Improving Land Use Efficiency and Grower Revenue by Reducing Potato Row Width

Abstract

The standard row width for potato production in the Columbia Basin of Washington and Oregon is 86 cm (34 in.), but the reasons for this are unclear. The goal of this research was to identify a row width that maximizes potato grower revenue by optimizing land use efficiency. A 2012 pilot study conducted in central WA with four potato varieties (Alturas, Ranger Russet (R.), R. Burbank, and Umatilla R.) and four row width treatments (76, 81, 86, and 91 cm (30, 32, 34, and 36 in.)) indicated that row widths <86 cm had several advantages over those ≥86 cm. The protocol and methods were refined and a larger study conducted between 2013 and 2015. Russet Norkotah, Chieftain, and Teton R. were planted with the four varieties mentioned above into 71, 76, 81, and 86 cm (28, 30, 32, and 34 in.) row-width treatments; in-row seed piece spacing was 25.4 cm (10 in.). When data were averaged across years and varieties, a quadratic regression provided the best fit for total yield and adjusted gross return; the values for each peaked at 79 cm and 80 cm, respectively. Row widths of 76 and 81 cm produced 6 and 7 t ha −1 higher yields, respectively, than the 86 cm industry standard. The 81 cm treatment produced 7.3% higher adjusted gross than the industry standard. Compared to the industry standard, plants from the 71 cm rows performed poorly; this 15 cm (6 in.) reduction in row width caused a 9.3% loss of adjusted gross income. Tuber weight and number per plant and were maximized when rows were ≥81 cm wide. These data suggest that the industry standard row width of 86 cm is an inefficient use of land and that an inter-row spacing of 80-81 cm (31.5-32.0 in.) could improve economic return to Columbia Basin growers by as much as $937 ha −1. ResumenLa amplitud estandar entre surcos para la producción de papas en la rivera del Columbia de Washington y Oregon es de 86 cm (34 pulgadas), pero las razones para esto no están claras. La meta de esta investigación fue de identificar una distancia entre surcos que maximizara la ganancia del productor mediante la optimización del uso eficiente de la tierra. Un estudio piloto en el 2012 conducido en el centro de WA con cuatro variedades de papa (Alturas, Ranger Russet (R.), R. Burbank y Umatilla R.) y cuatro tratamientos de distancia entres surcos (76, 81, 86, y 91 cm (30, 32, 34 y 36 pulgadas) indicó que la distancia entre surcos <86 cm tuvo varias ventajas sobre aquellas de ≥ 86 cm. Se refinaron el protocolo y los métodos y un estudio más grande se condujo entre 2013 y 2015. Se plantaron Russet Norkotah, Chieftain, y Teton R. con las cuatro variedades ya mencionadas arriba, en tratamientos de distancias entre surcos de 71, 76, 81, y 86 cm (28, 30, 32, y 34 pulgadas), y espaciamientos entre las unidades de tubérculo-semilla de siembra de 25.4 cm (10 pulgadas) dentro del surco. Cuando se promediaron los datos entre años y variedades, una regresión cuadrática proporcionó el mejor ajuste para rendimiento total y ajustó la recuperación neta; los valores para cada uno alcanzaron su máximo a ...

Nontraditional production additives fail to improve potato yield and economic return

“…Additionally, increasing specific gravity would only be economically beneficial to growers if their average specific gravity from plants not treated with NutriCal was below a certain processing contract threshold. Processing contracts often provide the same economic incentive for tubers within the specific gravity range of 1.084–1.088, and they typically decline when specific gravity values are higher or lower than this optimum range (Pavek et al., 2018). Furthermore, the significant increase of tuber rot observed in plots treated with Trafix ES Cal Eight (8% Ca) does not agree with research showing reduced susceptibility to bacterial soft rot from tubers with an increased level of tuber Ca (McGuire & Kelman, 1984; Simmons & Kelling, 1987).…”

“…Process market values were derived using the same methods outlined in Pavek et al. (2018). Specific gravity measurements were not used in gross return calculations because of the limited sample size.…”

“…Due to tank mix compatibility with standard production inputs, it was assumed that growers could apply all nontraditional products in this study in the same tank as the standard inputs; therefore, gross income was not adjusted for application costs. Process market values were derived using the same methods outlined in Pavek et al (2018). Specific gravity measurements were not used in gross return calculations because of the limited sample size.…”

La Belle Russet: an Early Maturing, Dual-Purpose Variety Having a High Percentage of Marketable Yield, Long Tuber Dormancy, and a Reduced Incidence of Sugar Ends

“…Early and late harvest gross economic returns for La Belle Russet for both fresh and process markets were calculated using 4 years of data obtained from a Washington trial site as described by Spear et al (2017) and Pavek et al (2018). Fresh market economic returns for both early and late harvest for La Belle Russet relative to early-maturing industry standard Russet Norkotah were 28% and 20% greater, respectively (Table 9).…”