Bedding availability issues are arising rapidly in the broiler industry that may alter the type and quality of bedding available to growers to rear broiler chickens. Because birds are in direct contact with the litter, the potential impact of bedding materials on footpad health is of concern. In 3 successive trials, 8 different bedding sources (pine shavings, pine bark, chipped pine, mortar sand, ground hardwood pallets, chopped straw, ground door filler, and cotton-gin trash) were compared in side-by-side experimental pens by rearing mixed-sex birds. In addition to broiler growth performance and litter characteristics (moisture, caking, and ammonia volatilization), the incidence and severity of footpad dermatitis (FPD) was assessed at 6 wk of age. Bedding materials had little influence on the live performance of broilers in 3 successive trials. Prevalence of FPD varied significantly (P < 0.05) among the bedding materials. The incidence of FPD paralleled high litter moisture and caking scores, with chipped pine, chopped straw, cotton-gin trash, and pine shavings showing the highest severity scores and mortar sand and ground door filler showing the lowest. From an FPD etiology standpoint, the ability of the bedding to absorb (i.e., ground door filler) and quickly release (i.e., mortar sand) moisture may be the most important characteristics.

The discovery of auxins as plant growth regulating chemicals in the 1930s and their ability to stimulate adventitious rooting in stem cuttings marked a major milestone in the modern history of plant propagation. Basic and applied research conducted during the past 70 years has provided information regarding absorption and translocation of auxin in cuttings, as well as the effects of timing of auxin application, methods of auxin application, type of auxin, and concentration of auxin on the rooting response of cuttings. The basal quick-dip method, the powder application method, and the dilute soak method have been the most commonly used methods for applying auxin to cuttings in commercial horticulture over the past 7 decades, with the first two methods still in common use today. In addition, a wide variety of other auxin application methods have been reported beginning in the 1930s and continuing to the present. Some of these methods remain primarily of historical interest, several find limited use in commercial horticulture, and others show potential for greater use in the future. Opportunities exist for further development of auxin application techniques that can enhance plant quality, efficiency and productivity of the cutting propagation process, and worker safety. This review provides horticulturists, from the academic researcher to the commercial propagator, with an exploration of auxin application methods over the past 70 years, along with an examination of the physiological response of cuttings to applied auxin and an overview of issues leading to future opportunities.

A substrate component (WholeTree) made from loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) was evaluated along with starter fertilizer rate in the production of greenhouse-grown petunia (Petunia ×hybrida Vilm. ‘Dreams Purple’) and marigold (Tagetes patula L. ‘Hero Spry’). Loblolly pine from a 12-year-old plantation were harvested at ground level, chipped, and further processed through a hammer mill to pass a 0.64-cm screen. The resulting WholeTree (WT) substrate was used alone or combined with 20% (WTP2) or 50% (WTP5) (by volume) Canadian sphagnum peatmoss and compared with an industry standard peat-lite (PL) mix of 8 peatmoss : 1 vermiculite : 1 perlite (by volume). Substrates were amended with 1.78 kg·m−3 dolomitic lime, 0.59 kg·m−3 gypsum [CaSO4-2(H2O)], 0.44 kg·m−3 Micromax, 1.78 kg·m−3 16N–2.6P–9.9K (3- to 4-month release), and 1.78 kg·m−3 16N–2.6P–10.8K (5- to 6-month release). A 7N–1.3P–8.3K starter fertilizer (SF) was added to each substrate at 0.0, 1.19, 2.37, or 3.56 kg·m−3. Container capacity (CC) was greatest for PL and decreased as the percentage of peatmoss in the substrate decreased with WT having 35% less CC than PL. Conversely, air space (AS) was greatest for the WT and decreased as percentage of peatmoss increased with PL containing 33% less AS than WT. In general, petunia dry weight was greatest for any substrate containing peatmoss with a SF rate of 2.37 kg·m−3 or greater. The exception was that petunia grown in WT at 3.56 kg·m−3 SF had similar dry weight as all other treatments. Marigold dry weight was similar for all substrates where at least 2.37 kg·m−3 SF was used.

No abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential for use of container substrates composed of processed whole pine trees (WholeTree). Three species [loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), slash pine (Pinus elliottii), and longleaf pine (Pinus palustris)] of 8- to 10-year-old pine trees were harvested at ground level and the entire tree was chipped with a tree chipper. Chips from each tree species were processed with a hammer mill to pass through a 0.374-inch screen. On 29 June 2005 1-gal containers were filled with substrates, placed into full sun under overhead irrigation, and planted with a single liner (63.4 cm3) of ‘Little Blanche’ annual vinca (Catharanthus roseus). The test was repeated on 27 Aug. 2005 with ‘Raspberry Red Cooler’ annual vinca. Pine bark substrate had about 50% less air space and 32% greater water holding capacity than the other substrates. At 54 days after potting (DAP), shoot dry weights were 15% greater for plants grown in 100% pine bark substrate compared with plants grown in the three WholeTree substrates. However, there were no differences in plant growth indices for any substrate at 54 DAP. Plant tissue macronutrient content was similar among all substrates. Tissue micronutrient content was similar and within sufficiency ranges with the exception of manganese. Manganese was highest for substrates made from slash pine and loblolly pine. Root growth was similar among all treatments. Results from the second study were similar. Based on these results, WholeTree substrates derived from loblolly pine, slash pine, or longleaf pine have potential as an alternative, sustainable source for producing short-term horticultural crops.