Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of potato production best management practices

  • Published:
American Journal of Potato Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A 2001 survey indicated that many growers are reluctant to adopt research-based recommendations because of a perception that it is not practical or applicable to their specific farming operation. Other growers, however, appear to adopt these practices successfully. Highlighting “model” growers is a method that can be used to field-test research findings and facilitate grower adoption. The objectives of this project were to: 1) establish field demonstrations with potato (Solariumtuberosum L.) growers who generally follow researchbased best management practices (BMPs); 2) establish plots within each field to compare BMPs with a high input, maximum yield management (MYM) approach; and 3) enhance grower confidence regarding researchbased BMPs. Fourteen field trials were conducted in the Pacific Northwest during 2002-2005. Five replicates of BMP and MYM plots were established in each field. The BMPs consisted of sampling, scouting, and use of prediction models to aid in determining rate and timing of inputs to maximize returns. In contrast, the MYM approach was based on tradition and calendar timing, with a near zero tolerance for pest and nutrient limitations. The MYM plots had 1.7 to 13.2% more fertilizer and pesticide costs than the BMP plots. The MYM treatments resulted in significant marketable yield increases in three fields and decreases in two fields, with the remaining nine fields and the combined average of all 14 fields being statistically equivalent. When factoring in estimated costs, only two fields resulted in a monetary advantage with MYM treatment. In contrast, the BMP treatment resulted in significant increases in net crop value in five fields, as well as the combined average of all 14 fields ($200 ha-1 or 3.2%). These field demonstrations, along with associated field days and grower meetings, have resulted in many documented changes in grower practices towards BMPs, with many more undocumented changes probable.

Resumen

Un estudio que se hizo el 2001 indica que muchos agricultores son renuentes a adoptar las recomendaciones basadas en la investigación, debido a una percepción poco práctica o aplicable a sus operaciones de cultivo. Otros, sin embargo, parecen adoptar exitosamente estas prácticas. El destacar a los agricultores “modelo” es un método que pude ser usado para probar en el campo los resultados de la investigación y facilitar su adopción. Los objetivos de este proyecto fueron: 1) hacer demostraciones de campo con los agricultores que cultivan papa (Solarium tuberosum L.) que emplean generalmente las mejores prácticas de mane jo (BMPs) basadas en investigación; 2) establecimiento de parcelas dentro de cada campo las BMPs con gastos altos, un enfoque de manejo máximo de rendimiento (MYM); 3) incremento de la confianza del agricultor referida a los BMPs basados en investigación. Catorce pruebas de campo se realizaron el Pacñfico Nor Occidental durante 2002-2005. Cinco repeticiones de BMP y de MYM se hicieron por parcela en cada campo. Los BMPs consistieron de muestreos, exploración y uso de modelos de predicción para ayudar a determinar la tasa y registro de gastos para alcanzar el máximo de ganancia. Contrariamente, el enfoque MYM estuvo basado en la tradición y distributión del tiempo, con tolerancia cero para problemas de pestes y nutrientes. Las parcelas MYM recibieron 1.7 a 13.2% de gastos en fertilizantes y pesticidas que las parcelas BMP. Los tratamientos resultaron en aumento significativo de rendimiento comerciable en tres campos disminución con los restantes nueve y el promedio combinado de los 14 campos estadñsticamente equivalentes. Cuando se factorizó en gastos estimados, sólo dos campos resultaron en ventaja monetaria con el tratamiento MYM. Contrariamente, el tratamiento BMP dio como resultado un incremento significativo en cinco campos, asñ como el promedio combinado de todos los 14 campos ($200 ha-1 o 3.2%). Estas demostraciones de campo, junto con los asociados dñas de campo y reuniones de agricultores, han dado como resultado muchos cambios documentados en el proceder de los agricultores hacia los BMPs, con cambios probables no documentados.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Dean B. 1994. Managing the Potato Production System. The Hawthorn Press, Inc., Binghamton, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flint M. 1986. Integrated Pest Management for Potatoes in the Western United States. Western Regional IPM Project. University of California Publication #3316.

  • Gardener H, T Jackson and L Fitch. 1985. Irrigated potatoes, Columbia Basin and Malheur County. FG 57. Oregon State Univ Ext Serv, Corvallis, OR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins BG, DA Horneck, MJ Pavek, PP Patterson, JS Miller, PJS Hutchinson, NL Olsen, JW Ellsworth, JM Alvarez, SL Hafez and H Neibling. 2007. Best Management Practices for Sustainable Potato Production in the Pacific Northwest. University of Idaho, PNW Publ. (In Press).

  • Lang NS, RG Stevens, RE Thornton, WL Pan and S Victory. 1999. Potato Nutrient Management Guide for Central Washington. Wash. State Bull. #1871.

  • Kleinschmidt GD, GE Kleinkopf, DT Westermann and JC Zalewski. 1984. Specific Gravity of Potatoes. Univ. Idaho CIS 609, Moscow, ID.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). December 2002. Potato Stocks. Agricultural Statistics Board, USDA. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). December 2003. Potato Stocks. Agricultural Statistics Board, USDA Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). December 2004. Potato Stocks. Agricultural Statistics Board, USDA. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). December 2005. Potato Stocks. Agricultural Statistics Board, USDA. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powelson ML, KB Johnson and RC Rowe. 1993. Management of diseases caused by soilborne pathogens.In: R Rowe (ed), Potato Health Management. St. Paul, MN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe R (ed). 1993. Potato Health Management. APS Press, St. Paul, MN.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute. 1990. SAS/Stat & User’s Guide. Version 6. SAS Inst., Cary, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark JC, and SL Love (eds). 2003. Potato Production Systems. University of Idaho Ag Commun, Moscow, ID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark JC, DT Westermann and BG Hopkins. 2004. Nutrient Management Guidelines for Russet Burbank Potatoes. Univ of Idaho Bull. #840, Moscow, ID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zehnder G, M Powelson, R Jansson and K Raman. 1994. Advances in Potato Pest Biology and Management. APS Press, St. Paul, MN.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryan G. Hopkins.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hopkins, B.G., Horneck, D.A., Pavek, M.J. et al. Evaluation of potato production best management practices. Amer J of Potato Res 84, 19–27 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02986295

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02986295

Additional Key Words

Navigation