Progress 06/01/16 to 05/31/19
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience for this project arescientific community, extension professional, and fruit growers. Changes/Problems:Objective 3 "Evaluate the effect of foliar ABA application on cranberry bud cold hardiness during fall" wasreplaced by a new objective "Evaluate the responses of cranberry buds to temperatures during ecodormancy". The main reason why the original objective was not complete was the technical difficulty of determining cold hardiness of cranberry buds through controlled freezing test and visual evaluation under a microscope. When we proposed to evaluate the effect of ABA on cold hardiness of cranberry buds, we were hoping DTA would be a reliable way to evaluate cold hardiness of cranberry buds. However, through the work on objective 1 we discovered that DTA could not measure cold hardiness in cranberry buds, as cranberry buds do not deep supercool. DTA is a relatively high throughput method to evaluate cold hardiness, compared with visual evaluation, which would have made iteasier to test the effect of ABA treatment in a large population of buds. However, with visual evaluation of damage in buds only a limited number of samplescan be evaluated in a reasonable amount of time after the controlled freezing test is performed. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?-Villouta, C., B. Workmaster, J. Bolivar-Medina, and A. Atucha. 2017. Exploring Cranberry Cold Hardiness Using Differential Thermal Analysis. North America Cranberry Researcher and Extension Workers Conference. August 27-30. Plymouth, MA. -Villouta, C., Workmaster, B.A., Bolivar-Medina, J., and Atucha, A. 2018. Mechanisms of freezing stress survival in cranberry dormant buds. 11th International Plant Cold Hardiness Seminar: Importance of Cold Hardiness in a Warming Climate. August 5-10, Madison WI. -Villouta, C., Workmaster, B.A., Sinclair, S., and Atucha, A. 2019. Evaluating Spring Freezing Damage in Cranberry Terminal Buds and Its Impact on Subsequent Growth. North America Cranberry Researcher and Extension Workers Conference. August 19-21. Vancouver, BC, Canada. -Villouta, C., Workmaster, B.A., Bolivar-Medina, J. Sinclair, S., Atucha, A. 2019. Freezing Survival Strategy in Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.) Terminal Buds. American Society for Horticultural Science Annual Conference. July 21-25. Las Vegas, NV. -8/9/2017 Oral presentation on results from the project delivered at the Wisconsin Cranberry Summer Field day. Warrens, WI -4/11/2017 Oral presentation on results from the project delivered at the Wisconsin Cranberry Early Season GrowerWorkshop. Tomah and Wisconsin Rapids, WI. -Atucha, A., Villouta, C., and Workmaster, B.A. 2017. Cranberry Plant Freezing is SuperCool. Proceedings Wisconsin Cranberry School. January 19. Stevens Point, WI. -Atucha, A., Villouta, C., and Workmaster, B.A. 2018. Understanding Patterns of Cold Damage In Buds Using Control Freezing Test. Proceedings Wisconsin Cranberry School. January 24-25. Stevens Point, WI. -Atucha, A., Villouta, C., and Workmaster, B.A. 2019. Cold hardiness in cranberry, what have we learned Proceedings Wisconsin Cranberry School. January 24. Stevens Point, WI. Atucha, A (2017). Identifying frost damage in cranberry buds. Cranberry Crop Management Journal 30 (4): 5. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Objective 1: Define changes in cranberry terminal bud cold hardiness from fall to spring over the period of plant dormancy, focusing on the transition periods at the onset and emergence from dormancy. 1.a. Determine if differential thermal analysis (DTA) can reliably estimate cranberry bud cold hardiness:Dormant cranberry buds were collected on a weekly during several winters and DTA was performed to evaluate cold hardiness. High and low temperature exotherms (LTE) were detected during DTA but results were inconsistent. In addition to DTA, a second subset of samples was evaluated using a control-freezing test (CFT) to compare the two methodologies. Results revealed no LTE by the DTA system, but damage was detected by CFT. Additional testing involving microscopy, MRI scans, and ice nucleation activity of bud structures suggest that V. macrocarpon terminal buds survive long periods of freezing stress by freeze-induced dehydration and not deep super cooling, thus DTA is not a suitable methodology to estimate cold hardiness of dormant cranberry buds. 1.b. Determine the presence or absence of an ice nucleation barrier:During the dormant season of 2015-2016, terminal budswere sampledfor histochemical evaluation at four different stages:early fall, late fall, early spring, and late spring andevaluatedunderfluorescent and light microscopy. No presence of ice barrier was identified in any of the samples evaluated, and there was no differences in tissue composition throughout the different sampling dates evaluated. During fall 2017 and spring 2018, cranberry terminal buds were sampled and a CFT was performed to visualize freezing events of the plant material. A video thermo camera recorded the samples during the CFT. Two distinctive freezing events were observed; the first one originated at the base of the upright and ice propagated through the stem stopping at the bud axis. The second freezing event occurred at a lower temperature than the first one and displayed the freezing of the bud itself. This suggestes the presence of an ice barrier located in the area where bud connects to the stem.During the dormant season of 2018-2019, terminal budswere placed in a programable freezer while temperature dropped to -50 ºCwhile recorded with a thermal video camera. Results confirmed the previous observations of two distinctive freezing events. The first one from the base of the upright up through the stem and stopping at the bud axis, and second one at lower temperature showing the freezing of the bud itself. However, the length of time between the occurrence of the two freezing events was shorter for the buds sampled in late spring compared to those sampled in early spring and late fall. Results from these studies provide evidence of the presence of an ice nucleation barrier in cranberry terminal buds. 1.c. Determine timing of terminal bud endodormancy onset and release:During fall 2016, sets ofcranberry uprights with dormant budswere collectedfrom the field atthreedifferent chilling-hour accumulation: 350, 550 and 650 hours. At each samplingdate, subsets of uprights were placed in: forcing conditions at 25°C; -5°C constant temperature (freezing) for 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours, and 5°C constant temperature (chilling) for 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours.Sets in freezing and chilling environments were moved to forcing conditions after reach 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours of exposure to freezing or chilling conditions. The rate of bud break was evaluated at a two day-interval. After 700 hours of exposure to chilling temperatures, 53% of bud break was observed increasing to 80% with 1000 hours, 95% in 1500 hours, and 90% in 2000 hours of chilling. After 700 hours of exposure to freezing temperatures, we observed 40% of bud break increasing to 47% with 1000 hours, 59% in 1500 hours, and 54% in 2000 hours of freezing.During fall 2018 and 2019, cranberry uprights with dormant terminal buds were collected from the field after harvest and placed in two chilling environments. Environment A cycle consisted of 8 hours of photoperiod at 7°C followed by 16 hours at 2°C. Environment B cycle consisted of 8 hours of photoperiod at 7°C followed by 16 hours at -3°C. Uprights in environment A were exposed to chilling temperatures, while those in environment B were exposed to chilling and freezing temperatures. 1000, 1500, and 2000 hours of exposure to chilling temperature were evaluated in both environments. 50% bud break was observed in a 3-week period in buds exposed to at least 2000 hours of chilling temperature in Environment A. Buds in Environment B achieved 50% bud break in a 3-week period when exposed to 1500 hours of chilling plus 500 of freezing temperature. Similar results were observed in buds subjected to 1000 and 2000 hours of chilling, in which the additional freezing exposure contributed to the completion of endodormancy but in a lesser extent than the chilling temperatures. Objective 2) Evaluate environmentally and plant physiological factors for use as indicators to changes in cranberry bud cold hardiness level: During fall 2016 and spring 2017, temperature data loggerswere placedin the field to monitor hourly temperature experience at canopy and ground level.Starting a week after harvest, weekly samples of leaves from 'Stevens' cultivarwere collecteduntilicewas madein the beds for winter protection. Sampling resumed in the spring, aftericewas melted,and continued until bud break.During the fall period, chlorophyll b concentration remained constant, while chlorophyll a concentration decreased from mid-October to late December. During spring, chlorophyll a, increased from early March to a maximum in late May. Anthocyanins concentration during fall increased from mid-October to late December. During spring, anthocyanin concentration decreased its relative absorbance in early March to late May.During fall 2017 and spring of 2018, dormant cranberry buds were collected to assess cold hardiness level through a CFT. Freezing damage by evaluating the proportion of oxidative browning area appearance by a discrete scale with four levels of damages, from 0 to 3, being 0 no damage and 3 complete darkened area. Changes in location of the damage and intensity was correlated to temperature data and leaf pigment content, as well as day length during each sample date. A strong correlation was found between temperatures resulting in freeze damage of bud structures, expressed as LT50, and anthocyanin pigment degradation during spring. The results of this study will provide the basis for the development of a cranberry bud cold hardiness prediction model that will assist growers in the decision-making process regarding spring frost protection. Objective 3) Evaluating the responses of cranberry buds to temperatures during ecodormancy: During spring of 2018sections of cranberry sods (including roots, stems, and uprights) were collectedfrom the field and placedin three controlled environment treatments (10, 15, 20°C) with a 16-hour photoperiod, and upright phenology was evaluated weekly in all treatments, as well as in the field, until 100% bloom was achieved. The data collected was used to calculate developmental indexes. During spring of 2019, the study was expanded toover 20 commercial cranberry marshes in the state of Wisconsin. In each one of these locations hourlycanopy level temperature and upright phenology were evaluated weekly until 100% bloom was reached. Data collected in 2019 was used to validate the developmental indexes estimated in controlled environment settings during 2018, and a spring phenology prediction model was developed. The results of this work will help cranberry growers anticipate key phenological stages, such as bloom, based on canopy level temperature which will help target management practices to increase efficiency and reduce production costs.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Villouta, C., Workmaster, B.A., Bolivar-Medina, J., Sinclair, S., and Atucha, A. 2020. Freezing Stress Survival Mechanisms in Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait. Terminal Buds. Tree Physiology. Accepted
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2020
Citation:
Villouta, C., Cox, B.L., Rauch, B.M., Workmaster, B.A., Eliceiri, K.W., and Atucha, A. 2019. A device for the Controlled Cooling and Freezing of Excised Plant Specimens During Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Plant Methods. Submitted.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Villouta, C., Workmaster, B., Bolivar-Medina, J., Sinclair, S. and Atucha, A. 2019. Freezing survival strategy in Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.) terminal buds. HortScience. 54 (9S): S55.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Villouta, C., B. Workmaster, J. Bolivar-Medina, and A. Atucha. 2017. Exploring Cranberry Cold Hardiness Using Differential Thermal Analysis. North America Cranberry Researcher and Extension Workers Conference. August 27-30. Plymouth, MA.
|
Progress 10/01/17 to 09/30/18
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience for this project are fruit growers, in particular cranberry growers, and the scientific community. Changes/Problems:Objective 3 "Evaluate the effect of foliar ABA application on cranberry bud cold hardiness during fall" will not be completed. The main reason being the difficulty ofdetermining cold hardiness of cranberry buds through controlled freezing test and visual evaluation under a microscope. When we proposed to evaluate the effect of ABA on cold hardiness of cranberry buds, we were hoping DTA would be a reliable way to evaluate cold hardiness of cranberry buds. However, through the work done inobjective 1, we discovered that DTA could not measure cold hardiness in cranberry buds, as cranberry buds do not deep supercool. DTA is a relatively high throughput method to evaluate cold hardiness, compared with visual evaluation, which would have made the evaluation of a large number of samples needed to determine theeffect of ABA treatment on cold hardiness of buds possible. However, with visual evaluation of buds there are a very limited number of samples that can be evaluated in a reasonable amount of time after the controlled freezing test is performed. In the spring of 2018, we started a new study with the objective of evaluating theresponses of cranberry buds to temperatures during ecodormancy.During spring of 2018,0.2 m2sections of cranberry sods (including roots, stems, and uprights) were collected from the field and placed in three controlled environment treatments (10, 15, 20°C) with a 16-hour photoperiod. Cranberry upright phenology was evaluated weekly in all treatments and in the field until 100% bloom was achieved. The data collected will be used to calculate a developmental index for ecodormancy. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?One student is being trained on this project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?1/25/2018 Oral presentation on results from the project delivered at the Wisconsin Cranberry School. Stevens Point, WI 8/6/2018 Oral presentation at scientific conference.Villouta, C., Workmaster, B.A., Bolivar-Medina, J., and Atucha, A. 2018. Mechanisms of freezing stress survival in cranberry dormant buds. 11th International Plant Cold Hardiness Seminar: Importance of Cold Hardiness in a Warming Climate. August 5-10, Madison WI. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?1) Dormancy study data collection will continue through winter and spring 2019. 2) Workto determine presence or absence of ice barrier will continue during 2019. 3) Controlled freezing test to evaluate cold hardiness of cranberry buds will continue during fall 2018 and sprig 2019. In addition, we will conduct regrowth evaluation of sampled subjected to controlled freezing test, to determine the severity of the damage observed.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Goal 1. Define changes in cranberry terminal bud cold hardiness from fall to spring over the period of plant dormancy, focusing on the transition periods at the onset and emergencefrom dormancy. Goal 1.a. Determine if differential thermal analysis (DTA) can reliably estimate cranberry bud cold hardiness:This sub objective was completed in 2017. G0oal 1.b.Determine the presence or absence of an ice nucleation barrier:Cranberry terminal budswere sampled for histochemical evaluation, during fall 2018. Buds were fixed inglutaraldehydeandembeddedin resin.Cutted sectionswere stained with toluidine blue and rat monoclonal antibodies JIM5 against de-methyl-esterified HG and JIM7 against methyl-esterified HG. Sectionswill be evaluated underfluorescent and light microscopy to determine the presence of an ice barrier. During fall 2017 and spring 2018, cranberry terminal buds were sampled and a controlled freezing test was performed to visualize freezing events of the plant material. A FLIR 655SC video thermo camera recorded the samples during the control freezing test. Results from the video showed two distinctive frozen events; the first one from the base of the upright up through the stem and stopping at the bud axis, and the second one at lower temperature showing the freezing of the bud itself. This suggests the presence of an ice barrier at zone were the bud connects to the stem. Goal 1.c. Determine timing of terminal budendodormancyonset and release:During fall 2017, 0.2 m2sections of cranberry sods (including roots, stems, and uprights) were collected from the field the first week of November, and placed in three controlled environment treatments with short photoperiod (8 hours): a control treatment at 25°C, a freezing treatment of constant -3°C, and chilling treatment of constant 3°C.Samples in freezing and chilling environments were moved to forcing conditions (25°Cand 16 hr photoperiod) after reaching 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours of exposure to freezing or chilling conditions.The rate of bud break was evaluated at a two day-interval. Due to the freezing condition in the -3°C treatments, cranberry samples died and no data was collected for this treatment. 2. Evaluateenvironmentally and plant physiological factors for use as indicators to changes in cranberry bud cold hardiness level:During fall 2017 and spring of 2018, dormant cranberry buds were collected to assess cold hardiness level through a controlled freezing test. Buds from the controlled freezing test were dissected for freezing damage assessment using a dissection microscope. Buds were cut longitudinally with a double edge razor blade and immediately observed for damage distribution. Freezing damage was assessed by the evaluation of multiple bud structures: Bud scales, bud axis, lower stem, shoot apical meristem, and flower primordia. Damage for each structure was evaluated by severity according to the proportion of oxidative browning area and water soaking appearance by a discrete scale with four levels of damages, from 0 to 3, being 0 no damage and 3 complete darkened area. Changes in location of the damage and intensity was correlated to temperature data collected in the field, as well as day length during each sample date.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Villouta, C., Workmaster, B.A., Bolivar-Medina, J., and Atucha, A. 2018. Mechanisms of freezing stress survival in cranberry dormant buds. 11th International Plant Cold Hardiness Seminar: Importance of Cold Hardiness in a Warming Climate. August 5-10, Madison WI.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2018
Citation:
Atucha, A., Villouta, C., and Workmaster, B.A. 2018. Understanding Patterns of Cold Damage In Buds Using Control Freezing Test. Proceedings Wisconsin.
Cranberry School. January 24-25. Stevens Point, WI.
|
Progress 10/01/16 to 09/30/17
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience for this project are fruit growers, in particular cranberry growers, and the scientific community. Changes/Problems:Objective 1"Define changes in cranberry terminal bud cold hardiness from fall to spring over the period of plant dormancy, focusing on the transition periods at the onset and emergence from dormancy", is divided into 3 subobjectives: 1.1Determine if differential thermal analysis (DTA) can reliably estimate cranberry bud cold hardiness. Completed 1.2Determine the presence or absence of an ice nucleation barrier. This subobjective will be modified to use fresh tissue samples instead of bud sections embedded in resin. 1.3Determine timing of terminal bud endodormancy onset and release. This subobjective will be modified to determine cilling hour requirement for dormancy fufillment, as well as base temperature for growth in the spring after fufillment of chilling. Objective 1.1 has been completed, and we have determined that DTA can not estimate cranberry bud cold hardiness. However, this will affect objective 2 "evaluate environmental and plant physiological factors for use as indicators to changes in cranberry bud cold hardiness level", because we can not evaluate cranberry bud cold hardiness. To fufill objective 2, we collected and analyzed leaf samples for changes in pigment concentration during fall 2016 and spring 2017, however we will not be able to correlate this information with changes in cold hardiness in buds because the results from the DTA analysis we performed as we were sampling for the pigments, did not provide any information on the degree of cold hardiness of the buds. We will correlate changes in pigment development and degradation of cranberry leaves duringfall 2016 and spring 2017 with the temperature data we collected during this period. Objective 3"Evaluate the effect of foliar ABA application on cranberry bud cold hardiness during fall". We will have to modify this objective because we can not evaluate cold hardiness of buds with DTA. We will do visual evaluation of cold damage in buds after controlled freezing tests in a glycol bath. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Conference presentation:Villouta, C., B. Workmaster, J. Bolivar-Medina, and A. Atucha. 2017. Exploring Cranberry Cold Hardiness Using Differential Thermal Analysis. North America Cranberry Researcher and Extension Workers Conference. August 27-30. Plymouth, MA. Non-referred publication:Atucha, A (2017). Identifying frost damage in cranberry buds. Cranberry Crop Management Journal 30 (4): 5. 8/9/2017 Oral presentationon results from the projectdelivered at the Wisconsin Cranberry Summer Field day.Warrens, WI 4/11/2017Oral presentationon results from the projectdelivered at the Wisconsin Cranberry Early Season Grower Workshop. Tomah and Wisconsin Rapids, WI. 1/19/2017Oral presentationon results from the projectdelivered at the Wisconsin Cranberry School. Stevens Point, WI What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?1) Dormancy study data collection will continue through winter and spring 2018. 2) Cranberry anatomical study to determine presence or absence of ice barrier on fresh tissue samples will continue during 2018. 3) Evaluate foliar ABA application on bud hardiness.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
We collected dormant cranberry buds on a weekly basis starting the third week of October 2016 until the second week of May 2017, and performed DTA on each sampling date. Although high and low temperature exotherms (LTE) were detected during DTA analysis from buds collected during spring of 2016, results were inconsistent and the number of LTEs recorded did not reflect accurately the number of buds tested. In addition, temperature values of LTEs recorded during this period did not change, even when buds in the field experienced significant changes in temperature. Based on these results, during the spring of 2017, in addition to DTA analysis a second subset of samples was evaluated using a control-freezing test to compare the two methodologies. Results from the comparison between DTA and control freezing test suggest that the LTEs detected by the DTA system might not necessarily reflect the freezing of super cooled tissue within cranberry buds. To further test this hypothesis, during fall 2017 biweekly samples of cranberry buds were collected from the field and cold hardiness of buds was determine using the DTA set up and a set of copper-constant thermocouple attached to individual buds to monitor tissue temperature. Simultaneously, a second set of buds was evaluated through a control freezing test, using a glycol bath and submitting the samples to the same range of temperatures as in the DTA. No LTEs were recorded through the DTA system or through the copper-constant thermocouple, however, significant damage to buds was observed through visual evaluation of buds tested in the control freezing test. The data collected in these studies suggest that cranberry buds may not undergo deep super cooling, thus DTA is not a suitable methodology to estimate cold hardiness of dormant cranberry buds. Terminal buds were sampled for histochemical evaluation, from fall 2015 until spring 2016 at five different stages: Pre-harvest, Post-harvest, Pre-ice, Post-ice and Bud Swell. The samples were classified according to upright nature (i.e. vegetative or reproductive) and bud size. Buds were fixed in glutaraldehyde and embedded in resin. Cut sections were stained with fluorescent dye aniline blue, ruthenium red, and phloroglucinol for callose, pectin, and lignin identification, respectively. Sections were evaluated under fluorescent and light microscopy. No presence of ice barrier was identified in any of the samples evaluated, and there were no differences in tissue composition throughout the different sampling dates evaluated. However, we observed the presence of voids in bud scales, in particular after the sampling of buds during the Pre-ice sampling date. During fall 2017, the same stains were used in fresh bud section. However, no ice barriers were identified as in the fixed sections. During fall 2016, sets of cranberry uprights were collected from the field at three different chilling hours accumulation: 350, 550 and 650 hours. At each sampling date, subsets of uprights were placed in: control in forcing conditions at 25°C; -5 °C constant temperature (freezing) for 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours, and 5 °C constant temperature (chilling) for 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours. Sets in freezing and chilling environments were moved to forcing conditions after reaching 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours of exposure to freezing or chilling conditions. The rate of bud break was evaluated at a two day-interval. After 700 hours of exposure to chilling temperatures, we observed a maximum average of 53% of bud break increasing to 80% with 1000 hours, 95% in 1500 hours, and 90% in 2000 of chilling. After 700 hours of exposure to freezing temperatures, we observed a maximum average of 40% of bud break increasing to 47% with 1000 hours, 59% in 1500 hours, and 54% in 2000 of freezing.During fall 2017, 0.1 square meters area of cranberry vines and roots, refer to as sods, were sampled from the field once the vines had accumulated 350 chilling units. A subset of sods was placed a -3 °C constant temperature (freezing) for 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours, while a second subset was placed at 3 °C constant temperature (chilling) for 700, 1000, 1500 and 2000 hours. This study is currently underway. During fall 2016 and spring 2017, temperature data loggers were placed in the field to monitor hourly temperature experienced at canopy and ground level. Starting a week after harvest, weekly samples of leaves from 'Stevens' cultivar were collected until ice was made in the beds for winter protection, and sampling resumed in the spring, after ice was melted, and continued until bud break. During the fall period, chlorophyll b concentration remained constant, while chlorophyll a concentration decreased from 10.61 mg/g FW at the beginning of the sample period in mid-October, to 4.55 mg/g FW in late December. During spring, Chlorophyll a, increased from 2.07 mg/g FW at the first sampling date in early March, to a maximum of 4.67 mg/g FW during the last sampling date in late May. Anthocyanins concentration during fall increased from 0.37 in relative absorbance value at 535nm in mid-October, to 1.06 in late December. During spring, the anthocyanin concentration decreased its relative absorbance at 535nm value in leaves from 1.26 in early March, to 0.22 in late May.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Villouta, C., B. Workmaster, J. Bolivar-Medina, and A. Atucha. 2017. Exploring Cranberry Cold Hardiness Using Differential Thermal Analysis. North America Cranberry Researcher and Extension Workers Conference. August 27-30. Plymouth, MA.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Workmaster, B.A., Villouta, C. and Atucha, A. 2017. Cranberry Plant Freezing is SuperCool. Proceedings Wisconsin Cranberry School. January 19. Stevens Point, WI.
|