1. Adoption of agenda
Meeting commenced at 12:00pm and the agenda distributed by C. Mohler, NY, was approved by members present.
2. Introductions
The individuals present gave brief introductions.
3. Elect secretary for 2001 (to become chairperson 2002)
Eric Gallandt, ME, was elected Secretary for 2001, to become Chairperson in 2002. Responsibilities of the Secretary include (A) recording Minutes of the annual meeting and (B) submission of the Minutes from the Annual Meeting to the Chairperson one month from the date of the meeting (2001 Annual Meeting Minutes due March 11, 2001).
4. Approval of minutes of last years meeting
Minutes of the 2000 Meeting were approved.
5. Report from Administrative Advisor
Scott Angle reported that the Multistate Project, formerly NE-92, was inactive for 6 months but is now an approved 5 year project, NE-1000.
6. Clarification of reporting requirements for this year
Given the relatively recent initiation of NE-1000, participants questioned whether an annual report would be required; an annual report is required. The NE-1000 Chairperson is required to submit the Annual Report to the Administrative Advisor 3 months from the date of the Annual Meeting (2000 Annual Report Due May 11, 2001). Guidelines for reporting are available at the NERA website: SAES-422 "Format for Multistate Research Activity Accomplishments Report" (http://www.agnr.umd.edu/userforms/nera/annualForm.html).
The reporting period is based on the calendar year and therefore 2000 Annual Reports from PI's should cover the interval 10/00 through 12/00. C. Mohler, Chairperson, requested that PI's submit their Annual Reports to him by April 15, 2001. PI's were encouraged to include bulleted highlights of progress for easy access of accomplishments by the Chairperson and Administrative Advisor.
It was suggested by S. Angle, Administrative Advisor, that in future years PI's should bring their completed reports to the Annual Meeting. There was general agreement among participants present and this policy will be implemented for the 2001 reporting period.
Critical Mass
Generally a Regional Project is required to include 10-15 Scientists. Current participants in NE-1000 should consider inviting additional individuals to participate. Although considered a "Regional Project" the research can be National in scope and participants do not need to be located within the Northeast Region to join the project.
IFAFS
Noting that Regional Projects may be particularly well situated to address the goals of the IFAFS $150 million competitive grant program, S. Angle discussed the program and the potential for funding within the Northeast Region. The NE Region was particularly unsuccessful during the 2000 IFAFS funding cycle, with a NERA analysis indicating that many of the proposals from the Region failed to address critical extension and teaching objectives. These are implementation projects that must include outreach/extension, teaching, curriculum development as major efforts. Although the RFP has not been released, in 2001 only Land Grant Institutions are eligible and it is likely that the NE Region will have a greater success in this funding program. It was further noted that some level of priority will be given to underrepresented States (e.g., within the Northeast all Land Grant Institutions except Cornell, Penn State, and University of Maryland). To encourage participation in IFAFS proposal development it is likely that Experiment Station Directors will support travel for proposal writing efforts.
7. Report from CSREES Rep.
Jim Parochetti mentioned the CAR? and RAF? Pest Management Alternatives as potential funding sources for projected related to NE-1000. He further noted that regional research programs now have a stronger emphasis on extension. With the change in Administration funding increases are unlikely with the hope being to maintain current levels of funding [for pest management related research programs?]. This year all hatch and special grants will face a 0.22% reduction in funding. Information from Tom Bewick on the Methyl Bromide Alternatives grant program indicates a focus on weeds this year, with a focus on 'systems' to replace methyl bromide, probably not 'drop-in' substitutes for methyl bromide. Lastly Dr. Parochetti encouraged participants to contact him with any questions related to CSREES programs (202/401-4354; jparochetti@reeusda.gov).
8. Meeting location and format for next year
In future years NE-1000 participants should consider including a Registration Fee; this meeting room cost $200 for 4 hours, paid by MD Experiment Station (S. Angle). Discussion ensued regarding other options for the Annual Meeting which could be held as a separate event to allow more opportunity for presentations and discussion. In years past the members had met in Allentown, PA.
C. Mohler queried NE-1000 participants regarding the Annual Meeting location with greatest preference for holding the meeting in conjunction with the WSSA Annual Meeting (8 respondents) instead of the NEWSS Annual Meeting (3 respondents) or a separate meeting (1 respondent). Although there seemed to be general support for a separate NE-1000 Annual Meeting sometime in the future, the 2002 Annual Meeting will be held in conjunction with the WSSA Annual Meeting in Reno, NV. Participants should plan to travel on Friday, February 8, 2002, to attend a full-day meeting on Saturday, February 9, 2002. A registration fee will be required to cover the costs of a meeting room at the conference site. To avoid direct handling of registration fees the Secretary will work through the WSSA Local Arrangements Committee and Allen Marketing so participants can pay a registration fee when they register for the WSSA Annual Meeting. It was noted that this would be good time to recruit additional participants who are likely to be attending the WSSA Annual Meeting.
9. Outreach to other scientists
The need to maintain a critical mass within Multistate Projects was noted by S. Angle. The following scientists, whose research interests seem congruent with the objectives of NE-1000, were mentioned as individuals to contact: Rick Boydston, WA; Milt McGiffin, CA; Jerry Doll, WA; Ray William, OR; Clyde Elmore, CA. Also, a new position at Guelph will be filled by an individual who may be interested in NE-1000.
10. Publication of a book/booklet on use of cover crops/living mulches/crop residue for weed management.
Although not in the project outline there was discussion about summarizing the groups' progress to date related to cover crops and weed management. The following questions were raised:
a. How would this publication be unique relative to M. Sarrantonio's NE Cover Crop Handbook and the USDA National Cover Crop book (title?; 1990s?).
b. In past discussions of this topic it had been suggested that this would be a farmer/grower focused publication; could look to SARE to fund publication costs.
c. It was noted that such a publication would be a very positive reflection of the NE-1000 Participants efforts. C. Mohler will review other publications related to cover crops to see whether we have something unique to contribute. If so, C. Mohler will draft an outline with suggestions for authors of various sections.
11. Brief updates on research and publications continuing forward from the NE-92 project.
E. Beste, MD, described research related to a vetch/tomato system; purple vetch produced less biomass than lana wholly pod vetch (seed from Pleasant Valley). At seeding rates of 20, 40, and 60 lbs/A in a band around the tomato row produced 600-700 lbs/A dry vetch biomass resulting, in this year of ample rain, a slight depression in tomato yield and weed biomass.
C. Reberg-Horton, NC, is working with N. Creamer, NC, on the rye variety trial as a component of his Ph.D. research and will be presenting a paper at the WSSA. Noted was an effect of variety on allelochemical levels in one year but not the following. Based on bioassays 2 rye varieties were identified as highly phytotoxic. Three hundred rye accessions were planted in the fall of 2000 for evaluation in 2001.
J. Burton, NC, has been examining environmental effects on rye allelochemicals and will be presenting a paper on this work at the WSSA.
C. Mohler, NY, has conducted 2 years of rye variety trials without detecting differences [related to weed suppression], although bioassays with broomcorn millet, but not other bioassay species, has detected some varietal effects on phytotoxicity. Based on these bioassay results 'Wheeler' residues were phytotoxic whereas 'Wrens Abruzzi', and 'Winter Grazer' were not.
E. Beste, MD, noticed very different plant populations in his rye variety trial based on different seed sizes (140-200 plants/m of row).
R. Bellinder, NY, will be conducting one additional year of a rotation study including field corn, corn+clover intercrop, corn/wheat/pea/oat/vegetables (cabbage, snap beans, sweet corn). The vegetable crops are split to receive full herbicide rates, 1/2 herbicide rates, and management with cultivation alone. Another project mentioned included a study of the timing of interseeding cover crops in fall broccoli.
D. Doohan, OH, commented that J. Cardina, OH, had screened 25-30 ground covers for use in orchards, including subterranean clover.
E. Gallandt, ME, described a field study in which incorporated red clover reduced the establishment of several annual broadleaf weed species. Further, weed establishment was similarly reduced with two methods of incorporation (rototilled vs. spader).
12. Planning research for the 2001 growing season
During this session the NE-1000 participants present discussed details related to the experimental design of this objective. Rye was chosen as the cover crop instead of rye/hairy vetch. Tillage treatments will contrast chisel/disk vs. zone tillage. Rye will be killed by mowing at heading to prevent regrowth and enable movement of the residue into the crop row. Because movement would be difficult with a blade plow or undercut treatment this option was dropped. J. Cardina, OH, suggested, and there was general agreement, that the timing of residue movement should be a factor within the experiment. Suggested were the following: (a) residue not moved; (b) residue moved into the crop row at planting; (c) 2 leaf corn, 1st trifoliate soybean; (d) 4 leaf corn, 3rd trifoliate soybean, at "layby." It was further agreed that these treatments should be split to compare in-row residue effects where the in-row weeds were removed prior to residue movement vs. in-row weeds not removed but buried by the residue. Following residue movement into the crop row it should be compressed, mimicking the actions of a press wheel, to increase the residue "bulk density."
From a practical standpoint it was noted that these manipulations can be performed by hand (e.g., by raking residue).
All treatments would subsequently receive interrow cultivation.
Field trials at all sites will include both incorporated and surface residue treatments for comparison.
Meeting concluded 4:10 pm, Sunday, February 11, 2001.