Jul 12-

Jul16-Jul

19-Jul

23-Jul

26-Jul

30-Jul

0.02.04.06.08.0

Average berry weight by weed management 2012 Weed mat

Hand weed

Control

DateAve

rage

ber

ry w

eigh

t (g)

30-Jun 5-Jul 10-Jul 15-Jul 20-Jul 25-Jul 30-Jul 4-Aug0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.0

Average berry weight by cultivar 2012

Black Diamond Marion

Date

Ave

rage

ber

ry w

eigh

t (g)

Berry Nutrient Concentration

• ‘Black Diamond’ berries had a lower %Ca than ‘Marion’ berries (P<.0001). Similarly, ‘Black Diamond’ primocane leaves had lower %Ca than ‘Marion’ in 2011 and 2012 (P<.0001 and 0.0003 respectively).

• ‘Black Diamond’ berries had higher %B than ‘Marion’ berries (P=0.002). Conversely, ‘Black Diamond’ primocane leaves and floricane leaves had lower %B than in ‘Marion’ in 2012 (P<.0001)

Black Diamond Marion0.000.050.100.150.200.25

2012 Berry calcium concentration

Cultivar

Ca

(%)

Black Diamond Marion0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

2012 Berry boron concentration

Cultivar

B (p

pm)

Removal of macronutrients in harvested fruitBerry macronutrient removal (July 2012)z, y          

Macronutrient removal (kg/ha)    N P K Mg CaCultivar

Black Diamond 19.9 3.7 20.8 1.9 3.1Marion 17.1 3.7 18.0 2.2 4.3

Weed managementControl 12.6c 2.7c 13.3c 1.4c 2.6c

Hand weed 17.8b 3.7b 19.5b 2.0b 3.7bWeed mat 25.2a 4.7a 25.2a 2.7a 5.0a

Significance                    Cultivar (C) NS NS NS NS 0.0002Weed management (W) 0.0003 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 <.0001CxW   NS NS NS NS 0.01zMean separation (in columns) by LSD test at P ≤ 0.05 (lowercase letters)NSNon SignificantyTotal dry yield per plot divided by number of plants per plot multiplied by average berry nutrients for each plot

Berries from weedy ‘Control’ plots had less moisture and higher soluble solids (°Brix)

than berries from either ‘Weed mat’ or ‘Hand weed’ plots.

2012 Mean floricane yield components, collected Aug. 2012                      Per Floricane

Length (m) No. nodes

Bud break (%)

No. fruit/later

al

Yield (kg/plant

)Cull

(g/plant)

Berry weight

(g)

Soluble solid

conc. (%)

Berry moisture

(%) Cultivar

Black Diamond 4.9 103.8 40.1 5.7 6.0 28.8 5.5 10.6 86.5Marion 3.1 130.8 37.8 4.1 5.2 30.3 4.9 13.2 83.9

Weed managementControl 3.9 111.1 41.9 5.0 3.6c 29.1b 4.9b 12.4a 84.3b

Hand weed 3.9 106.8 40.7 5.2 6.0b 31.5b 5.4a 11.7b 85.7aWeed mat 4.2 134.1 34.3 4.5 7.2a 35.2a 5.5a 11.7b 85.8a

Significance                            Cultivar (C ) 0.0007 0.04 ns 0.002 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.0001Weed management (W) ns ns ns ns <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.02CxW   ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns nszMean separation (in columns) by LSD test at P ≤ 0.05 (lowercase letters)NSNon significant

Floricane biomass (DW) at caning out

• Floricanes in weedy ‘Control’ plots had less DW at caning out than those in ‘Hand weed’ and ‘Weed mat’ plots (P<0.0001).

• In 2012, nutrient concentration in floricanes was not significantly affected by weed management.

Control Hand weed Weed mat0.00.51.01.52.02.5

c

ba

Aboveground floricane biomass by weed management August 2012

Weed management

Dry

wei

ght (

kg/p

lant

)

‘Control’ ‘Weed mat’‘Hand weed’

July 3, 2012

Above-ground N gain & removal

Cultivar

Primocanes (25 Jan.

2012)

Fruit harvested (July 2012)

Floricane removal (9 Aug. 2012)

Primocanes (winter 2013)

TOTAL N gained

(to date)*

TOTAL N removed

2012

g N/plant gained

g N/plant removed

g N/plant removed

g N/plant gained lb N/a lb N/a

Black Diamond 8.3 9.0 14.3 ? 29.7* 46.2

Marion 11.6 7.7 18.6 ? 29.2* 52.1

Data collected February 2012, July 2012, and August 2012.

• During spring 2011 and 2012, plants fertilized with 50 lb N/a

* Primocanes will be sampled in winter 2013 to determine total nutrient gain & removal for 2012

Fruit + from caning out

Weed management

Primocanes (25

Jan. 2012)

Fruit harvested (July 2012)

Floricane removal (9 Aug. 2012)

Primocanes (winter

2013)

TOTAL N gained (to date)

TOTAL N removed

2012

g N/plant gained

g N/plant removed

g N/plant removed

g N/plant gained lb N/a lb N/a

Control 5.6 5.7 10.0 ? 20.0* 31.1

Hand weed 11.1 8.0 17.6 ? 28.7* 50.8

Weed mat 13.1 11.3 21.7 ? 39.4* 65.4

Data collected February 2012, July 2012, and August 2012.

• During spring 2011 and 2012, plants fertilized with 50 lb N/a

* Primocanes will be sampled in winter 2013 to determine total nutrient gain & removal for 2012

Above-ground N gain & removal

Fruit + from caning out

Temperature, 2011

• No effect of weed

management on soil temperature

• There was a trend for higher

daytime soil temperature in

the ‘Control’ (weedy)

treatment0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Average Hourly Soil Temperature: 4 September 2011

Hand Weed Control Weed Mat

Hour

Tem

pera

ture

(°C

)

0:002:00

4:006:00

8:0010:00

12:0014:00

16:0018:00

20:0022:00

05

101520253035

Average hourly air temperature: 4 September 2011

Average air temperature

Hour

Tem

pera

ture

(°C

)

Soil nutrients, 2011, end of off-year

• ‘Weed mat’ plots had higher soil ammonium-N than ‘Control’ or ‘Hand weed’ plots (P=0.0084)

• ‘Weed mat’ plots had higher soil Ca than ‘Control’ and ‘Hand weed’ plots (P=0.0047).

Control Hand-weed Weed mat0.0

1.0

2.0

2011 Ammonium-N concentra-tion in the soil by weed man-

agement

Weed management

NH

4 -N

(ppm

)

Control Hand-weed Weed mat850900950

1,0001,0501,100

2011 Calcium concentration in the soil by weed management

Weed management

Ca

(ppm

)

Temperature, 2012

0:002:00

4:006:00

8:0010:00

12:0014:00

16:0018:00

20:0022:00

05

101520253035

Average hourly air temperature: 4 September 2012Average air temperature

Hour

Tem

pera

ture

(°C

)

• ‘Control’ and ‘Hand weed’ plots

had higher soil temperature than ‘Weed mat’ plots

(P=<0.0001).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Average hourly soil temperature: 4 September 2012Hand Weed Control Weed Mat

Hour

Tem

pera

ture

(°C

)

Soil nutrients, 2012, end of on-year

Control Hand-weed Weed mat190200210220230240250260

2012 Potassium concentrations in the soil by weed management

Weed management

K (p

pm)

•‘Weed mat’ plots had higher soil K than ‘Control’ and ‘Hand weed’ plots (P=0.0002).

Trends observed in soil, 2011-2012

• Magnesium was significantly greater in ‘Weed mat’ plots in 2011 and 2012 (P=0.0024 and 0.03 respectively).

• Manganese was significantly greater in ‘Weed mat’ plots in 2011 and 2012 (P=<.0001 and 0.0002 respectively).

Control Hand-weed Weed mat0

50

100

150

200

2011 201120112012 2012

2012

Magnesium concentrations in the soil by weed management in 2011

& 2012

Weed management

Mg

(ppm

)

Control Hand-weed Weed mat05

10152025

2011 2011

2011

2012 2012

2012

Manganese concentrations in the soil by weed management in

2011 & 2012

Weed management

Mn

(ppm

)

• pH tended to increase under ‘Weed mat’ from 2011 to 2012.

• Nitrate-N tended to decrease in all plots from 2011 to 2012.

Control Hand-weed Weed mat5.45.55.65.75.8

20112011

2011

2012 2012

2012

2011-2012 soil pH by weed management

Weed management

pH (1

:1 s

oil:w

ater

)

Control Hand-weed Weed mat0.00.51.01.52.0

20112011 2011

2012 20122012

2011-2012 soil nitrate-N by weed management

Weed management

NO

3-N

(ppm

)

Trends observed in soil, 2011-20

Conclusions• ‘Black Diamond’ had larger berries and a greater

yield than ‘Marion’.• Primocane and floricane DW of ‘Black Diamond’

was less than that of ‘Marion’• ‘Black Diamond’ required

less total N than ‘Marion’

‘Black Diamond’ plants appear to be more

nutrient efficient than ‘Marion’ plants.

Marion Black Diamond

Conclusions cont.

• Plants in weedy, ‘Control’ plots had fewer and longer primocanes with a lower nutrient concentration

• In 2012, floricane nutrient concentrations were not significantly affected by weed management treatments

• In 2012, floricane DW was least and yield the lowest in weedy ‘Control’ plots

• Berry weight was less and fruit had a lower % moisture in weedy ‘control’ plots

Conclusions cont.• ‘Weed mat’ plots had the greatest aboveground

primocane and floricane DW in 2012• ‘Weed mat’ plots had the highest yield in 2012• Nitrogen removal in ‘Weed mat’ plots was highest

• NH4-N, Ca, K, S, Mg, and Mn, concentrations in the soil were all greatest in ‘Weed mat’ plots

On-going work• Impacts of post-harvest irrigation and training time

evaluated in 2013 (now EY)• Adjust fertility rates• Monitor nutrient accumulation & losses

Nov. 8, 2012