Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #1509
Subject: Cider Digest #1509, 10 June 2009
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #1509 10 June 2009
Cider and Perry Discussion Forum
Contents:
Dabinett leaf curl (Andrew Lea)
Biennialism (Andrew Lea)
repelling deer (Dick Dunn)
Re: biennial bearing (Dick Dunn)
NOTE: Digest appears whenever there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider#Archives
Digest Janitor: Dick Dunn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Dabinett leaf curl
From: Andrew Lea <andrew@HarpHill.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:18:33 +0100
Kevin wrote:
> So far, it seems to be showing the
> same behavior I saw with the first attempt - the leaves are already curling.
> I noticed that Andrew Lea's Science of Cidermaking article mentions that
> Dabinett needs lots of Potash. Does anyone (Andrew?) know if the behavior
> I'm seeing is consistent with Potash deficiency?
I don't regard myself as an orchard expert but Dabinett is peculiarly
susceptible to K+ deficiency and I have seen the dramatic results myself
when this has been induced by removal of a grass crop from young trees.
The leaves certainly do curl, but the diagnostic feature is the
'marginal scorch' i.e. brown edges to all the leaves, but especially the
older leaves on the extension shoots. Then they drop off completely.
Potassium sulfate would be a 'quick' remedial cure or even just a normal
'high potash feed' as used for tomatoes. Results may take a while to
show since potassium is not very mobile in soil I believe.
But you may have some other issue here.
Andrew Lea
www.cider.org.uk
------------------------------
Subject: Biennialism
From: Andrew Lea <andrew@HarpHill.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:42:40 +0100
David wrote:
> The genetics of apples means that there are significant differences in
> responses of varieties to thinning chemicals. Again, because of the
> genetics, these differences are confounded by differences in the
> appropriate timing of sprays in relation to phenology - commonly in
> relation to full bloom. Australian recommendations for instance
> indicate:
> Ammonium thiosulphate - apply at 80% full bloom (specifically for Royal Gala)
> NAA - 10-14 days after full bloom, to the top 2/3 of the tree
> Benzyladenine - 10-22 after full bloom, depending on variety
> Carbaryl - 7-28 days after full bloom: notes toxicity to Typhlodromus
> occidentalis and bees
> Working through the matrix of cider variety, chemical, timing, and
> then prevailing environmental conditions is a major undertaking.
> Anybody for a PhD project?
As some of you may know, the UK's now-defunct Long Ashton Research
Station put a lot of work into this in the context of cider apples in
the 1970's and 80's. According to Liz Copas, who managed the work in its
later years: "Carbaryl was an effective hormonal spray but is no longer
permitted under EU directives due to its potentially adverse
environmental effects and toxicity to birds, insects and mammals. There
are no hormonal fixes for biennial bearing at present [in the UK]. Most
good growers are able to keep crops coming by a combination of
stress-free and competition-free [weeds and grass] tree growth, good
renewal pruning practice done every other year at least, and a modicum
of NPK. The key is to maintain a balance between adequate vegetative
growth and fruiting."
I'm obviously a rotten grower since my trees are totally biennial now,
though as a hobbyist it hardly matters (and it gives me a breathing
space in alternate years!)
>
> If you accept the premise that apples have a
> substantial part of their flavour compounds in the outer few mms of
> skin/flesh, then perceived wisdom says that small apples with a higher
> surface to volume ratio contribute more flavour to cider than do
> larger apples. This being the case then there is arguably a case for
> letting your trees be biennial...
I'd love to see the evidence for that, David? Do you know of anything
documented?
Andrew
nr Oxford UK
------------------------------
Subject: repelling deer
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 19:12:53 -0600
Deer damage is a common problem for orchards. We don't see deer here very
often, so I've not had much chance to test until recently.
A few years ago we had an errant young buck find his way into the orchard
and start sampling. I panicked and looked all over for whatever repellents
were available, found one, applied it, and had no further problems that
year.
I continued applying it according to the most lenient (longest interval)
schedule through the growing seasons of succeeding years. Although I
saw no deer damage, I also saw no deer. So I'd begun to wonder if my
treatment was like granny's glass of water on the kitchen windowsill to
keep lightning away. ("It works! Never been hit by lightning!")
This spring I'd noticed what -looked- like insect damage on a few plants
around the place, but last Friday I caught on when I saw a deer running
up our fence line. (I'm slow but I pick up on subtle cues like that.)
So I hurried out and sprayed the repellent (which I had neglected so
far this spring) on all the trees in the orchard. Along the way I noted
various small bits of unwelcome pruning--the deer had been wandering around
sampling the young branches. Next day I checked and didn't see any more
obvious damage to the apples, but a few of our roses had been literally
"nipped in the bud", and I figured out that some damage to our peas was
also deer damage. So I sprayed everything likely to get hit, not just
apples. And no new damage Sunday...so, so far so good.
This morning (Monday) I looked out to see the deer contentedly grazing!...
but on grass nearby the trees. After chasing it off I checked carefully.
No new damage even on small trees fifteen feet from where he'd been.
So this is good enough for me to say the repellent really works.
I don't want to turn this into a brand-name testimonial, but what I've
used is called Liquid Fence. There might be other products with similar
formulations. The main ingredients are "putrescent egg solids" and
garlic. I'm pretty sure the rotten eggs are the key to the success,
because I've heard mixed results with garlic/capsaicin products.
(The other active ingredients are sodium lauryl sulfate, which I presume
is a spreading agent, and potassium sorbate. Yeah...a preservative?!?
Maybe to help the garlic retain its potency?)
Anyway, it works without anything particularly toxic; it -might- be
suitable for organic orchards I don't know. The one real caution is
to pay attention to wind direction when you're spraying! You do NOT
want it on you because it has a thoroughly disgusting smell, and is
persistent.
I'm curious to know several things:
* Anybody else have similar success with this stuff?
* Anybody have any -failures- with it?
* What other products (brand names) have similar formulations,
and do they work?
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
Subject: Re: biennial bearing
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 19:27:07 -0600
In the last CD, Jack O Feil commented on some thinning chemicals and
practice, ending with:
>...The thinning chemicals will be hard to come by as most states have
> restrictions of who can buy them.
But Sevin (carbaryl) is generally available, likely to remain so, and
is useful against some notable pests (eg codling moth) where you'd be
spraying at the same time as when it has its thinning effect. Might
this not be enough for home orchardists?
(ObCaution: Please don't use it at blossom time! And keep it away from
areas where honeybees are foraging at other plants!)
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #1509
*************************
