P-ISSN 0008-0845
E-ISSN 2160-8091
Vol. 10, Issue 1, 1956January 01, 1956 PDT
ccby-nc-nd-4.0
Sulfur dioxide injury on citrus: Riverside tests show orange trees to be resistant to plantdamaging air pollutant at known atmospheric concentrations
Sulfur dioxide injury on citrus: Riverside tests show orange trees to be resistant to plantdamaging air pollutant at known atmospheric concentrations
E Darley, J Middleton, J Kendrick,
Articles in Vol. 10, Issue 1, 1956
Vol. 10, Issue 1, 1956
- Pear packing plant economies: Study shows possible variations in plant organization and operation offer potential reductions in inplant packing costsB FrenchL SammetR Bresrler
- Irrigation pumping plant costs: Capacity of well, design and power of pumping plant must be engineered to fit water needs of crop for operating economyV Scott
- Three new hybrid tomatoes: Crosses between male-sterile and fertile varieties prove superior for quality and early yield of market tomatoesC RickC BaughnB Hall
- Flare-up of oriental fruit moth: Costly outbreak of pest of peach orchards in 1954 resulted in co-operative research in 1955 to develop control programF SummersL BrownJ FoottJ Quail
- Powdery mildew on peach trees: Comparative effectiveness of sulfur and other chemicals for control of peach powdery mildew in tests near LindenJ OgawaF Charles
- Citrus replant seedling tests: Trifoliate orange rootstock shows better growth in old citrus soil than other seedlings included in replant problem studyJ MartinW BittersJ Ervin
- Sulfur dioxide injury on citrus: Riverside tests show orange trees to be resistant to plantdamaging air pollutant at known atmospheric concentrationsE DarleyJ MiddletonJ Kendrick
- Filbertworm Injury to WalnutsA MichelbacherS HitchcockA Retan
- Mechanized Cucumber PickingB HallJ MacGillivray
- Manure as Source of NitrogenT EmbletonW Jones
Darley, E, J Middleton, and J Kendrick. 1956. “Sulfur Dioxide Injury on Citrus: Riverside Tests Show Orange Trees to Be Resistant to Plantdamaging Air Pollutant at Known Atmospheric Concentrations.” California Agriculture: The Journal of UC Agriculture and Natural Resources 10 (1): 9–9.