@article{vann_suchoff_machacek_cheek_whitley_2021, title={Tobacco injury and sucker control efficacy following applications of pelargonic acid}, volume={7}, ISSN={["2374-3832"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/cft2.20086}, DOI={10.1002/cft2.20086}, abstractNote={Core Ideas}, number={1}, journal={CROP FORAGE & TURFGRASS MANAGEMENT}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Vann, Matthew C. and Suchoff, David H. and Machacek, Jeremy L. and Cheek, Joseph A. and Whitley, D. Scott}, year={2021} }
 @article{vann_cheek_machacek_whitley_moody_council_hartley_green_2020, title={First report of cigar tobacco production in western North Carolina}, volume={6}, ISSN={["2374-3832"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/cft2.20063}, DOI={10.1002/cft2.20063}, abstractNote={Over the last two decades, burley tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) production has declined by 5,300 acres in western North Carolina (North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 2005; USDA-NASS, 2019). The loss of burley tobacco has left a void in the agricultural economy. Cigar wrapper tobacco types, such as Pennsylvania seedleaf (PA41) and Connecticut broadleaf, may be suitable replacements for burley because of their overlapping production practices. Cigar tobacco has not been produced in western North Carolina; therefore, knowledge gaps exist regarding its growth habits in the region. The objective of this study was to quantify the days to flower removal, yield, and grade distribution of six cigar tobacco varieties. In 2019, experiments were initiated at the Mountain Research Station in Waynesville, NC (35.48N, –82.96W) and the Upper Mountain Research Station in Laurel Springs, NC (36.39N, –81.30W). Treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design replicated four times. Plots consisted of a single row measuring 4 by 33 ft with a planting density of 7,260 plants acre–1. At each location, three PA41 varieties (‘Eshbach’, ‘Grower's Choice’, and ‘Welk's Pride’) and three Connecticut broadleaf varieties (‘B2’, ‘D1’, and ‘PAB’) were compared. Tobacco was transplanted on 31 May in Waynesville and 6 June in Laurel Springs. Plants were deflowered at CORESTA growth stage 65 (CORESTA, 2019), leaving 18 to 20 leaves per plant. Twenty plants per plot were then stalk-cut 2.5 wk later and air-cured according to existing burley recommendations (Swetnam & Bailey, 2019). Once cured, the leaves were stripped from the stalk and classified into wrapper (uniform color and structure, free of holes, >9 inches wide), binder (the same qualities as wrapper but with no more than two holes on one side of the leaf), straight strip (leaf that is not classified as wrapper or binder), or filler grades (small, inconsistent in color, moldy, rotten, or damaged). Data for days to deflowering, yield per acre, and grade distribution were subject to ANOVA via the PROC GLIMMIX procedure (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Within each analysis, replication was considered as a random factor, whereas variety and tobacco type were fixed factors. Treatment means were reported as least square means. Contrast statements were used to compare PA41 and Connecticut broadleaf types. Variety means within each type were separated by Fisher's Protected LSD at P ≤ .05. Figures were created using Sigma Plot (Systat Software, Inc., San Jose, CA). At Waynesville (P < .001) and Laurel Springs (P < .001), PA41 yielded more than Connecticut broadleaf by 684 to 1,164 lb acre–1, depending on the location (Figure 1a). Days to flower removal was also significant at both locations (P < .001), with PA41 varieties requiring 10 to 12 additional days to reach this stage of management (Figure 1b). Cured leaf grades were less consistent, as tobacco type was only significant for wrapper at Waynesville (P = .039) and binder at Laurel Springs (P = .002). The frequency of wrapper grade was extremely low, regardless of the type or location (0.5–5.3%), although PA41 produced more wrapper than Connecticut broadleaf in Waynesville (3.4% vs. 0.5%, respectively) (Figure 1c). Binder grades were more prevalent in Connecticut broadleaf at Laurel Springs (Figure 1d). Designations of straight strip and filler were not influenced by tobacco type at either of the locations (Figure 1e,f). Cured leaf yield and days to flower removal were similar within each tobacco type at Laurel Springs (Table 1). The same observations were made for wrapper, binder, and filler grades (Table 1). Eshbach produced a smaller percentage of straight strip grades relative to Grower's Choice (Table 1); however, straight strip grades were similar within Connecticut broadleaf varieties (Table 1). In contrast, cured leaf yield differed between PA41 and Connecticut broadleaf varieties at the Waynesville location. Within the PA41 varieties, Grower's Choice had a higher yield than Welk's Pride, with Eshbach being intermediate (Table 2). The yield potential of PAB was greater than that of D1 and B2 within the Connecticut broadleaf type (Table 2). Days to flower removal and grade distribution were similar among varieties within each tobacco type at this location (Table 2). Direct comparisons of these tobacco types and varieties have not been reported; therefore, this information is novel and provides useful insights to stakeholders as cigar tobacco is offered as an alternative to burley tobacco. Cigar tobacco production will not occur without substantial change and education. For example, deflowering may occur 2 wk earlier in cigar production, with fewer leaves remaining on the plant relative to burley (12–14 vs. 18–20). Farmers will also have to harvest and handle cigar tobacco much more delicately than burley to reduce physical leaf damage. The adoption of pesticide application programs that are more proactive than what is allowed by current practices will also be required. The failure to produce substantial proportions of wrapper grades in our study is a reflection of having too many leaves per plant, reactive pest control, and aggressive handling. Each of these factors will be addressed in later field studies and shared with farmers at Extension events. In addition, other research agronomists should consider that the current practices used to evaluate burley tobacco trials may not prove suitable for cigar and they should therefore be adapted accordingly. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.}, number={1}, journal={CROP FORAGE & TURFGRASS MANAGEMENT}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Vann, Matthew C. and Cheek, Joseph A. and Machacek, Jeremey L. and Whitley, D. Scott and Moody, Chad and Council, John and Hartley, Michael and Green, Benjamin}, year={2020} }