SJABY

Ohio IFD@i?ns[ts9 AssoensiftDooi] EBonDDcsG&m

10 >^3

Number 680 Harry K. Tayama, Editor- June, 1986

A Regional Comparison Of The Flowering Plant Industry:Ohio Vs. Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, And The United States

A nationwide survey of theflowering plant industry wasconducted in 1985, by theGreenhouse OperationsManagement Team in theDepartment of Horticulture atThe Ohio State University. Thepurpose of this survey was toobtain an improvedunderstanding of industryproduction and marketingpractices. Business demographics,crop marketing information, andproduct mix data were collectedduring Phase I of the GreenhouseOperations Management Project.The following demographic andproduction/marketing profile ofthe flowering plant industrycompares respondents from Ohiowith those of competing floweringplant firms in Illinois, Michigan,Pennsylvania, as well asrespondents from the entireUnited States.

For purposes of this research, theflowering plant industry isidentified as firms that producepotted flowering plants, beddingplants, and/or flowering hangingbaskets. A mail survey was usedto determine: 1) number of yearsin flowering plant production, 2)number of full-time employees, 3)total square feet devoted to

Sandra L. BornThomas L. PrinceDepartment of HorticultureThe Ohio State University2001 Fyffe CourtColumbus, OH 43210

David A. SchillingDepartment of Management ScienceThe Ohio State University1775 College RoadColumbus, OH 43210

John G. SeeleyDepartment of Floriculture and

Ornamental HorticultureCornell UniversityIthaca. NY 14850

flowering plant production, 4)channels of distribution, and 5)the mix of potted crops beinggrown on a regular basis. Thesurvey was distributed to over1,200 flowering plant growersacross the United States; over 800(67%) were returned. Thefollowing regional profile of theflowering plant industry is basedon the respondents of that survey.

INDUSTRY DEMOGRAPHICS

Years in Production

Businesses that had been inflowering plant production lessthan 10 years were categorized as'new,' those in operation between10 and 60 years were consideredto be 'established,' and those inbusiness over 60 years weretermed 'third generation.' Theresults of the survey indicate thatjust over 25% of the growers inOhio are 'new' to the industrywhich corresponds with thenational average. Illinois,Michigan, and Pennsylvania arewell below that with 16, 14, and12%, respectively (Figure 1). Themajority of all respondents,nationwide, fall into the categoryof 'established' firms. The 'thirdgeneration' operations accountedfor 13% of the flowering plantproducers in Ohio, close to theU.S. average of 12%, while 25% ofthe respondents from Illinois werein the category of 'thirdgeneration' operations.

Number of Employees

Two-thirds of the surveyrespondents from Ohio had fewerthan 5 full-time employees, whichclosely corresponds withbusinesses from Michigan.Nationwide, just over half of theproducers of flowering plants hadfewer than 5 full-time employees.The survey results from Illinois

indicate that 30% of the firms hadmore than 20 employees, whichwas almost twice the nationalaverage of 16%.

Size of Production Facility

Production facilities werecategorized according to thesquare feet of bench spacedevoted to flowering plantproduction. Small firms werethose that had less than 25,000square feet. Medium sizeoperations had between 25,000and 100,000 square feet.Greenhouse with 100,000 to500,000 square feet wereconsidered large, while thosewith over 500,000 square feet ofbench space in flowering plantproduction were classified as verylarge. Over half of the growers inOhio and Pennsylvania wereinvolved in small productionoperations, compared to 43% ofthe growers in the U.S. as awhole (Figure 2). In the categoryof medium-sized firms, the resultswere very uniform across the 4states that were compared,ranging from 35% to 38%, andwere close to the nationalaverage. Ohio had fewer largeand very large flowering plantproducers than Illinois, Michigan,or Pennsylvania. Illinois andMichigan were about equal in thelarge category, while Illinois wasmore than double the other statesand the national average in thevery large category.

Distribution Channels

A distribution channel is aninterdependent system ofproducers, wholesalers, andretailers providing the ultimateconsumer with floral products andservices. There are three majorchannels for distributingflowering plants: 1) from the

Page 2 Ohio Florists' Association

producer to retail florists andgarden centers, 2) from theproducer to mass market outlets,and 3) from the producer directlyto the consumer. If 60% or moreof the flowering plants producedby a grower were distributedthrough one channel, that wasconsidered to be the primarychannel of distribution for thatfirm.

Among the states compared, thepercent of respondents whodistributed their product to retailoutlets was fairly uniform,ranging from 29% to 37% (Figure3). Ohio ranked the lowest with29% of the respondentsdistributing primarily to retailoutlets, Michigan the highestwith 37%, while the U.S. averagewas 34% of all the respondentfirms in the country.

Mass markets were the majorchannel of distribution for 11% ofthe respondents surveyed. Ohio,Michigan, and Pennsylvania hadfewer than the average, with only2% of the Michigan producersmarketing their flowering plantsthrough mass market outlets.Illinois had the most with 19% ofgrowers surveyed.

The most prevalent method ofdistribution used by Ohio growerswas direct-to-consumer,accounting for over one-third ofthe survey respondents from Ohio.Illinois with 38% did slightlymore direct-to-consumer thanOhio. The other states as well asproducers nationwide did less, theaverage being 27%.

Firms that split their productdistribution over 2 or 3 channelswere considered to have a mixedmarketing strategy. This type ofstrategy was employed by overone-fourth of the Ohiorespondents, which closelycorresponds with the industry as

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A Regional Comparison Of The FloweringPlant Industry: Ohio Vs. Illinois,Michigan, Pennsylvania, And TheUnited States 1

Metalaxyl Spike For The Control OfPythium Root Rot Of Poinsettia,Chrysanthemum, And Easter Lily 3

Evaluation Of Neem Extract, A NaturalPlant Product, For Leafminer ControlOn Chrysanthemum 7

Permission is herebygiven to reprintarticles appearing here,provided credit isgiven to Ohio Florists' Association.

a whole. Only 14% of the growersin Illinois use this strategy.

Product Mix

The survey of the flowering plantindustry also ascertained thetypes of flowering plantsproduced. From a list of 63 majorflowering plant crops, the growersindicated the crops beingproduced. For this research, acrop was determined by thefollowing: 1) common name, 2)container size, and 3) specificcultural practice used to producethe crop, i.e. pinched vs.unpinched poinsettia. From thesurvey data, the number ofindividual crops produced wascomputed, as well as the numberof 4- and 6-inch potted crops fromeach firm. The following statisticsprovide a product mix profile ofthe industry, indicating thespecialization and diversificationof flowering plant production ineach state.

Crop Specialization/Diversification

The individual Ohio firms, ingeneral, produced between 14 and18 different potted crops, whilethe U.S. average was between 18and 20, indicating that Ohiogrowers were slightly morespecialized than the industry as a

PERCENT OF

• • SP0N0ENTS

ioo r

Figure 1

YEARS IN PRODUCTION

THIRD GE*RAtI0N

URITY

Figure 3

PRIMARY CHANNEL OF

DISTRIBUTION FOR FLOWERING PUNTS

PERCENT OF

RESPONDENTS

mRETAIL HASS K4BCET 0IRIC'

CHANNEL OF 0ISTRIBUT

~ - I

Bulletin No. 680, June, 1986

whole. Pennsylvania and Illinoiswere the most diversified of thestates compared, with producersin those states growing between18 and 24 different crops.Although the averages indicatedthat Ohio was somewhat morespecialized than the other states,certain firms in Ohio wereproducing as many as 48 differentpotted crops, more crops thanfirms in any other state in thiscomparison.

The analysis of 4-inch potted cropproduction also indicated thatOhio growers, on the average,were producing fewer 4-inch croptypes than the other statescompared (Figure 4). Ohiogrowers produced 4 to 6 different4-inch potted crops, while theproducers in Illinois andPennsylvania produced as manyas 8 different crops. Again,although the averages suggestedfewer types of 4-inch crops inOhio, some Ohio firms wereproducing as many as 17 different4-inch potted crops throughoutthe year. Ohio had the fewest andIllinois the greatest number ofcrops being grown in 6-inch pots.These data do not reflect theactual number of pots produced,but indicate the number ofdifferent crops produced.

Figure 2

BENCH AREA IN

FLOWERING PLANT PRODUCTION

PERCENT OF

•• POHDENTS

60 r

SIZE OF PRODUCTION FACILITY

Figure 4

FLOWERING PUNT INDUSTRY

PRODUCT MIX

4- CROPS

CONTAINER SIZES

Ohio Florists' Association

SUMMARY

The regional demographic,marketing, and product mixanalysis of the flowering plantindustry has provided benchmarkstatistics for Ohio producers, aswell as the industry at large. By

Sandra L. Born

comparing Ohio producers withproducers in neighboring statesand the U.S. as a whole, Ohiogrowers can more easily assesstheir current position in theindustry and define theirproduction/marketing strengthsand weaknesses. The

Bulletin No. 680, June, 1986 Page 3

dissemination of this type ofinformation helps to improvecommunications among allsegments of the industry, andhelps provide a healthycompetitive environment for theindustry, which benefits allconsumers.

Thomas L. Prince David A. Schilling John G. Seeley

Metalaxyl Spikes For The Control Of Pythium Root RotOf Poinsettia, Chrysanthemum, And Easter Lily

Most pot grown greenhouse flowercrops are subject to root rotcaused by one or more of the

species ofPythium watermold fungus.The disease is

relativelycommon. Rootenvironments of

potted plantsare often

conducive to the development ofdisease because of low aerationlevels, excessive wettness, and/orstressful temperatures. Inaddition, roots stressed by solublesalt toxicity may be more subjectto infection by Pythium. Thiscondition is often induced byexcessive drying betweenwaterings.

Pythiums are widespreadcontaminants of soils and somepotting media. Failure to properlysanitize potting media prior to usewill often lead to Pythium rootrot. Poor greenhouse sanitation,splashing water and soil from potto pot, use of old pots and flats,etc. can all lead to this disease.

Since Pythium root rot is socommon, it remains a constantthreat to the production ofhealthy potted ornamental crops.Most growers use soil fungicidesto protect their crops. Several

C. C. Powell

C. C. PowellDepartment of Plant PathologyThe Ohio State University2021 CoffeyRoadColumbus, OH 43210

fungicides are registered forPythium root rot control. They areapplied to the potting media asincorporated granules, drenches,or top dressed granules. Suchapplication methods are effective,but difficult to carry out properly.Drenching entails time and greatquantities of water (sometimesmore than 10,000 gallons peracre). Granulars are often appliedunevenly, resulting in some potswith ineffective or damagingdosages.

Several months ago, we initiateda series of trials to evaluate theeffectiveness of metalaxylfungicide incorporated into a 6.0gram fertilizer spike. The spike isdesigned to be placed into the soilat the time the plants are placedinto the pot. It provides a starterfertilizer consisting of 3-2-2(N-P-K) as well as a dose ofmetalaxyl fungicide. Theadministered dose of fungicide inthe pot via this spike deliverysystem should be constant. Inaddition, it is relatively easy toapply.

Metalaxyl in other formulations iscurrently registered and highlyeffective for control of Pythiumroot rot diseases on pottedornamental crops. The objective ofthese tests was to determine ifmetalaxyl in a spike would be assafe and effective at providingcontrol of root rot as otheravailable formulations. Also, wewished to see if the protectionafforded from a single applicationwould last for the duration of the

pot crop's life. Poinsettias,chrysanthemums, and Easterlilies were treated, inoculatedwith Pythium at varying periodsafter treatment, and observed atmaturity for freedom fromchemical damage and root rotdisease.

PART I.

POINSETTIAS

Methods: Rooted poinsettiacuttings (cv Annette Hegg DarkRed) were potted into 6-inch potscontaining a steamed 1:1 soikpeatpotting mix on October 10, 1985.All treatments were made onOctober 14, 1985. One 6.0 gramspike was placed into the soil ineach pot at the edge of the rootsemerging from the cutting'srooting medium. Two, four, andeight weeks after treatment,plants in each of the treatmentswere challange inoculated with P.ultimum cultures growing on soilcontaining potato pieces. Theinoculum was finely ground andinserted into holes made in theroot balls at two different spots ineach pot. The pots were placed instanding water (in saucers) for 48hours after treatment. There were10 plants per treatment for eachof the inoculation groups and thecontrol group. Plants were grownaccording to normal procedures inour research greenhouses. Thisincluded constant fertilization(200 ppm N) at each wateringwith 20-20-20 soluble fertilzer(Peter's).

Observations and discussion:Three root rot evaluations were

Page 4 Ohio Florists' Association

made on the various inoculationgroups (Tables 1-4). Roots wereobserved in the pot and afterwashing soil from roots at the endof the experiment. The followingwas noted:

1) The treatments did not appearto be phytotoxic (Table 1).

2) In all inoculation groups,fertilizer spikes withoutfungicide appeared to result inmore development of disease.The reasons for this areunknown. It may have been

Table 1. Root rot ratings of non-inoculated poinsettiiis.

Treatment Results On 12/18/85

No treatment 3.56 A*

3-2-2A Fertilizer spike 3.11 Aonly

3-2-2A plus 0.3* A.I. 2.67 Ametalaxyl

3-2-2A plus 0.5* A.I. 2.67 Ametalaxyl

3-2-2B plus 0.3% A.I. 3.56 Ametalaxyl

3-2-2B Fertilizer spike 2.89 Aonly

2 oz/100 gal metalaxyl 2.89 A2E drench

1 oz/100 gal metalaxyl 3.44 A2E drench

12oz/l,000sq ft 3.44 Ametalaxyl 5Gtop dressed on soil

that the fertilizer spikeresulted in more rootbranching and root tipdevelopment. Thus, increasedsites were present for thePythium to infect. It also couldhave resulted from localizedareas of high soluble saltsresulting from initialplacement of the spike.

The fungicide was significantlyeffective in protecting the rootsfrom disease in the treatmentsinoculated at both 2 weeks and4 weeks after treatment

Bulletin No. 680, June, 1986

(Tables 2 and 3). Metalaxylwas equally effective whetherapplied as a drench, topdressed as a granular, orinserted into the potting mediavia the spike.

4) In the third inoculation group(Table 4). not much root rotdeveloped between the date ofinoculation and theobservation of the crop atmaturity. However, anon-significant protectivetrend was still noted in sometreatments.

Washed Roots Results

On 1/15/86

Table 2. Root rot results on poinsettiiis inoculated on 10 2!> 85. two wicks nitertreatment

Washed Hoots Results

Treatment Results On 1216/85 On 1/16/86

3.44 A*

3.44 A

3.44 A

3.11 A

3.67 A

3.89 A

3.33 A

3.67 A

3.67 A

No treatment

3-2-2A Fertilizer spikeonly

3-2-2A plus 0.3% A.I.metalaxyl

3-2-2A plus 0.5% A.I.metalaxyl

3-2-2B plus 0.3% A.I.metalaxyl

3-2-2B Fertilizer spikeonly

2 oz/100 gal metalaxyl2E drench

1 oz/100 gal metalaxyl2E drench

12 oz/1,000 sq ftmetalaxyl 5Gtop dressed on soil

2.22 B*

1.33 A

3.22 CD

2.67 BC

3.33 CD

2.11 B

3.00 CD

3.67 D

3.00 CD

2.78 B*

2.00 A

3.11 BC

2.89 C

3.11 BC

3.22 BC

3.11 BC

3.44 BC

3.67 C

Table 3. Root rot results on poinscttias inoculated on 11 12 85, four weeks aftertreatment

Washed Roots Results

Treatment Results On 12/16/85 On 1'15/86 On 1/16/86

Table -I. Root rot results on poinsettias inoculated on 12 9 85. eight weeks aftertreatment.

Washed Roots Results

Treatment Results On 1 15 8(i On I 1686

No treatment 2.11 BC

3-2-2A Fertilizer 1.33 Aspike only

3-2-2A plus 0.3% 2.78 DA.I. metalaxyl

3-2-2A plus 0.5% 2.56 CDA.I. metalaxyl

3-2-2B plus 0.3% 2.78 DA.I. metalaxyl

3-2-2B Fertilizer 1.78 ABspike only

2 oz/100 gal 2.89 Dmetalaxyl2E drench

1 oz/100 gal 2.78 Dmetalaxyl2E drench

12 oz/1,000 sq ft 2.67 CDmetalaxyl 5Gtop dressed on soil

2.22 B

1.44 A

2.78 BC

3.00 C

2.67 BC

2.22 B

3.33 C

3.22 C

3.22 C

2.78 BC*

2.00 A

2.89 BC

2.78 BC

3.11 BC

2.44 AB

3.00 BC

3.33 C

3.00 BC

No treatment 3.33 BC*

3-2-2A Fertilizer spike 2.11 Aonly

3-2-2A plus 0.3* A.I. 3.56 Cmetalaxyl

3-2-2A plus 0.5* A.I. 3.44 Cmetalaxyl

3-2-2B plus 0.3* A.I. 3.11 BCmetalaxyl

3-2-2B Fertilizer spike 3.00 BConly

2 oz/100 gal metalaxyl 3.00 BC2E drench

1 oz/100 gal metalaxyl 3.33 BC2E drench

12 oz/1,000 sq ft 2.78 Bmetalaxyl 5Gtop dressed on soil

3.56 C*

2.44 A

3.56 C

3.56 C

2.89 AB

2.78 A

3.44 BC

3.78 C

2.78 A

lVi°te: JtG !eutter(s) Allowing each average indicate the Duncan's New Multiple Range Groupings Averages5Jbeing^no^iseVsr6 ^ siSnificantly at the .05 level. Root rot was rated on a0-5 scale with