Effect of Market Channel, Farm Scale, and Years in Production on Mid-Atlantic Vegetable Producers\u27 Knowledge and Implementation of Good Agricultural Practices

Foodborne illnesses associated with fresh produce have dramatically increased within the last decade. Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) were developed to address potential sources of pre-harvest microbial contamination, but certification remains low. The majority of mid-Atlantic vegetable farms are fresh market, but limited information is available about what on-farm production practices are being utilized to mitigate food safety risks. Our goal was to assess Maryland and Delaware vegetable producers\u27 understanding and implementation of GAP. An electronic survey on pre-harvest production practices was administered at commercial grower meetings in 2010 and 2013. A total of 313 surveys were analyzed, and Probit regression was used to estimate the average marginal effects of farm scale, years in production and market channel on the probability of using different on-farm food safety practices. Generally, food safety practices did not differ across farm scale or years in production. However, market channel did influence a grower\u27s decision to implement some food safety practices. Growers who marketed their produce primarily through wholesale channels were more likely to: have written policies for how they grew and handled their produce, test their irrigation water at least once a year for microbial contamination, or be GAP-certified. Economic constraints were not reported as the primary obstacle for GAP implementation in either survey. While more research is needed to better understand how market channel influences decision-making activities including on-farm food safety practices, this study highlights the complexity of the issue and the need for GAP educational programs to expand beyond a one-size-fits-all approach

Effect of Market Channel, Farm Scale, and Years in Production on Mid-Atlantic Vegetable Producers' Knowledge and Implementation of Good Agricultural Practices

Foodborne illnesses associated with fresh produce have dramatically increased within the last decade. Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) were developed to address potential sources of pre-harvest microbial contamination, but certification remains low. The majority of mid-Atlantic vegetable farms are fresh market, but limited information is available about what on-farm production practices are being utilized to mitigate food safety risks. Our goal was to assess Maryland and Delaware vegetable producers' understanding and implementation of GAP. An electronic survey on pre-harvest production practices was administered at commercial grower meetings in 2010 and 2013. A total of 313 surveys were analyzed, and Probit regression was used to estimate the average marginal effects of farm scale, years in production and market channel on the probability of using different on-farm food safety practices. Generally, food safety practices did not differ across farm scale or years in production. However, market channel did influence a grower's decision to implement some food safety practices. Growers who marketed their produce primarily through wholesale channels were more likely to: have written policies for how they grew and handled their produce, test their irrigation water at least once a year for microbial contamination, or be GAP-certified. Economic constraints were not reported as the primary obstacle for GAP implementation in either survey. While more research is needed to better understand how market channel influences decision-making activities including on-farm food safety practices, this study highlights the complexity of the issue and the need for GAP educational programs to expand beyond a one-size-fits-all approach.Adalja2_Effect.pdf: 177 downloads, before Aug. 1, 2020

Pumpkin Production Guide (NRAES 123)

This 152 page publication (NRAES-123) was originally published by the Natural Resource, Agriculture, and Engineering Service (NRAES, previously known as the Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service), a multi-university program in the Northeast US disbanded in 2011. Plant and Life Sciences Publishing (PALS) was subsequently formed to manage the NRAES catalog. Ceasing operations in 2018, PALS was a program of the Department of Horticulture in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (CALS) at Cornell University. PALS assisted university faculty in publishing, marketing and distributing books for small farmers, gardeners, land owners, workshops, college courses, and consumers.Twelve chapters, 115 color photos, 20 illustrations, 26 tables, a key to disease identification, and a glossary. Discusses groundbreaking insight into fruit set and pollination to help growers maximize yields and maintain post harvest quality

Number of isolates by year and collection location used in this study.

<p>Top: each line represents a lineage (dotted line [US-8, n = 29], dashed line [US-11, n = 27], solid line [US-23, n = 167], dotted line with dashes [US-24, n = 36]). Bottom: collection location of isolates by lineage. In some cases, map markers represent multiple isolates collected from that location.</p

Neighbor-joining tree of US-24 isolates.

<p>Bootstrap values below 50% are not shown. Taxa are labeled by isolate code: collection year: collection state: host (P = potato, T = tomato, NA = information not available).</p

Principal component analysis of all 257 isolates used in the GBS study.

<p>Lineages are indicated by diamonds (US-8), squares (US-11), triangles (US-23), and x marks (US-24).</p

Neighbor-joining tree of US-11 isolates.

<p>Bootstrap values below 50% are not shown. Taxa are labeled by isolate code: collection year: collection state: host (P = potato, T = tomato). Isolates that showed variation in their SSR profile are indicated by.V following their isolate code. Technical replicates are indicated by cntl (for control) and an additional sample identifier following their isolate code</p

Neighbor-joining tree of all 166 US-23 individuals, color-coded by collection year.

<p>97% of US-23 isolates were collected from 2011 through 2014. Isolates collected in 2011 (blue) and 2012 (black) are consistently scattered throughout the tree. Isolates collected in 2013 (red) and 2014 (green) group strongly together. <b>A.</b> Group of 11 isolates collected in 2014 from six states (MA, NY, VA, NC, FL, and ID). <b>B.</b> Group of 17 isolates, 14 of which were collected in 2013 from eight states (ME, RI, MA, NY, PA, OH, IN, and WI). The remaining three isolates in this group were collected in 2011 (NY and PA) and 2012 (PA).</p