In the past decade, sales of meat products labeled as natural (minimally processed) and produced without antibiotics and hormones have increased dramatically. In response to growing demand for meat products differentiated by various production attributes, many smaller-scale beef enterprises are considering direct marketing of their beef products to end-consumers as a viable approach to sustaining their family farming operations. This research uses survey data from Colorado consumers, and factor and cluster analysis to determine market segments for various (varied by production protocols and other meat attributes) natural beef products. Findings from the cluster analysis indicate that there are multiple segments of consumers who are likely to purchase natural beef, and that different segments are motivated by different factors. The most important factor explaining almost two-thirds of the differences among consumer responses relates to consumers' perceptions of the importance of meat attributes related to production practices (e.g. use of antibiotics, hormones and environmentally friendly grazing). Interestingly, the two consumer segments that are willing to pay a significantly higher premium for natural, local beef are motivated by different aspects of the meat and its intrinsic production attributes. One segment, representing 12.5% of consumers, ranked the importance of all production attributes significantly lower than the sample average. Consumers in this segment appear to be motivated by their perceptions of the extrinsic quality of natural beef products. The other segment, 13% of consumers, appears to be altruistic, ranking all production attributes such as 'no antibiotics', 'no hormones', and 'humane treatment', significantly higher than all of the other clusters. These results indicate the potential strength of production methods (and marketing of such quality differences) as product differentiation criteria. This paper illustrates the type of market research that may be useful for beef producers seeking value-added marketing opportunities, and portrays the types of consumers who are fueling the growth in natural meats in the United States. Such market analysis can facilitate producers' ability to effectively develop product concepts, labeling and promotional strategies targeted at the most receptive consumer segments, and illustrates that there is more than one type of consumer interested in purchasing products differentiated by sustainable production methods.

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) lint yield losses by southern root-knot nematode [Meloidogyne incognita] (RKN) have increased during the last 20 years. Site-specific management (SSM) of nematicides is a promising method to reduce yield losses, increase profitability and reduce adverse environmental impacts associated with excess allocations of agrochemicals. The impact of two nematicides applied at two rates on RKN population density and lint yield were compared across previously determined RKN risk zones in commercial fields during the 2007 growing season. Root knot nematode risk zones were delineated in 2006 using fuzzy clustering of elevation and slope of the terrain, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) calculated from a bare soil spectral reflectance, and apparent soil electrical conductivity [shallow (EC a-shallow ) and deep (EC a-deep )]. Four different treatments of nematicides were randomly allocated among blocks that spanned the entire length of the fields. Test bare soil spectral reflectance plots (16 rows by 100 feet long) including the four treatments were also randomly selected within each zone to collect RKN population density, soil water content, and plant height, root galling, and final yield. In general, there were no benefits associated with a high rate of Telone (6 gal ac -1 ) versus a lower rate of 3 gal ac -1 . Similarly, the higher Temik rate of 6 lbs ac -1 did not provide additional nematicide control compared to the low rate (3 lbs ac -1 ). Comparing treatment results across management zones, Telone provided better RKN control compared to Temik in high risk zones, comprised of more coarse-textured, sandy soil. However, in low risk zones, which were comprised of relatively heavier textured soil compared to the high risk areas, the application of Temik would provide sufficient nematicide control. The results from this study clearly showed that RKN control and final yield varied with respect to the nematicide type and rate across management zones (MZ). These results are promising and support the idea of variable rate nematicide applications based on RKN risk zones.

No abstract