Chapter II: Part 2

The tomato is not especially exacting as to care after it has been set out-of-doors. It will do business if given half a chance. At the same time, much can be done to favor earliness, good yield and high quality.

Time of Planting

In general, tomatoes are set in field or garden as soon as danger of frost is reasonably past. Suppose May 1st is average date of last killing frost. Growers would make general plantings from May 18th to 25th though, in rare instances, frost might occur as late as May 28th or 30th. The last week of May is planting time over a vast area of the North. Venturesome souls will set home garden plants as early as May 10th, standing ready to replant if necessary. There is little gain in rushing the season too much, however, for the tomato is not only sensitive to frost but it does not thrive under what people call "raw, mean, chilly weather." Such conditions may also be responsible for misshapen fruits. A grower for local market not infrequently risks a share of his plants before safe setting time in the hope that warm weather may give the crop a good start toward early ripe fruit to sell at high prices.

Delayed planting and use of plants that do not start quickly into vigorous growth is the cause of heavy losses in the north, especially among cannery growers. Better quality and heavier yields are attained if the bulk of the crop matures before cool weather in the fall. In the south, it is necessary to get good plant development and a full set of fruit before hot weather which often destroys the blossoms.

Plant Protectors

Many forms of plant protectors are on the market--of paper and of other materials. These act as little greenhouses for the individual plant, protecting against frost and promoting growth. Plants may be set out-of-doors a couple of weeks earlier by their use. The most common forms are of translucent paper reinforced by pasted strips of paper or by wire. The trick is to devise one that is cheap, that will admit maximum light and that will withstand the weather. For tomatoes, they need to be tall, which makes the problem of wind resistance more serious.

For emergencies, opaque cover, baskets upside down or even newspaper may be used. Many a field has been saved by burying the plants when frost threatened, carefully uncovering when danger is past.

Spacing

Untrained tomatoes are set at distances from 3-1/2 feet each way to 7 x 7 feet or even more. The extreme width is found on rich irrigated lands in California where plants make tremendous growth. The closer spacings are found on lighter soils where humus, plant food, and moisture are not too abundant. The variety should also be considered. Sixteen square feet per plant is about average.

Check row planting is common, though it is not feasible where transplanters are used. Wider spacing between the rows than between plants is desirable as it permits later cultivation one way and leaves a better passage for pickers with less damage to plants and fruits. Thus, 3-1/2 x 4-1/2 feet might be preferred to 4 x 4 feet.

Rows for single stem, staked and pruned plants may be as close as three feet and plants may be as close as eighteen or even twelve inches, though some growers contend that two feet is close enough.

Methods of Planting

The essential point in field setting is to pack the soil firmly about the roots, thus establishing maximum contact for moisture absorption. Whatever the method of planting, the aim should be to get the plants from the old home to the new with as little delay and check in growth as possible. For the first-early crop, they should be moved so that "they never know it." With bands, pots or blocking in flats or beds, it is feasible to avoid practically all disturbance of roots.

The tomato will, under ordinary favorable conditions, take hold and grow even if shaken quite free of earth. Plants, however, should be dug loose rather than pulled, to prevent undue breakage of roots.

Plants ought to be watered well some hours before transplanting. Transplanting machines and hand planters of the Masters type give a little shot of water at the root, thus helping to establish contact with the soil. Starter solutions are discussed on page 35. These machines are commonly used for cannery setting and, to some extent, for market tomatoes. Blocked plants can be set pretty fast by hand with much less disturbance of roots. Some manage to set potted or blocked plants by machine, keeping a ball of earth about the roots.

The rows are usually marked out fairly deeply, plants are dropped in fours between rows and it is a very short job to pack soil about the clod of earth in which the plant is growing. Another method is for one worker to make an opening with a spade. A second places the plant in the wedge-like opening and the first steps on the soil to firm it solidly about the roots.

Plants are generally set a little deeper than in the plant bed.

Cultivation

The old idea about cultivation was "the more, the better." More recent experiments notably those by Thompson have shown that little need be done beyond controlling weeds. He found that stirring the soil gave no significant increase in yield over mere scraping sufficient to destroy weeds. It is pretty hard to convince many old time gardeners of this. The value of dust mulch for conservation of moisture has been pretty well discredited by experimental comparisons.

Irrigation

Irrigation is not essential for tomato production in humid climates and is seldom provided except under market garden conditions. Water is occasionally an asset in a dry season and, of course, the grower who waters at such times reaps a harvest in higher prices as well as in increased yield. The advantage of irrigation is especially marked if dry weather retards plant growth and delays maturity of the first of the crop, for the high prices of the early market are involved. Judicious irrigation will sometimes continue production for late fall market. Yet gardeners seldom plan permanent overhead equipment for tomatoes. The movable lines that are now used to a considerable extent serve well for the tomato crop.

The furrow method of irrigating tomatoes is the most common in the West. This plan allows the water to make its way down the rows, slowly soaking in all along the line. The tomato stands drouth better than many of our crops, especially if the soil holds moisture fairly well, either naturally or through a liberal humus content. Excessive moisture is doubtless a factor in causing the plants to run to vine and drop their blossoms. Hence, in western sections, it is customary to water thoroughly just before or just after setting the plants and then to avoid applications until the setting of fruit is well advanced.

Thorough soaking is better than frequent light waterings, as it encourages a better development of root system. An Idaho bulletin suggests three irrigations. Late irrigations tend to delay ripening of fruit, but this object is sought in the late fall shipping districts of California which find their best markets after eastern crops have been nipped by frost.

Irrigation must be handled with care to avoid cracking of fruit, which occurs when soil becomes rather dry and then is heavily watered. Watering late in the season is said to make fruit watery and of poor quality.

Mulching

R. A. Emerson[16] in 1903 reported results of careful comparisons between vegetables that were cultivated and others that were mulched with straw. These results indicate that mulching gives good results with tomatoes, both as to yield and quality. However, frost injury was more severe on mulched plats, and Emerson points out that the mulch should not be applied until the plants are well established.

Mulching is recommended by a good many writers and growers and it seems to be practiced to some extent in Missouri. The advantages claimed are conservation of moisture and clean, fine quality fruit. L. W. Purdum and Sons of Virginia use 4-5 tons per acre of wheat straw, staking their plants and irrigating. They report unusually heavy returns per acre under these methods. The Missouri people apply as much as sixteen tons per acre, making the cover five or six inches thick. The practice of mulching, however, is not common, and the cost will likely prevent its general use.

VI

TO TRAIN THEM UP OR LET THEM SPREAD

Growers attending conventions will often stay up half the night to argue about training and pruning tomatoes and to debate the details of their favorite procedures.

For home garden, the method is strongly commended. Many market gardeners follow the practice and it has gained materially of recent years in New England. Some market reports quote staked tomatoes separately and at a materially higher level than fruit from unpruned plants.

Most of the southern shipping sections follow the practice and it is practically universal in greenhouses.

One way is to drive a stake by each plant tying at several points along the stem with cheap twine. The other plan, recently gaining in favor, is to set posts every 25 feet or so, string a heavy wire on top, and another a foot from the ground. Cheap jute twine is strung between wires and the tomato plants are merely twisted around the string. Tying is not required. Some omit the lower wire, tying a non-slipping bowline loop around the plant near the ground. In either case, plants are kept trimmed to a single stem though occasionally an extra branch is allowed to grow. In southern Illinois, plants are tied to a short stake without pruning.

Pro and Con

The advantages claimed for pruning and training are:

Earliness.
High yield per acre.
Ease of cultivating and spraying.
Ease of picking.
No injury from snails and wire worms.
Quality of fruit:--size, color, smoothness and cleanliness.
Crop finished earlier.
Less sunscald.

The disadvantages claimed are:

Many plants required.
Reduced yield.
More blossom-end rot.
Higher cost of labor.
Cost and care of stakes and wire.

The validity of each of these points varies greatly with conditions; in fact, the answer to the whole question depends largely upon the location and the ideas of the grower. In trying to reach a conclusion, it is well to realize that training makes certain radical changes in the plant. It loses leaves through pruning, it is supported from the ground, and it is spaced differently. Since the leaves manufacture the basic substance for themselves, and for the rest of the plant, removal of leaves reduces the resources of the plant. H. C. Thompson[17] has found that the root system is reduced about in proportion to leaf reduction. It is fairly clear that single-stem training greatly reduces the yield per plant, and other methods result similarly in proportion to the severity of pruning. When plants are spaced closely enough together the yield may be brought up to that of areas unpruned and unstaked. Idaho experiments indicate that staking alone does not affect the total yield, but that it does favor early maturity under the different pruning systems. The disadvantages of training are largely economic. Will the marketing conditions justify the extra cost of staking and pruning?

Experiments have shown pretty clearly that sunscald, blossom-end rot and cracking are worse on trained plants. Using varieties of good foliage will help the first trouble while uniform and adequate water supply achieved by selection of suitable land, by building humus content of the soil and by irrigation will solve the latter two problems. Thompson found increased yield of early fruit. Other evidence is somewhat conflicting but, in general, it supports Thompson. It is generally agreed that pruned plants yield larger, cleaner and more perfectly formed and colored fruits. Ease of spraying or dusting and of picking is important.

For pruned plants, 3-1/2 feet between rows and 1-1/2-2 feet between plants is about right.

To train or not to train is a question that one must answer for himself as the controlling factors vary too widely--costs of stakes, wire and labor, prices of early tomatoes and possibility of cultivating a more or less fancy trade.

VII

THE ETERNAL BATTLE WITH INSECTS AND DISEASES

The tomato, in most regions, is not one of our most "pestered" crops. Although over thirty diseases of tomatoes are discussed in books and bulletins, most of them are only occasionally serious or are subject to definite control methods. Enemies are generally worse in the warmer climates.

Most home garden tomatoes and many commercial crops are grown without benefit of spray or dust. If trouble arises, county agent or college specialist can usually advise, suggesting methods suitable for local conditions.

Experience must, of necessity, be the guide in shaping a program and costs must be carefully balanced against results.

The principal measures that are widely used are seed treatment against damping off, use of resistant strains against fusarium wilt and application of bordeaux mixture against leaf blights.

As with all plants, thoroughness must be the watchword in spraying or dusting. Timeliness, choice of weather conditions so far as possible, and covering all surface lightly rather than throwing on heavy blotches of spray or dust all require careful attention.

_Fusarium Wilt_ (Fusarium lycopersici) is perhaps the most serious of all the tomato diseases although it occasions little trouble in the more northerly states. It is troublesome as far north as New Jersey to Iowa.

The fungus winters in the soil, enters through the roots and blocks the water passages of the plant causing wilting, yellowing, and finally, death. Water vessels in the stem are discolored,--another means of identifying the disease.

Spraying or dusting are of no service since the fungus is within. Long time rotation and use of the many resistant strains are effective means of control.

_Leaf Spot_, _Septoria Blight_ (Septoria lycopersici) causes heavy loss by destroying the foliage and so the fruit-making power of the plant. It also opens the fruits to sunscald. The spots appear as small dark water soaked areas which enlarge but little though they increase in number and turn brown. Tiny black dots, the fruiting bodies of the fungus, appear. The spores germinate only on moist leaves and the disease is spread by wind, rain, workers and the like. It winters on refuse of the tomato and related plants.

Fall plowing helps to control. Bordeaux spraying beginning in the seed bed and carried faithfully through the season will usually hold the trouble in check.

_Late Blight_ (Phytophthora infestans) is the same fungus as the late blight of potatoes, affecting both foliage and fruit. It is often troublesome the first few weeks after plants are set out-of-doors. Clean soil in seed bed and bordeaux spraying are helpful.

_Western Blight_, _Yellows_, _Curly Top_,--cause unknown,--is prevalent in California. Leaves roll and become thickened and brittle, later turning a sulfury yellow. Veins become purplish. The trouble prevails in hot weather. The cause is likely a virus, similar to or identical with the curly top of beets. It is apparently spread by leaf hoppers. No satisfactory control has been devised though there is some promise in resistant strains.

_Mosaic._--No organism has been definitely connected with the mosaic diseases of tomatoes, but they are highly infectious, being spread by means of what is called a "virus," which passes the finest filters. It is spread by insects, notably aphids, which carry plant juice, and in the handling of plants, but it does not persist in seeds or in litter. It is wintered on horse nettles and three species of ground cherries. Control suggestions include roguing affected plants, eliminating weeds, and controlling carrying insects. The symptoms are widely various, the most common being mottling of leaves, stunting and malformation of leaflets, which sometimes become fine ribbons or threads, curling, appearance of small brown dead areas, and spots and cracks on fruits.

_Damping off_ is caused by various fungi in the seed bed which attack the stem near the surface of the soil and cause the plant to drop over and die. Clean soil, heating of soil, commonly called sterilization, and care in watering are all helpful. It is now common practice to dust seed with formaldehyde dust, or with red copper oxid or with an organic mercury disinfectant. If trouble is serious, a watering with semesan just before seedlings emerge may be helpful.

A government bulletin on "Market Diseases of Tomatoes" (Miscellaneous Publication 121, 1932) is an excellent summary with colored plates to help in recognizing the various troubles.

Insects

_The Fruit Worm_ (Chloridea obsoleta) is probably the worst of the tomato insects, but is not prevalent in the North. It is the same as the corn ear-worm or the cotton boll-worm, and bores into green or ripening fruits. It winters in the soil and fall plowing is recommended for its control. Planting corn as a trap crop is also suggested. The Virginia Truck Experiment Station finds that the addition of two pounds of calcium arsenate to 50 gallons of the Bordeaux used for disease control helps materially.

_Cut-worms_ (various species of the family Noctuidae) cause severe losses at the time of field setting. They winter in the soil and are worse when sod has been plowed under, or following other host plants. Poison bran mash is commonly used to combat them, using a spoonful to each plant. Hand picking and the use of paper collars are resorted to on a small scale. Well-hardened plants seem less subject to injury by these pests than tender plants.

_Colorado Potato Beetle_ (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) can cause a world of damage to young plants. Arsenical spray or dust will ordinarily control them. The old-fashioned potato bug (family Meloidae), is reported as troublesome in Missouri. When they appear in droves, the only control is to drive them with brush. Arsenical spray or dust is of some value.

_Flea Beetles_ (family Chrysomelidae) are the little black jumping fellows that perforate leaves in plant beds and in the field. They are also accused of injuring blossoms and reducing the set of fruit. Their attacks upon young plants are sometimes ruinous. Bordeaux with arsenical serves as a repellant. Dusting with nicotine sulphate dust is also suggested.

_Green Tomato Worms_, or _Horn Worms_ (Phlegethontius sexta) are big, green fellows and have a great capacity for tomato foliage. Hand-picking and arsenical spray or dust are usual means of combat.

_The stalk-borer_ (Papaipema nitela) is a slender caterpillar which is reported as serious in Indiana. No satisfactory control is suggested except clean culture around fields and pinching the stems to destroy the pest.

VIII

SKILLFUL SELLING CROWNS THE ENTERPRISE

The most skillful production is in vain if marketing is not done well. At the same time, the quality of the goods is the principal factor in making the price and in moving the goods. Even then, if costs in production and marketing are too high, the enterprise is a failure.

The differences between high and low quotations on the same market the same day, are usually fairly wide,--say, $1.75 to $2.50; or $0.75 to $1.25; or $0.20 to $0.25 per basket. These differences are sufficient to make the difference between profit and loss. Small differences in quality of the product, in handling and dress-up of the market pack and skill in finding buyers may easily result in price differences as great or greater than those indicated.

Harvesting

Picking in the field calls for the closest care and supervision to prevent damage to the fruits and vines. Stems should be removed to avoid punching other fruits, and long finger-nails do great harm by cutting the skin and admitting infection. Containers should not be too large to be handled conveniently. Round half-bushel stave baskets and galvanized pails are excellent. Baskets made of quarter-inch staves rather than veneer are smooth and durable, but the investment is rather heavy unless dumping is resorted to. In practice, all sorts of boxes and crates are used, often the package that is used for marketing. No container as deep as a bushel basket should be used.

The stage of ripeness at which tomatoes are picked depends upon the time and distance to market. For home use or local market, fruit may range from the first turn to almost fully colored.

A few growers pick at the turn and use ripening rooms to prepare for local selling. In this way cracking, injury by soil, by insects, and by uneven coloring are avoided. Fruits are wiped and handled with less loss and may even be washed if need be.

Fully ripened fruit will not stand handling and hauling and will quickly deteriorate, reaching the consumer in bad condition.

For cannery, full ripening is desired with even coloring. MacGillivray[18] has shown that success in this is largely a matter of care in picking. Cracking and slight softening are not serious defects for this purpose, but molds and bacteria in broken places are serious as they throw the product out of grade or occasion rejection.

Picking Green

Most tomatoes for long distance shipment, are picked before color appears,--at the mature-green stage. One of the great difficulties is to judge this stage correctly; to train ordinary labor to pick by maturity and not by size. Immature-green tomatoes ripen slowly and do not achieve good appearance or table quality.

It is almost impossible to describe the ear marks of a mature-green tomato. Most of those usually cited are of doubtful value--glossy surface, whitish cast of color and the dark ring at the stem scar. The jelly-like or mucilaginous material in the seed cells has sufficiently developed in a mature green tomato so that the fruit may be sliced without cutting seeds. Of course, the tomato is ruined but the method can be used to check one's judgment based on the exterior. Also, one can learn by laying aside tomatoes judged mature-green and immature-green to ripen.

Some efforts have recently been made in Florida to pick tomatoes at the turn, that is, at the first show of color, a practice suggested by Sando[19] some years ago. This should provide fruits of uniform degree of maturity, that would be about ready to sell on arrival and it would eliminate the serious problem of immature-greens. It would require more frequent picking of fields and there could be no delay in packing. There would, doubtless, also be problems of temperature and ventilation in transit. Results of tests thus far have been rather encouraging.

Ripening

Green wrap tomatoes are received at terminal markets by produce houses that have special ripening rooms where temperature is kept at about 70 deg., with high humidity to prevent wilting or shriveling. Ethylene gas is used by some to hasten ripening. It does not change the nature of the process, merely speeding it up. Some of these repackers have elaborate equipment for sorting and packing.

The tomatoes, on arrival, are shaken out of their paper wraps. Any that have ripened in transit are taken out and packed while the greens go into the ripening rooms. They may have to be sorted over two or three times as ripening progresses.

The ripening process in tomatoes has been rather thoroughly studied. Sando found that tomatoes ripen uniformly, regardless of size, at a certain age, dating from the setting of the fruit. This time, which, of course, varies according to weather conditions, was eight weeks when the studies were made. Ripening is accompanied by an increase in moisture, acids and sugars, with decrease of solids, nitrogen, starch, pentisans, crude fibre and ash. Sugars increase from about a quarter to about half of the dry weight. Chemical analysis did not show differences sufficient to account for the difference in quality between vine-ripened fruit and green fruit ripened in the laboratory. Lack of ventilation seems to be detrimental.

It is commonly held that tomatoes chilled without freezing will not ripen satisfactorily afterward. This belief is discounted by results of Wright and associates and of Platenius who found little effect of low temperatures upon later ripening.

Wright[20] and Platenius[21] have both found that tomatoes should not be stored at low temperatures, 50 deg. to 60 deg. F. being best. Storage is not likely to be satisfactory for more than a month.

Waxing

Waxing of tomatoes by immersion in a dilute water emulsion of paraffine and carnauba waxes is being tried out with very promising results. Waxes are also dissolved in volatile hydrocarbons and sprayed on. Moisture loss and shriveling are materially retarded, and interference with the ripening process is negligible. The wax coating is very thin, adds an attractive gloss and is entirely harmless.

Grading

It is generally true that at market the poorest products in a given lot tend to fix the price. When the buyer finds a few inferior specimens he assumes there are many more. Imperfect and diseased specimens infect others. Grading enhances the appearance of the pack.

FIGURE 20.--A California packing house with elaborate machinery and fully organized.]

Of course, the grower who picks marketable tomatoes and leaves unmarketable fruits on the vine is engaged in a form of grading--informal and subconscious. Methods may range from this simple practice to the elaborate schemes adopted in large packing houses. There is no difficulty in adopting methods for the farm that are easily managed and perfectly practical. In general, two grades to sell represent a good plan, leaving culls at home unless prices are high and there is good demand for them. The set-up may involve no more than a worker at a table with three baskets--one with tomatoes from the field; another for #1's and a third for #2's. The worker may well use a cotton flannel glove or cloth to wipe the tomatoes and the fruits should be placed in layers to bring the package to a good face. With some practice, this slows the operation but very little. Shed packing should be more common than it is though the practice seems to be gaining.

Shippers scattered from Cuba and California to New York state have packing houses set up to all degrees of elaborateness. Some have machines and conveyors that wash, sort for size, provide for hand sorting for grade and deliver to bins for packing. Experienced packers advance with the season from Florida to Lake Erie. These workers become almost incredibly expert and speedy. It is not uncommon for a worker to pick up, wrap and place in the lug box 60 or 70 tomatoes per minute--not as a show-off but in course of regular work.

The federal government has worked out and published standards for the grades of tomatoes along with most other vegetables. These standards are practical and have found wide acceptance as furnishing common language between seller and buyer, especially for long distance shipment. The one who grades may, however, set up a standard of his own to meet the needs of his conditions and market.

U.S. Standards for cannery tomatoes are widely used as a basis of payment to the grower and this practice is to be commended.

Packaging

The lug box has almost wholly replaced the older 6-basket carrier and 4-basket flat for shipment of tomatoes. It is in almost every respect, a good package for tomatoes. It is built with solid board ends, with veneer or sawed sides, bottom and cover. Cleats on the ends serve to raise the lids so that a bulge pack will not be injured by pressure. Veneer covers and bottoms are held together by stitched veneer cross pieces. The lug box is packed in three layers and holds about 30 pounds net of tomatoes though it is often over-packed to carry considerably more. The bulge pack is desirable only so far as it is necessary to insure a tight pack and to take up the small shrinkage that takes place in transit. Ordinarily, it goes beyond this. It results in delivery of more tomatoes than are paid for, and in bruising because the top center is too high.

FIGURE 22.--The lug box is the most widely used of all tomato packages. This is well packed and labeled but shows too much bulge making for difficulty in loading and handling and increasing danger of bruising the upper fruits.]

The late M. R. Ensign in Florida, was working with a wire-bound lug to carry 20 pounds of tomatoes in two layers without bulge.

The lug box is packed in three layers and the size of fruits is designated by the number of tomatoes each way,--6 x 6, 6 x 7, and 7 x 7 being the commonest sizes. Each tomato is wrapped in a square of tissue paper which may or may not be printed. The principal advantage of the paper is to cushion the pack and protect the tomatoes against rubbing and abrasion. Where tomatoes are small, U.S. Standards provide for "bridge pack" or partial extra layers, for extra rows and for double wraps or two tomatoes in one paper.

Lug boxes were formerly loaded lengthwise of the car but are now generally loaded crosswise,--that is, the side of the box is crosswise throwing the heavy endwise thrust against the substantial end of the box. Thin strips are nailed between layers, butting against the sides of the car to prevent shifting of the load and closing of ventilation channels. Refrigerated cars are generally used but icing is not usual.

A few shipping sections, notably New Jersey, still use the 12-quart climax basket for tomatoes.

Local markets use various containers for tomatoes,--the Boston bushel box; a half bushel of the same depth also used in New England; lug boxes; the Jersey tomato crate; and very commonly, 8 and 12-quart square braid veneer market baskets. Peach baskets and bushel baskets are now used but little, being too deep for good carrying. The diamond market basket of earlier years has about disappeared--being too flexible and not suited for stacking. The square braid with suitable cover may be stacked very satisfactorily in trucks but is hardly substantial enough for rail shipment.

Hot house tomatoes travel in square braid, climax or paper fibre baskets, now rather commonly, the latter. The Cleveland section sells some millions of baskets of 8-quart capacity but carrying 8 pounds of tomatoes in two layers, usually with stems on, usually wrapped and sometimes with a paper divider between layers.

Cannery tomatoes move in field crates belonging to the canner or, in Jersey, in 5/8 bushel baskets, about as awkward a container as could be readily devised unless it should be the Jersey tomato crate with its two cover strips permanently fastened.

Repack tomatoes are sometimes replaced in lugs or in half lugs. Ten pound corrugated cartons are widely used, newer and fancier packs being but one layer deep. Fruits are wrapped with paper or cellulose film. An increasing proportion of repacks are now put up in one-pound cartons with a window of cellulose film, carrying four or five tomatoes. A variation is a paper tray wrapped with cellulose film.

Good marketing calls for a good label for whatever package is used. These are usually pasted on the package. Paper containers are often printed directly but the problem of misuse of second hand packages is coming to the fore.

Selling

Success in selling demands in the producer the qualities which we ordinarily expect in the business man. The good grower is a business man if he succeeds, and this will be more true in the future than in the past, as competition increases. It is necessary to judge the men one deals with, forming estimates as to reliability and character. Mutual confidence is essential to satisfactory dealings. It is worth while to study the produce business and to learn its ins and outs, reading a trade paper, talking with dealers, and making trips to markets.

Shipments are made on "f.o.b." or track sale, on consignment, or on joint account. The first plan of outright sale is the most desirable and is possible where there is enough business at a given point to attract buyers or where grades and business standing are well enough established to assure the purchaser of what he is getting. When the quality of the product is uncertain or when markets are glutted, consignment must be resorted to. Under this plan, the shipper owns the goods until the receiver makes a sale and all the risks up to this point are his. There are many consignment houses of high character if the shipper will take the trouble to find them instead of shipping to any one who writes a good letter, and there is vigorous competition in the trade. These factors make it possible to secure fairly good service most of the time. Joint account selling, where shipper and receiver agree on how returns shall be divided, is sometimes undertaken where mutual acquaintance justifies it.

Selling on distant markets is more complex and difficult than local selling for many reasons. Shoving crates off the wagon into the car and forgetting them is not selling. Co-operative organization has helped many communities through pooling of resources, standardizing, grading and packing the product, encouraging better field practices, and securing the services of able managers and salesmen.

Local Selling

A very small amount of produce is sold by producers directly to the consumer at his home, but the roadside market has greatly developed retail activity by growers. Here fine quality, attractive appearance, moderate prices, and fair dealing are effective in building business. Stands that plan to "fleece them as they pass" do not last long. It is the return business that counts. The bulk of local selling is done directly to retailers--grocers or hucksters--either at market or store-door. The costliness of this system is being realized and local commission business is growing, in many cases through the establishment of commission houses co-operatively owned and managed by growers, as in Providence, Cleveland, Chicago and other markets.

Some effort has been made to increase the use of tomatoes as has been successfully done with oranges and bananas. These efforts have been sporadic and results have been hardly more consistent than the efforts. Co-operative publicity, especially at times when large quantities are to be moved, would seem to offer fine possibilities. Growers of some crops are finding chain store groups very ready to help in moving out large volumes of produce when the supply is large.

Cannery Selling

Cannery sales are generally made at a stipulated price on contracts closed in advance of planting. These contracts have usually devoted more words to protecting the interests of the packer than those of the grower, largely because the grower has accepted the canner's initiative with little question. Farseeing companies have been fair in enforcement of terms and liberal in their dealings, realizing that prosperity must be mutual for the highest success. A few canners have contract provisions that enable the grower to share in prices realized for the packed product when they rise beyond a certain figure. Too many canners have lacked vision, however, and have taken all they could get. Farmers have known little about costs and so have frequently been lured by the prospect of cash return even though they see no money until the packed tomatoes are actually sold. During recent years, much has been learned about the business side of growing for cannery purposes and the knowledge has been made available through extension channels. Growers have shown some tendency to organize and some canners welcome this movement as helping them to set their affairs on a plane of definite understanding. Canners have suffered sadly through failure of growers to live up to contracts if it suited them better to evade the terms, and organization helps greatly to develop the producer's sense of responsibility. Indiana has formed a federation of locals, but an organization movement in another state failed, more because the directors and members did not live up to their duties than through opposition of certain hostile canners. Co-operation in this field has the same possibilities, requirements and dangers as in other fields. With time and experience, co-operation will be an increasing and beneficial factor in the business.

In some sections, most of the cannery tomatoes are sold on open market, and in others, the early part of the crop is free for local sale or shipment. This arrangement would seem to have possibilities for further development by the use of good plants and good culture.

IX

OPERATING IN THE RED OR IN THE BLACK

Happily, the home gardener does not need to keep books with his tomatoes. If he likes the culture and the product, he need not inquire further.

Not so with the commercial grower. After all skill has been exercised in growing and selling, the books must show black and not red. This calls for good management and judgment not only as to what is best for the tomatoes and for the consumer but also how much one can afford to spend to gain a given advantage.

Fortunately, quality, yield and economy generally go hand in hand. One of the best ways to achieve low unit cost is to win a high yield per acre.

For the cannery crop, conditions are sometimes such that one cannot afford to apply, say, optimum fertilizer because some other factor not readily controlled may limit the returns and so make heavy feeding uneconomical.

_Yield._--The average yield per acre of cannery tomatoes for the United States was, in 1940, 5.39 tons per acre and the 10-year average, to 1938, was 4.15 tons per acre. For tomatoes for fresh market, the average yield for 1940 was 148 bushels per acre, 14 bushels above the 10-year average. Of course, these yields would not satisfy a grower who calls himself successful. In the canning sections of New York, it takes about 7 tons per acre to cover costs of production. Some years ago a survey in Arkansas recorded costs as low as $36 per acre. However, the same survey showed cost per ton as $13.64. Cannery contracts that year averaged about $12.75 per ton. That does not yield much money to bank even if ten or twenty acres are grown. Rarely yields run to 25 tons per acre.

It is accordingly necessary to keep costs down and to bring yields up. Each item of cost must be scrutinized and adjusted to bring lowest cost per ton or per package.

In counting costs, it is necessary to include every element. The following summary from 118 Western New York farms for 1934 for cannery tomatoes illustrates the various items:

-----------------------------------------------------------
| | _Per cent_
| | _of total_
Growing costs: | |
Land | $ 7.66 | 9.17
Manure | 3.91 | 4.68
Commercial fertilizer | 8.21 | 9.83
Plants | 15.55 | 18.62
Plowing | 3.42 | 4.10
Fitting | 3.83 | 4.59
Applying fertilizer | 1.65 | 1.98
Setting | 5.41 | 6.48
Cultivating | 6.38 | 7.64
All other growing costs | 2.14 | 2.56
|---------------------
Total growing costs per acre | $58.16 | 69.65
Harvesting and delivering (8.2 tons) | 25.34 | 30.35
|---------------------
Total costs | $83.50 |100.00
-----------------------------------------------------------

All too often, growers think they are counting costs when such important items as interest, use of truck and machinery or others are omitted. One sometimes sees such figures in print.

One good way to view returns is in terms of cents per hour for labor. Cost accounts in New York have showed that a group of farmers who raised cannery tomatoes the nine years up to 1937 and whose records were studied, realized $0.34 per hour for their time given to tomatoes, $0.51 for potatoes, $0.24 for wheat, and $0.11 for oats.

SELECTED REFERENCES

This book is not a monograph in the scientific sense and no attempt has been made to cite references for all statements. This list is intended to include the publications that are likely to prove most useful to one who wishes to read further about tomatoes. There are many others of great value, most of them being included in bibliographies in the works cited below.

Unless otherwise stated, references are to publications of the state experiment stations, addresses of which may be obtained by writing Office of Experiment Stations, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.

General

Beattie, W. R. Tomatoes as a truck crop. U.S. Dept. of Agr.
Farmers Bul. 1338. 1923.

Snyder, G. B. and Dempsey, P. W. Tomato production in
Massachusetts. Mass. Ext. Leaf. 51. May, 1937.

Porter, D. R. and MacGillivray, John H. The production of
tomatoes in California. Calif. Exp. Sta. Cir. 104. 1937.

Cochran, H. L. Improved methods of tomato production in
Georgia. Ga. Exp. Sta. Bul. 206. 1940.

Huelsen, W. A. Growing tomatoes in Illinois. Ill. Exp. Sta.
Cir. 451. 1936.

Balch, W. B. Growing tomatoes in Kansas. Kan. Exp. Sta. Cir.
172. 1933.

Seaton, H. L. Tomato growing in Michigan. Mich. Exp. Sta. Ext.
Bul. 156. 1936.

Allen, E. J. and Talbert, T. J. Tomato culture in Missouri.
Mo. Exp. Sta. Cir. 173. 1934.

Schermerhorn, L. G., Tiedjens, V. A., et al. Questions and
answers relative to tomato production. N.J. Exp. Sta. Ext.
Bul. 174. 1936.

Raleigh, G. J. Growing tomatoes for market. Cornell Ext. Bul.
377. 1937.

Tracy, W. Tomato culture. Orange Judd Co. 1907.

Work, Paul. Tomato production. Orange Judd Co. 1926.

Pellett, F. C. and M. A. Practical tomato culture. A. T. De La
More Co. 1930.

Food Value

Atwater, W. O., and Woods, C. D. The chemical composition of
American food materials. U.S. Dept. of Agr., Office of Expt.
Stas. Bul. 28. 1896.

Sherman, H. C. Food products. Macmillan. 1924.

Miller, Elna. Tomatoes, their value and uses. Utah Exp. Sta.
Cir. 47. 1932.

Ellis, Eliz. E. Using tomatoes in family meals. N.H. Exp.
Sta. Cir. 225. 1940.

Cannery

Beattie, J. H. Tomatoes for canning and manufacturing. U.S.
Dept. of Agr. Farmers Bul. 1233. Rev. 1930.

Lancashire, E. R., Parks, T. H. and Pierstorff, A. L. Tomatoes
for canning. Ohio Exp. Sta. Bul. 114. 1935.

Hester, J. B. Good, fair or poor tomatoes from your soil.
Campbell Soup Co., Bul. 2. 1940.

Cruess, W. V. Commercial fruit and vegetable products.
McGraw-Hill. 1924.

Pederson, C. S. Preparation of tomato products. N.Y. Exp.
Sta. Cir. 178. 1937.

Gaylord, F. C. and Fawcett, K. L. A study of grade, quality
and price of canned tomatoes sold at retail in Indiana. Ind.
Exp. Sta. Bul. 438. 1939.

Saywell, L. G. and Cruess, W. V. The composition of canning
tomatoes. Calif. Exp. Sta. Bul. 545. 1932.

MacGillivray, J. H. and Ford, O. W. Tomato quality as
influenced by the relative amount of outer and inner wall
region. Ind. Exp. Sta. Bul. 327. 1928.

MacGillivray, J. H. Tomato color as related to quality in the
tomato canning industry. Ind. Exp. Sta. Bul. 350. 1931.

Gaylord, F. C. and MacGillivray, J. H. Tomato quality studies.
Field and harvest factors affecting grade. Ind. Exp. Sta. Bul.
394. 1934.

Hauck, C. W. Marketing cannery tomatoes on grade in Ohio. Ohio
Exp. Sta. Bul. 504. 1932.

Greenhouse

Beattie, J. H. Greenhouse tomatoes. U.S. Dept. of Agr.
Farmers Bul. 1431. Rev. 1939.

Hoffman, I. C. Growing of greenhouse tomatoes. Ohio Exp. Sta.
Bul. 499. 1932.

Burk, E. F. and Roberts, R. H. Growing greenhouse tomatoes.
Wisc. Exp. Sta. Bul. 418. 1931.

Gilbert, B. E. and Pember, F. R. Relative efficiency of
various organic supplements in the growth of greenhouse
tomatoes. R.I. Exp. Sta. Bul. 236. 1932.

Gilbert, B. E. and Pember, F. R. Economical amounts of nitrate
of soda to apply in the greenhouse for the growth of tomatoes.
R.I. Exp. Sta. Bul. 252. 1935.

Bouquet, A. G. P. An analysis of the characters of the
inflorescence and fruiting habit of some varieties of
greenhouse tomatoes. Cornell Exp. Sta. Memoir 139. 1932.
Biblio.

Seaton, H. L. and Gray, G. F. Histological study of tissues
from greenhouse tomatoes affected by blotchy ripening. Jour.
Agr. Research (U.S. Dept. of Agr.), Vol. 52, No. 3, pp.
217-224. 1936.

Breeding and Varieties

Boswell, V. R. Improvement and genetics of tomatoes, peppers,
and eggplant. U.S. Dept. of Agr. Yearbook. 1937. pp. 176-206.
Full biblio.

Boswell, V. R., et al. Description of American varieties of
tomatoes. U.S. Dept. of Agr. Misc. Publ. 160. 1933.

Muller, C. H. A revision of the genus Lycopersicon. U.S.
Dept. of Agr. Misc. Publ. 382. 1940.

Morrison, Gordon. Tomato varieties. Mich. Exp. Sta. Spec. Bul.
290. 1938.

Myers, C. E. and Lewis, M. T. The effect of selection in the
tomato. Penn. Exp. Sta. Bul. 248. Rev. May 2, 1930.

Yeager, A. F. Tomato breeding. N.D. Exp. Sta. Bul. 276. 1933.

Pritchard, F. J. Development of wilt-resistant tomatoes. U.S.
Dept. of Agr. Bul. 1015. 1922.

Wellington, Richard. Comparison of first generation tomato
crosses and their parents. Minn. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 6. Rev.
1923.

Groth, B. H. A. The F_{1} hereditary of size, shape, and
number in tomato fruits. N.J. Exp. Sta. Bul. 242. 1912.

Lindstrom, E. W. Hereditary correlation of size and color
characters in tomatoes. Iowa Exp. Sta. Research Bul. 93. 1926.

Porte, W. S. and Wellman, F. L. Development of interspecific
tomato hybrids. U.S. Dept. of Agr. Cir. 584. 1941.

Babb, M. F. and Kraus, J. E. Results of tomato variety tests
in the great plains region. U.S. Dept. of Agr. Cir. 533.
1939.

Anon. A haploid marglobe tomato. Jour. of Heredity,
Washington, D.C. Vol. 27, No. 11, 1936.

Huelsen, W. A. New wilt-resistant tomato varieties for field
and greenhouse. Ill. Exp. Sta. Cir. 448. 1936.

Plants for Transplanting

Nissley, C. H. Plant growing and plant growing structures.
N.J. Ext. Bul. 51. 1926.

Tussing, E. B. and Lancashire, E. R. Growing vegetable plants.
Ohio Ext. Bul. 103. 1930.

Raleigh, G. J. Starting vegetable plants. Cornell Ext. Bul.
448. Oct. 1940.

Crist, J. W. Ultimate effect of hardening tomato plants. Mich.
Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 89. 1928.

Harvey, R. B. and Wright, R. C. Frost injury to tomatoes.
U.S. Dept. of Agr. Bul. 1099. 1922.

Seaton, H. L. and Strong, M. C. Southern-grown vs. locally
grown tomato plants. Mich. Quarterly Bul. Vol. 20, No. 3, pp.
131-141. 1938.

Alexander, L. J., Young, H. C. and Kiger, C. M. The causes and
control of damping-off of tomato seedlings. Ohio Exp. Sta.
Bul. 496. 1931.

Van Haltern, Frank. Control of tomato seedbed diseases of
southern plants. Ga. Exp. Sta. Bul. 187. 1935.

Fertilizers

Work, Paul. Tomato fertilizer experiments in Chautauqua
County, New York. Cornell Exp. Sta. Bul. 467. 1928.

Hartman, J. D., Work, Paul Wessels, P. H. Tomato fertilizer
experiments on Long Island. Cornell Exp. Sta. Bul. 676. 1937.

Mack, W. B., Stout, G. J. and Rahn, E. M. Fertilizer
experiments with tomatoes. Penna. Exp. Sta. Bul. 393. 1940.

Sayre, C. B. Effects of fertilizers and rotation on earliness
and total yields of tomatoes. N.Y. Exp. Sta. Bul. 619. 1933.

Sayre, C. B. Starter solutions. Farm Research (N.Y. Exp. Sta.
Geneva) Vols. 5, 6, and 7, No. 2. April 1939, '40, '41.

Parker, M. M. Tomato fertilization. (1) The effect of
different fertilizer ratios on the yield to tomatoes. Va. Exp.
Sta. Bul. 80. 1933.

Carolus, R. L. Tomato fertilization. (2) The effect of
different fertilizer ratios on the chemical composition of
tomatoes. Va. Exp. Sta. Bul. 81. 1933.

Thomas, R. P. Effect of fertilizer treatments of a soil on the
quality and yield of tomatoes. Md. Exp. Sta. Bul. 386. 1935.

Friend, W. H. Tomato varieties and fertilizers for the lower
Rio Grande valley of Texas. Texas Exp. Sta. Bul. 438. 1931.

Comin, Donald and Bushnell, John. Fertilizers for early
cabbage, tomatoes, cucumbers, and sweet corn. Ohio Exp. Sta.
Bul. 420. 1928.

Hepler, J. R. and Kraybill, H. R. Effect of phosphorus upon
the yield and time of maturity of the tomato. N.H. Exp. Sta.
Tech. Bul. 28. Rev. 1926.

Hester, J. B. Soil fertility in tomato production. Campbell
Soup Co. Bul. 3. 1941.

Cultural Practices

Thompson, H. C. Pruning and training tomatoes. Cornell Exp.
Sta. Bul. 580. 1934.

Watts, V. M. Pruning and training tomatoes in Arkansas. Ark.
Exp. Sta. Bul. 292. 1933.

Hibbard, R. P. The various effects of frost protectors on
tomato plants. Mich. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 124. 1932.

Thompson, H. C. Experimental studies of the effects of
cultivation of certain vegetable crops. Cornell Expt. Sta.
Memoir 107. 1927.

Physiology

Kraus, E. J. and Kraybill, H. R. Vegetation and reproduction
with special reference to the tomato. Ore. Exp. Sta. Bul. 149.
1918. Biblio.

Work, Paul. Nitrate of soda in the nutrition of the tomato.
Cornell Exp. Sta. Memoir 75. 1924.

Arthur, J. M., Guthrie, J. D. and Newell, John M. Some effects
of artificial climates on the growth and chemical composition
of plants. Amer. Jour. of Botany, 17: 416-482. 1930.

Murneek, A. E. Physiology of reproduction in horticultural
plants. (1) Reproduction and metabolic efficiency in the
tomato. Mo. Exp. Sta. Research Bul. 90. 1926.

Murneek, A. E. Effects of correlation between vegetative and
reproductive functions in the tomato. Plant Physiology, Vol.
I, No. 1. 1926.

Nightingale, G. T. The chemical composition of plants in
relation to photo-periodic changes. Wis. Exp. Sta. Research
Bul. 74. 1927.

Porter, A. M. Effect of light intensity on the photosynthetic
efficiency of tomato plants. Plant Physiology, Vol. 12: pp.
225-252. 1937.

Nightingale, G. T. Effects of temperature on metabolism in
tomato. Botanical Gazette, Vol. 95, No. 1. 1933.

Phillips, T. G., Smith, T. O. and Hepler, J. R. Some effects
of potassium and nitrogen on the composition of the tomato
plant. N.H. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 73. 1939.

MacGillivray, J. H. Effect of phosphorus on the composition of
the tomato plant. Jour. of Agr. Research. Vol. 34, No. 2. pp.
97-127. 1927.

Janssen, G., Bartholomew, R. R. and Watts, V. M. Some effects
of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium on the composition and
growth of tomato plants. Ark. Exp. Sta. Bul. 310. 1934.

Eckerson, Sophia H. Influence of phosphorus deficiency on
metabolism of the tomato. Contribs. of Boyce Thompson
Institute. Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 197-218. 1931.

Fisher, P. L. Responses of the tomato in solution cultures
with deficiencies and excesses of certain essential elements.
Md. Exp. Sta. Bul. 375. 1935.

Howlett, F. S. Effect of carbohydrate deficiency upon
formation of sex cells in tomato. Ohio Exp. Sta. Bul. 532.
1934.

Howlett, F. S. The modification of flower structure by
environment in varieties of Lycopersicum esculentum. Jour. of
Agr. Research, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 79-117. 1939.

Watts, V. M. Some factors which influence growth and fruiting
of the tomato. Ark. Exp. Sta. Bul. 267. 1931.

Watts, V. M. Growth and fruiting responses to pruning and
defloration of tomato plants. Ark. Exp. Sta. Bul. 347. 1937.

Smith, Ora. Pollination and life-history studies of the tomato
(Lycopersicon esculentum mill.) Cornell Exp. Sta. Memoir 184.
1935.

Smith, Ora. Relation of temperature to anthesis and blossom
drop of the tomato together with a histological study of the
pistils. Jour. of Agr. Research. Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 183-190.
1932.

Smith, Ora and Cochran, H. L. Effect of temperature on pollen
germination and tube growth in the tomato. Cornell Exp. Sta.
Memoir 175. 1935.

Smith, Ora. Effects of light on carotenoid formation in tomato
fruits. Cornell Exp. Sta. Memoir 187. 1936.

Reid, Mary E. Growth of tomato cuttings in relation to stored
carbohydrate and nitrogenous compounds. Amer. Jour. of Botany,
Vol. 13: pp. 548-574. 1926.

Foster, A. C. and Tatman, E. C. Influence of certain
environment conditions of congestion of starch in tomato plant
stems. Jour. of Agr. Research. Vol. 56, No. 12, pp. 869-882.
1938.

Diseases and Insects

Chupp, Chas. Manual of vegetable-garden diseases. Macmillan.
1925.

Kadow, K. J. and Shropshire, L. H. Tomato diseases and insect
pests. (Identification and control.) Ill. Exp. Sta. Cir. 428.
1935.

Weber, G. F. and Kelbert, D. G. A. Seasonal occurrence of
tomato diseases in Florida. Fla. Sta. Bul. 345. 1940.

Samson, R. W. and Thomas, H. Rex. Tomato diseases in Indiana.
Ind. Exp. Sta. Cir. 257. 1940.

Strong, M. C. Tomato diseases in Michigan. Mich. Exp. Sta.
Cir. Bul. 139. 1932.

Young, P. A., Harrison, A. L. and Altstatt, G. E. Common
diseases of tomatoes. Texas Exp. Sta. Cir. 86. 1940.

Horsfall, J. G., Magie, R. O. and Suit, R. F. Bordeaux injury
to tomatoes and its effect on ripening. N.Y. Exp. Sta.
Geneva. Tech. Bul. 251. 1938.

Ramsey, G. B. and Link, G. K. K. Market diseases of fruits and
vegetables: Tomatoes, peppers, eggplants. U.S. Dept. of Agr.
Misc. Pub. 121. 1932.

Marketing

Parsons, F. E. Preparation of fresh tomatoes for market. U.S.
Dept. of Agr. Farmers' Bul. 1291. Rev. 1930.

Wright, R. C. and Gorman, E. A., Jr. Ripening and repacking of
mature green tomatoes. U.S. Dept. of Agr. Cir. 566. 1940.

Sando, Charles E. The process of ripening in the tomato,
considered especially from the commercial standpoint. U.S.
Dept. of Agr. Bul. 859. 1920.

Wright, R. C., Pentzer, W. T. et al. Effect of various
temperatures on the storage and ripening of tomatoes. U.S.
Dept. of Agr. Tech. Bul. 268. 1931.

Frazier, W. A. Cracks in tomato fruits. American Soc. for
Hort. Sci. Vol. 32, pp. 519-523. 1934.

Brown, H. D. and Price, C. V. Effect of irrigation, degree of
maturity and shading upon yield and degree of cracking of
tomatoes. Amer. Soc. for Horti. Sci. Vol. 32, pp. 524-528.
1934.

Yarnell, S. H., Friend, W. H. and Wood, J. F. Factors
affecting the amount of puffing in tomatoes. Texas Exp. Sta.
Bul. 541. 1937.

LeCrone, Freddie and Haber, E. S. Changes in the pectic
constituents of tomatoes in storage. Iowa State College Jour.
of Sci. Vol. 12, No. 4. pp. 467-476. 1933. Good biblio.

Work, Paul. Ethylene ripening of tomatoes in relation to stage
of maturity. Amer. Soc. for Hort. Sci. 1928. pp. 61-64.

MacGillivray, J. H. Tomato color as related to quality in the
tomato canning industry. Ind. Exp. Sta. Bul. 350. 1931.