IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/saea10/56519.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Profitability Efficiency Analysis of Methyl Bromide Fumigants and Mulch Systems Alternatives for Pepper Production in Georgia

Author

Listed:
  • Ferrer, Myra Clarisse R.
  • Fonsah, Esendugue Greg
  • Escalante, Cesar L.
  • Culpepper, Stanley

Abstract

With the goal of looking for the best fumigant substitute not only effective to production yield but more importantly to profitability and its excellent corresponding mulching option, this study used the complete factorial treatment analysis approach. Seven fumigant options and four mulching alternatives were included in the study and results showed that 1,3-dichloropropene plus chloropicrin and metam sodium (TELPICVAP) and smooth low density black on black polyethylene mulch (METAL) are the most profitable fumigant and mulch option.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferrer, Myra Clarisse R. & Fonsah, Esendugue Greg & Escalante, Cesar L. & Culpepper, Stanley, 2010. "Profitability Efficiency Analysis of Methyl Bromide Fumigants and Mulch Systems Alternatives for Pepper Production in Georgia," 2010 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2010, Orlando, Florida 56519, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:saea10:56519
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.56519
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/56519/files/FERRER%20-%20SAEA%20Paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.56519?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ferrer, Myra Clarisse R. & Fonsah, Esendugue Greg & Escalante, Cesar L., 2011. "Risk-Efficient Fumigant-Mulching System Alternatives for Bell Pepper Production," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2011, pages 1-12, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:saea10:56519. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/saeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.