Largest hemp research center in the U.S. to open at Oregon State University

Analytics firm Brightfield Group, which tracks the cannabis industry, expects the hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) market to grow from $618 million in 2018 to $22 billion by 2022. Because of the growing interest in hemp and its potential to become a major agricultural commodity, Oregon State University is creating the country’s largest research center devoted to the study of this crop.

Continue reading Largest hemp research center in the U.S. to open at Oregon State University

Monitoring is crucial for growing lettuce and leafy greens year round

Since lettuce and leafy greens have short production cycles, greenhouse growers need to stay focused if they want to be successful growing these crops year round.

The increasing demand for locally-grown vegetables is causing more field vegetable growers, ornamental plant growers and new growers to look at trying to satisfy this market. Cornell University horticulture professor Neil Mattson said he works with all three types of growers.

“I see both vegetable field growers and ornamental greenhouse growers trying to produce lettuce and leafy greens year round,” he said. “Both are quite common. Field vegetable growers are looking for a crop that can generate year-round cash flow. Ornamental growers are looking to fill their greenhouses in the off-season. A lot of ornamental growers no longer produce poinsettias in the fall or spring bulb crops and spring plant propagation that they would normally do in the winter. Growers could have as much as a six-month window when their facilities are not being used.”

Mattson said ornamental growers tend to better understand what it takes to grow a year-round crop.

“Ornamental growers tend to be aware of differences in crops and the problems that can arise,” he said. “They also understand the concept that there is much less light in the winter so they may have to consider using supplemental light. Ornamental growers are usually aware of the high cost of heating a greenhouse year round, especially during the winter.

“In general, field vegetable growers who have greenhouses, may only be using those structures in the spring to produce their transplants. That means they may be used to heating a couple months each year.”

 

Controlling environmental parameters

During this year’s Cultivate’16 conference and trade show in Columbus, Ohio, Mattson did a presentation on the year-round production of leafy greens using controlled environment agriculture (CEA). The main environmental conditions growers need to monitor and control include light, temperature and relative humidity.

 

Light

Mattson said in the northern half of the United States light availability during the winter months is the most difficult environmental issue to deal with when growing plants year round.

“The target light level for lettuce production is 17 moles of light per square meter per day (daily light integral, mol/m2/d) for optimal growth,” he said. “In most parts of the country achieving that target usually isn’t an issue during the summer. In the winter, in the northern part of the country, light levels can be 5 mol/m2/d on average and even 1-3 mol/m2/d is common. That is three to five times less light than what is needed for optimum lettuce growth during the winter.”

 

Photo 1, Lettuce overview 1, Neil Mattson, Cornell Univ.
The target light level for lettuce production is 17 moles of light per square meter per day (daily light integral) for optimal growth.
Photos courtesy of Neil Mattson, Cornell Univ.

 

Mattson said supplemental light, using LEDs or high pressure sodium lamps (See the Lamps Needed Calculator, can be provided to deliver higher light levels to increase lettuce biomass. But going above 17 mol/m2/d can cause growers to have issues with tip burn.

“In the case of head lettuce, a grower can go from seed to harvested head (5-6 ounces) in 35 days if there is 17 mol/m2/d. If there is only 8.5 mol/m2/d, it takes the plants twice as long to produce that same biomass.

“For baby leaf greens, if they are seeded and transplanted and grown on for two weeks before harvesting and only receive 8.5 moles of light, the plants will only produce half the yield. If a grower normally harvests 10 ounces per square foot and there is only half the light, the plants will produce only 5 ounces per square foot.”

Mattson said a rule of thumb for New York is a grower can light a 1-acre greenhouse and produce the same yields as not lighting a 3-acre greenhouse to produce the same yields during the winter months.

 

Temperature

Lettuce and many other leafy greens are cold tolerant. Mattson said a lot of growers want to grow them cold.

“The Cornell CEA research group proposes that these crops be grown at fairly warm temperatures so that they have the faster 35-day crop cycle,” he said. “This is based on having 17 mol/m2/d and a daily average temperature of 70ºF-75ºF during the day and 65ºF at night.

“During the winter the issue with temperature is paying to heat the greenhouse. It’s easy to control the temperature, growers just have to be willing to crank up the thermostat.”

Mattson said temperature can be really hard to control in southern climates in the U.S.

“Under hot conditions, temperatures in the 80s and 90s, head lettuce is going to bolt prematurely,” he said. “It can be difficult to drop the day temperature low enough to avoid early bolting.”

Beyond trying to reduce the air temperature, research done by the Cornell CEA group has shown that lowering the root zone temperature to 74ºF or less using chilled water can help prevent premature bolting.

“Chilling the root zone temperature allows growers to grow using warmer air temperatures by having the cooler water temperature,” Mattson said. “This is an effective way to chill the plants even when the air temperatures reach the 80s and 90s.”

Mattson said the biggest issue with warmer air temperatures occurs with lettuce and spinach. Warmer temperature and long day conditions can both cause spinach to experience premature bolting. Mattson said warmer temperatures can also promote Pythium root rot on spinach. Spinach is much more susceptible to this water mold than lettuce or other leafy greens.

“Chilling the root zone temperature can help to prevent the disease organism from developing as quickly as at warmer temperatures,” Mattson said. “If the root zone temperature can be kept cool, it won’t completely avoid the Pythium issue, but it will help control it.”

 

Pythium baby leaf spinach, Neil Mattson, Cornell Univ.
Cooling the root zone temperature won’t completely avoid Pythium disease, but it will help control it.

 

Pythium spinach closeup, Neil Mattson, Cornell Univ.
Close-up view showing Pythium root rot on spinach.

 

The Cornell CEA group found that the optimum root zone temperature for spinach was 64ºF-65ºF. At this temperature Pythium was deterred, but there was no crop delay. If the root zone temperature is lowered to 62ºF, plant growth is slowed.

 

Relative humidity

Mattson said the relative humidity for lettuce and leafy greens should be between 50-70 percent. He said the lower humidity helps to limit pathogen issues.

“High humidity favors powdery mildew and Botrytis,” he said. “High humidity also favors the physiological disorder tip burn. Tip burn is caused by a calcium deficiency. The higher the relative humidity the less transpiration occurs in the plant resulting in the plant not taking up an adequate amount of calcium.”

 

Lettuce tipburn, Neil Mattson, Cornell Univ.
High humidity favors the physiological disorder tip burn, which is caused by a calcium deficiency.

 

Mattson said a relative humidity lower than 50 percent can cause an outer leaf edge burn, which is a physiological disorder.

“This is a different disorder than tip burn caused by calcium deficiency,” Mattson said. “The outer leaves develop lesions where the veins end on the edge of the leaves. The lesions occur where the sap exudes out of the veins and then is reabsorbed by the plant and there is a kind of salt buildup.”

 

Fertilization, water quality

Although fertilization and water quality are not environmental parameters, growers can have issues with both if they don’t monitor them. Lettuce and leafy greens are not particularly heavy feeders compared to other greenhouse vegetables like tomatoes and other vine crops. Mattson said lettuce and leafy greens are relatively forgiving crops when it comes to fertilization.

“Growers need to monitor the nutrient solution every day in regards to pH and electrical conductivity (EC),” he said. “The reason for testing the nutrient solution at least daily is because in hydroponics the nutrient solution pH can change by one or two units in a day.”

Mattson said for container crops like petunia and geranium, pH does not usually change by more than one unit in a week. He said container growers may check the pH every week, and some may only do it every two weeks. But for hydroponics a grower needs to stay on top of changes in pH.

In addition to daily pH and EC monitoring, Mattson said a detailed elemental analysis of the nutrient solution is important.

“Periodically, about every four weeks, growers should send a sample of their nutrient solution to a testing lab to determine if the plants are absorbing nutrients in the proportions the growers expect,” he said. “Certain elements in the solution may decline over time and a grower may have to add more of these elements and less of others.”

Mattson said some systems, like CropKing’s Fertroller, have automated sensors which measure pH and EC in line so it’s a real time measurement. The controller makes the necessary adjustments.

“Typically if a grower is putting high alkalinity water into the system, the pH tends to creep up over time, so the controller automatically adds acid to reach a target pH,” he said. “Likewise, the machine does that with EC too. If the EC is going down because the plants are taking up nutrients, the controller adds fertilizer stock solution to reach a target EC.”

Mattson said iron deficiency due to high pH is the most common nutrient disorder he sees on lettuce and leafy greens. Occasionally magnesium deficiency occurs because the water source contains enough calcium, but not enough magnesium.

 

ca
Iron deficiency due to high pH is usually the most common nutrient disorder on lettuce and leafy greens.

 

“Many fertilizers don’t include calcium and magnesium, so growers can run into issues with magnesium deficiency,” he said. “Basil tends to have a high need for magnesium. We usually recommend basil be provided twice as much magnesium as lettuce.”

 

Photo 6, Basil magnesium deficiency, Neil Mattson, Cornell Univ.
Basil tends to have a high need for magnesium and usually should receive twice as much magnesium as lettuce.

 

Mattson said growers should test their water more frequently to determine if there have been any changes in the alkalinity of the water, including calcium, magnesium and sodium concentrations.

“In the Northeast this summer, we are experiencing a drought,” he said. “I’ve heard from growers who say the EC of their water is going up, which implies that some salt levels are going up. But we don’t know specifically which salts and that would be useful to know what specifically is changing.

“It really depends on their water quality. In particular, EC, alkalinity and whether there are any nutrients in high concentrations, like sodium, can be an issue. It really comes down to how long they are trying to capture and reuse the water. In our Cornell system we have traditionally grown in floating ponds. We use that same water cycle after cycle for several years. We can continually use the same water because we start with deionized water. However, even if the water has fairly low salt levels, using the same water will result in the accumulation of sodium to harmful levels over time.”

 

For more:
Neil Mattson, Cornell University
School of Integrative Plant Science, Horticulture Section
49D Plant Science
Ithaca, NY 14853
(607) 255-0621
nsm47@cornell.edu
https://hort.cals.cornell.edu/people/neil-mattson
http://www.cornellcea.com
http://www.greenhouse.cornell.edu

Cornell Controlled Environment Agriculture “Hydroponic Lettuce Handbook”

 

David Kuack is a freelance technical writer in Fort Worth, Texas; dkuack@gmail.com.

 

University of Arizona short course to focus on CEA for food production and environmental stewardship

University of Arizona short course

University of Arizona short course

University of Arizona Controlled Environment Agriculture Center’s (CEAC) 2016 short course will focus on controlled environment agriculture (CEA) for food production within traditional rural and non-traditional urban farms. There will be a special focus on water issues, energy use and environmental stewardship.

The 15th annual Greenhouse Crop Production & Engineering Design Short Course will be held March 20–25, 2016, at the Westward Look Resort in Tucson, Ariz. New to the 2016 event are specific half-day sessions on “Indoor Growing” and “Lighting for Growing Crops in CEA.”

The short course features a comprehensive program that will assist attendees to successfully produce crops within controlled environments and ensure those crops thrive and are marketable. Speakers and experts will be available to answer questions both during and after the short course. Included with the short course is an exhibitor room where attendees can talk with industry experts about their projects and multiple industry presentations where attendees can meet successful growers and discuss their ideas with them.

Webcast, DVD options

For people unable to travel to Tucson, the short course will feature a webcast option. Webcast attendees will have live access to three days (March 21-23) of short course lectures and materials. They will also be able to submit real-time questions for the speakers to answer. The program consists of six half-day sessions. Those interested in the webcast can register for individual half-day sessions. This allows attendees to choose those presentations they are specifically interested in viewing.

There is also an option to receive a DVD of the lectures if it is not possible to view the live lectures. All attendees have the option of purchasing a DVD of the speakers’ presentations with their registration. The presentations will be available to all paid attendees in an internet database for 90 days after the conclusion of the short course.

Hands-on workshops, optional greenhouse tour

Hands-on workshops are scheduled for March 24 at the University of Arizona’s CEAC research and educational facilities. Some workshops will focus on sensors, controls and fertigation. Other workshops will provide hydroponic production fundamentals for tomatoes, lettuce and strawberries grown in a controlled environment. The goal of the workshops is to connect theory and information with practical hands-on experience. On March 25, there will be an optional tour to a commercial greenhouse operation to tie together the short course presentations and workshops.

For more: Aaron Tevik, (520) 626-9566; atevik@cals.arizona.edu; http://ceac.arizona.edu/greenhouse-crop-production-engineering-design-short-course.

U_of_Arizona_logo

Indoor Harvest Corp Provides Update on CLARA Vertical Farm Project in Pasadena, Texas

Houston, Texas, June 25, 2015 — Indoor Harvest Corp (OTCQB:INQD), through its brand name Indoor Harvest™, is a design build contractor, developer, marketer and direct-seller of commercial grade aeroponic and hydroponic fixtures and supporting systems for use in urban Controlled Environment Agriculture and Building Integrated Agriculture. The Company is pleased to provide an update on the Pasadena, Texas Community Located Agricultural Research Area (“CLARA”) project.

On March 31, 2015 the Company announced the signing of a LOI with the City of Pasadena, Texas to fund the establishment and provisioning of an indoor agricultural facility (vertical farm) to be located in Pasadena, Texas. Under the LOI, the City was to provide Indoor Harvest, or a partner of their designation with City approval, with two facilities owned by the City for the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) per annum for a period not to exceed twenty (20) years as well as provide tax abatements on these properties for use in a CLARA project. In addition, the Pasadena Second Century Corp. (economic development entity for the City of Pasadena) has been asked by City officials to consider a budgetary proposal of $500,000 as seed money for the project’s economic development portion in north Pasadena.

Mr. Chad Sykes, Chief Executive Officer of Indoor Harvest, stated, “We’ve received a timeline for the project through the City. We’re currently in the final stages of drafting the MOU and expect to be in a position to begin work on the project as soon as August, based on the timeline provided by the City. All of the parties involved are working together to create an agriculture campus in Pasadena that we hope will become a model for the rest of the nation. By combining agricultural research, education and commercial operations in one campus, we’re working to build a foundation to turn North Pasadena into a leader in new, innovative agricultural trends. We’ve also begun discussions with several potential commercial partners and investors interested in locating operations at the CLARA campus. Although we don’t have any binding agreements, interest seems to be significant given the background and history of groups with whom we are discussing the project.”

The CLARA project, based on current negotiations, is expected to be divided into two phases. Phase One will focus on developing the non-profit aspects of the project and is envisioned to include the construction of a 6,000 sq. ft. vertical farm R&D facility and 6,000 sq. ft. of classroom and office space.  Phase Two is envisioned to support a commercial retail operation with greenhouses built on approximately two acres of land adjacent to the vertical farm and education centers.

The Phase One vertical farm facility is intended to serve dual roles, with Indoor Harvest using the facility as a demonstration farm and R&D facility and Harris County BUILD Partnership, a non-profit group, using the facility for educational and charitable purposes.  It is anticipated that the crops grown will be donated, or sold at cost, to provide fresh produce to low income families in the North Pasadena area.  The entire proposed campus area, almost two city blocks, will be designed and built to allow the flow of tourists without impacting operations. The City has been asked to develop a project overview to be presented in August to department heads at the Pasadena Independent School District’s Kirk Lewis Career & Technical High School and the Continuing and Professional Development Department of San Jacinto College regarding academic curriculum development to be located at the CLARA campus.

The Harris County BUILD Partnership was established in January 2015 to eliminate the conditions that cause food insecurity in north Pasadena by launching a new healthy, accessible, and community-supported local food system.  The conveners of the BUILD Partnership are the Houston Food Bank, the Harris County Public Health & Environmental Services (“HCPHES”) and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Additional members of the BUILD Partnership include CHI St. Luke’s Health, Memorial Hermann Health System, Brighter Bites, CAN DO Houston, City of Pasadena, Neighborhood Centers Inc., Pasadena Health Center and the U.T. School of Public Health.

The BUILD Partnership is an extension of Healthy Living Matters (HLM), a county-wide collaborative of over 80 organizations chartered in 2011 to address childhood obesity in Harris County. There is also a Pasadena-specific version of HLM called the HLM-Pasadena Community Task Force that has 23 members local to the Pasadena community.

On June 9, 2015, the Harris County BUILD Health Partnership was selected as one of seven projects out of over 300 applicants nationwide, to receive a $250,000 grant from the inaugural BUILD Health Challenge class. The announcement was made live from the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., featuring Karen DeSalvo, Acting Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and was followed by a congratulatory letter from LaMar Hasbrouck, MD, MPH and executive director of the National Association of County and City Health Officials who remarked, “I look forward to tracking your progress and learning more about your projects’ best practices and challenges.” A portion of this grant funding will be used towards setting up the academic and non-profit portion of the CLARA project.

The Phase One initial project meeting has already been held. Caleb Harper, the Principal Investigator and Director of MITCityFarm, attended the meeting. As part of the non-profit academic portion of the CLARA project, all research would be made open source. The MIT Media Lab’s Open Agriculture (OpenAG) Initiative seeks to make agricultural research and data more available to researchers through an innovative cloud based system. Indoor Harvest is excited to continue its relationship with MITCityFarm by looking at ways to deploy the Open Ag platform at the CLARA research facility.

Chris Higgins from HortAmericas, a company involved in horticulture product distribution, consulting and services, also attended the meeting. Indoor Harvest has selected HortAmericas as a project consultant to the CLARA project. HortAmericas will assist the project by evaluating methods and process and providing feedback through the design phase as well as assisting in preparation of standard operating procedures.

It is expected that the project MOU will be finalized and property lease executed by August 2015 based on an existing timeline provided by the City. Construction on Phase One is planned for completion June 2016.

Phase Two of the project is anticipated to be developed on two acres of land currently available adjacent to the existing properties being provided by the City. Indoor Harvest, as the primary developer of the campus, expects to be able to provide commercial operators who build on the CLARA campus a unique group of incentives and key advantages in regards to distribution, manufacturing intelligence and access to resourcing and key agricultural production talent. Phase Two timeline will be dependent upon securing commercial partners who have adequate funding and approval by the City. The Company is currently in talks with several commercial parties interested in building on the CLARA campus.

In addition, the City of Pasadena is currently considering creating a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ) in the immediate area surrounding the CLARA campus.  A TIRZ is a public financing structure that Texas law allows to target tax revenue helping to support redevelopment in underserved areas. Such a zone, if created, could provide an additional economic incentive for tangential services to locate on the project site.  As of now, the City is not obligated to create a TIRZ zone and no such zone may ever come to fruition.

Consistent with the SEC’s April 2013 guidance on using social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter to make corporate disclosures and announce key information in compliance with Regulation FD, Indoor Harvest is alerting investors and other members of the general public that Indoor Harvest will provide weekly updates on operations and progress through its social media on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube. Investors, potential investors and individuals interested in our company are encouraged to keep informed by following us on Twitter, Youtube or Facebook.

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/indoorharvest

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/indoorharvest

Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/indoorharvest

ABOUT INDOOR HARVEST CORP

Indoor Harvest Corp, through its brand name Indoor Harvest™, is an emerging design build contractor and OEM manufacturer of commercial aeroponic and hydroponic system fixtures and framing systems for use in Controlled Environment Agriculture and Building Integrated Agriculture. Our patent pending aeroponic fixtures are based upon a modular concept in which primary components are interchangeable. We are developing our aeroponic and hydroponic systems for use by both horticulture enthusiasts and commercial operators who seek to utilize aeroponic and hydroponic vertical farming methods within a controlled indoor environment. Please visit our website at http://www.indoorharvest.com for more information about our Company.

FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

This release contains certain “forward-looking statements” relating to the business of Indoor Harvest and its subsidiary companies, which can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “estimates,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “intends,” expects”and similar expressions. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to be materially different from those described herein as anticipated, believed, estimated or expected. Certain of these risks and uncertainties are or will be described in greater detail in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These forward-looking statements are based on Indoor Harvest’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on Indoor Harvest. There can be no assurance that future developments affecting Indoor Harvest will be those anticipated by Indoor Harvest. These forward-looking statements involve a number of risks, uncertainties (some of which are beyond the control of the Company) or other assumptions that may cause actual results or performance to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Indoor Harvest undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws.

Contacts:

Indoor Harvest Corp

CEO, Mr. Chad Sykes

713-410-7903

 

ccsykes@indoorharvest.com

Collaboration is not a four-letter word

As funding is cut, academics, extension personnel and
commercial companies have an increased incentive to cooperate to ensure the floriculture
industry continues to thrive.

By David Kuack

With all of the divisiveness going on between Congressional
members and President Obama lately, it’s not surprising that there isn’t a lot being
accomplished in Washington. What has been especially disconcerting is the lack
of willingness on the part of many legislators to work together to come up with
policy decisions that reflect the beliefs of the majority of Americans who
elected them.

Maybe those politicians should have attended this year’s
National Floriculture Forum where a topic of discussion was how university
researchers, extension and commercial companies can work together to ensure the
continued viability of the floriculture industry. Just like in Washington, public
and private funding is being cut or eliminated, which is causing some university
researchers to work more closely with commercial companies to conduct the
research and train the students needed to keep the industry growing.

More than research

During the National Floriculture Forum Syngenta technical
specialist Jamie Gibson discussed the academic and industry perspectives on
research. Gibson, who received his doctorate from North Carolina State
University, was an assistant horticulture professor at the University of
Florida before taking a position with Syngenta.

Jamie Gibson, Syngenta technical specialist, told attendees at this
year’s National Floriculture Forum that the reduction in research
funding has had a major impact on horticultural researchers. 

“Sometimes a grant or a big project isn’t the biggest win
for a university researcher when working with the industry,” Gibson said. “Sometimes
it’s producing an outstanding undergraduate, or training a graduate student how
to properly problem solve an issue or to have a PhD student working on an
industry challenge that can really help growers to improve their profits. The
university still has a great niche for producing talented students to be
managers, researchers or specialists in the industry. Also, the university can
produce sales and marketing people who understand plant science, but also who
have a passion for working in the industry.”

Gibson said the reduction in research funding has had a
major impact on horticultural researchers.

“Today university researchers have to show their
administrators and deans that they are capable of landing the large grants,” he
said. “They are receiving increased pressure to bring in the large grants that
drive overhead costs and maybe support the administrative side of the
university. Researchers need to market themselves well. They not only have to
do good science work, but sometimes they have to partner with industry to do
projects that drive their programs.

“Academics should have a few projects that the industry
is sponsoring whether it is PGR work or nutrition or culture. These are the
projects that challenge and really improve the skill set of undergraduate and
graduate students. The funding for these industry-sponsored projects supports
the researcher’s technician, undergraduate researchers and it pays the bills.
The larger grants enable master’s students and PhD students to focus on the
bigger picture, making sure scholarly work is being done.

“There has to be a balance. The so-called “spray-and-pray”
research projects offer academics the opportunities to engage with the industry
very well. They do have relevancy.”

Going where the money
is

Peter Konjoian, president of consulting and research company
Konjoian’s Floriculture Education Services, told the National Floriculture Forum
attendees that there is much more cooperation and collaboration today between university
researchers than there was back in the 1970s and ’80s. Konjoian received his
PhD from Ohio State University and was an assistant horticulture professor at
the University of Maryland for two years before returning to his family’s
greenhouse business.

“When I was a graduate student and then a university
researcher, it was Ohio State vs. Michigan State and OFA vs. BPI. At that time there
was enough money available that you didn’t have to think about collaborating
with another university. Research funding flowed much more freely back then.
Today research money is tough to find and everything revolves around money,
whether we’re talking about one company or an entire industry.
Peter Konjoian, president of Konjoian’s Floriculture Education
Services, told National Floriculture Forum attendees that there is
much more cooperation and collaboration today between university
researchers than there was back in the 1970s and ’80s.

“During the ’70s and ’80s, there was profit margin in
every segment of the supply chain. Today those margins have eroded to the point
where they are razor thin.”

Konjoian said another reality is there are only a
fraction of the university horticulture positions today that there were in the
past.

“As horticulture professors retire their positions are
going away and other positions are being blended into the broader discipline of
plant science,” he said. “There are very few traditional horticultural programs
left in the U.S. If there were more university horticultural positions
available, many of the grad students would be looking there first for
employment opportunities.”

Konjoian said an increasing number of university
researchers are working together on projects enabling them to play to each
other’s personal and program strengths.

“The Young Plant Research Center, the Floriculture
Research Alliance, the Floriculture Sustainability Research Coalition, the
Water Education Alliance for Horticulture and e-GRO are just a few examples of
how university researchers are pulling together and collaborating among
themselves and industry,” Konjoian said. “Twenty or 30 years ago there is no
way the universities and industry are going to collaborate on research. Today
and in the future I can see research projects that include certain parts being
done at a university greenhouse and other parts at a commercial greenhouse. How
can the public and private sectors collaborate to improve efficiency and better
serve our growers? What can I do best in my private setting and what can a
university researcher do that I’m not equipped to do.”

Konjoian said when he was in graduate school in the late
’70s and early ‘80s there was often a negative connotation placed on applied
research.

“Back then applied research didn’t have the prestige,” he
said. “Now university researchers are looking for money wherever they can find
it. If they are going to attract money for research on PGRs or growing media or
crop nutrition, then they are going to include applied projects in their
programs.

“Many researchers, especially the younger ones,
understand they need industry more because there is less money coming in, less
state and federal funding is available. If that means doing applied research,
then so be it”

Privatizing
extension

Konjoian said another change that has occurred is the
loss of extension services and personnel dedicated to the horticulture
industry.

“When I was in graduate school it seemed like every state
extension service and state grower association published its own grower
newsletter,” he said. “We are going to continue to see privatization of
extension work because the public tax dollars are not available any more. Those
tax dollars are going to serve more people in the public sector.

“Over my career I have seen some level of privatization
occurring in teaching, research and extension. This is justifiable because more
tax dollars are being spent on programs that assist a larger number of
taxpayers and not just our small industry. If the taxpayers are not going to
pay for these extension services, then industry participants, including the
growers are going to have to pay for them. Either that or the services will go
away completely.”
Peter Konjoian, who does research and consulting work for
industry companies, would like to see increased collaboration
between the commercial side and universities.
Konjoian is quick to point out that there are still
plenty of good extension specialists at the universities. He said the private
sector has picked up the slack on some services that extension hasn’t been able
to continue to offer.

“This is an excellent example of the collaborative
efforts our industry needs to make,” he said. “How are we going to work
together? Could there be a national extension group that is supported by
private companies? Extension specialists have been told by their administrators
that they need to be more efficient and touch more growers via the web or in
other ways. That being the reality, just because specialists now find it more
difficult to justify one-on-one service doesn’t mean growers don’t still need
one-on-one attention. The difference today is that growers need to understand
that they have to pay for such service because public tax dollars no longer
will.”

For more:
Jamie Gibson, Syngenta Flowers, Home and Garden, Syngenta Flowers Inc., james.gibson@syngenta.com;
http://www.syngentaflowers.com. Peter Konjoian, Konjoian’s Floriculture Education Services,
peterkfes@comcast.net.

David Kuack is a freelance technical writer in Fort
Worth, Texas; dkuack@gmail.com.

Visit our corporate website at https://hortamericas.com