Request #9.1

Reviewer Comments: AC-1 approves. AC-5 approves. AC-6 approves: The Horticulture Heads endorsed and approved this SERA-IEG. They did have some questions about the production aspect of the subject matter. Does the group have sufficient membership to adequately address the production issues related to post-harvest quality? If not, should the title be changed to more acurately reflect the information covered by this IEG? AC-7 approves.: Group should develop output objectives to assure productive meetings and sustainability. We need more emphasis on the economics of fruit and vegetable production and post-harvest technology. Make sure economists are invited and involved. Final SAAESD Action:Approves revision/extension of SERA-IEG-4 to 2004. CES approves. Numerical Identifier Assigned: SERA-IEG-4 AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: Calvin Schoulties, SC

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-4
Submitted by: J.I. Sewell (AES, TN) and (TBA - CES)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 12/15/98
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-4 Food Science & Technology
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-6 Horticulture
• AC-7 Agricultural Economics

Preproposal:

1. Title: Production and Post Harvest Technology of Vegetables and Fruits

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: SERA-IEG-04, during its ten-year existence, has annually brought together research and extension professionals from the Land-Grant Universities of seven southern states to share experiences and exchange ideas related to vegetable and fruit production, mechanization and post-harvest technology. Attendance at meetings and field tours (which are emphasized) conducted in the various participants' states has averaged 20 persons about equally divided between research and extension assignments. In some cases, producers and industry representatives have attended.

4. Justification:
   Vegetable and fruit crops within the Southern Region are now estimated to have a value of about $5 billion and this is growing annually. Four Southern states report total annual sales well exceeding $250 million, and three others report sales exceeding $85 million. The continuation of this SERA-IEG is expected to help to maximize the exchange of information in this important area.

   This activity enjoys high national and regional priority ratings. In the Southern Strategic Research Plan developed by the Southern Agricultural Experiment Station Directors (SAAESD) in December, 1994, the Research Program Area initiative, "Enhance Food Safety", received regional priority No. 4 of 15 priorities listed. "Protecting Plants for Sustained Productivity" and "Enhancing Agricultural and Markets and Competitiveness" received rankings of 5 and 9, respectively. The October 10, 1998 SAAESD draft of Proposed SAES National Agricultural Research Programs lists for emphasis Plant Protection Strategies and Food Safety. The Cooperative Extension System's national initiatives closely parallel those of the Experiment Station System.

5. Objectives:
   
   1. Provide a forum for exchanging research results, field experiences and observations, and other information relating to common problems facing Southern Regional extension specialists, engineers, and scientists having responsibilities in the production and post-harvest technology of vegetables and fruits.
      
   2. Foster the development of linkages with, and stimulate ideas among, persons representing various industries and academic disciplines and who have related common interests.
      
   3. Enable the Associations of Southern Experiment Station and Extension Directors to coordinate the diverse efforts of their personnel involved in production and post-harvest technology pursuits.

6. Procedural Plan:
   The group will meet annually, on a rotating basis, in the states of the Southern Region to exchange ideas, to discuss common problems, and to review research and extension activities related to the production and post-harvest technology of vegetable and fruit crops. On-site visits of production areas throughout the South will facilitate the process.

   Involving participants from the private sector who have first-hand knowledge of problems facing the vegetable and fruit industry will be emphasized. New issues to be addressed include: environmental/natural-resources management, recycling plastic mulch (row covers), pooling resources from various states and industries to more effectively address common problems, transplant production, post-harvest cooling, handling/shipping, and developing and modifying specialized field equipment and disseminating field-equipment plans and leaflets.

   A chairperson and secretary for the previous group, SERA-IEG-04, are in place. During the first meeting of the new group, the administrative advisors will arrange an organizational meeting during which a new slate of officers will be elected. The chairperson will arrange annual meetings in consultation with the administrative advisors and will preside at those meetings. The secretary will record the minutes of the meeting, distribute the minutes, and keep the group informed concerning other business matters. New officers will be elected annually. Officers may succeed themselves.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity:
   Researchers and extension specialists from Southern and other Land-Grant Universities including 1890 Universities. Industry representatives involved in production, handling and marketing of vegetables and fruit. USDA, ARS scientists.

   Participating disciplines may include: Plant and soil science, Agronomy, Horticulture, Entomology, Agricultural economics, Plant pathology, Agricultural engineering, and Pomology.

   Major problem areas are: Bioremediation, Weed control, Planting/transplanting, Insect control, Harvesting, Disease control, Processing/storage, Transporting, and Marketing.

8. Duration:
   The current authorization for SERA-IEG-04 expires in September, 1999. The duration requested for this revision and renewal if five years, expiring in September, 2004.

Request #9.2

Reviewer Comments: AC-1 approves. AC-5 approves: AC-5 suggests a link to S-283 since it was for many years the conservation tillage research project. AC-7 approves. Final SAAESD Action: Approves revision/extension of SERA-IEG-20 to 2004. CES approves. Numerical Identifier Assigned: SERA-IEG-20 AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: Greg Weidemann, AR

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-20
Submitted by: J.I. Sewell (AES, TN) and B.L. Harris (CES, TX)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 12/16/98
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-7 Agricultural Economics

Preproposal:

1. Title: Southern Conservation Tillage Conference for Sustainable Agriculture (SCTCSA)

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: Since its inception in 1978, this conference has been an effective vehicle for bringing together professionals and producers who are interested in learning about late developments in the application of modern conservation tillage practices. These meetings offering presentations and poster sessions emphasize field tours. Some of the conferences have enjoyed substantial participation by producers, agri-businesses, and private conservation groups. Registered conference attendance between 1995 and 1998 has varied between 95 and 205 with an average of 138. SCTCSA has developed a regional reputation for its meaningful application-oriented programs, well organized meetings and tours, and the distribution of meeting proceedings at the meeting. SCTCSA is an effective conference.

4. Justification:During recent years, interest in conservation tillage systems and winter cover crops has increased dramatically among farmers, researchers, extension and crop consulting specialists, and Natural Resources Conservation Services personnel. Labor, pesticide, and equipment savings of conservation tillage can help growers meet world market prices while sustaining productivity on our farms. Environmental groups, elected officials and regulatory agencies have joined with them in promoting conservation tillage systems as a means to reduce sediment, and nutrient and pesticide transport into streams while improving soil quality. In the past five years, substantial changes have occurred in both perception and acceptance of conservation tillage. Recent opportunities and challenges, as well as new technologies, must be shared among those interested in conservation tillage and sustainable agriculture systems. Since 1995, products of gene transfer and manipulation have transformed the landscape of farming, offering new, economical, cropping systems with conservation tillage. Protecting crops against selected herbicides, such as glysophate, offers options for inexpensive, over-the-top applications of the herbicide, so that weeds can be reliably controlled in narrow and ultra-narrow plant spacings that improve productivity. Herbicide-protected crops can eliminate many of the pre-emergence herbicides that are so difficult to use in conservation tillage. Insect growth regulators or pesticides have been introduced into most of our common row crops. Not only do they allow control of many common pests in conservation tillage fields, but, in conjunction with the beneficial insect habitat management possible in high residue field, they can also eliminate insecticide application in crops like cotton, corn and peanut. Suppression of insect feeding in corn can extend the production window ! in the South allowing later planting to better utilize summer rains. Similar promising breeding and gene transfer offer hope for control of nematodes and plant diseases as well. Production systems that prevent soil degradation through erosion must form the basis of a sustainable agriculture. Increasing demands on soil and water resources caused by an ever-increasing population and urbanization place a premium on remaining farmlands. Meanwhile decreasing availablity of quality labor in the rural areas, increased reliance on larger acreage to provide a suitable farm income, increased crop production costs, and decreased profit margins for commodities have underscored the necessity to develop improved production systems that maintain productivity and profitability while conserving and protecting natural resources. Conservation tillage systems are the most cost-effective way to achieve this. In addition, they contribute to overall environmental protection by reducing runoff of sediment, pesticides and nutrients from fields.

   The Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors, in their Southern Strategic Research Plan of December, 1994, highlighted research to meet the unique challenges that soil, climate and crops of the region create for conserving and enhancing our natural resources. Among their initiatives for Environmental and Natural Resources they proposed research that would conserve and enhance air, soil, and water resources and would increase the use of integrated and sustainable production management systems. Some specific research objectives were to:

   • Define soil quality indicators and identify conservation techniques that protect or enhance soil quality.
   • Create integrated management systems approaches that recognize soil, air and water interactions to enhance environmentally sound land use.
   • Use recovered nutrients from wastes, such as manure, poultry litter, and compost.
   • Develop biologically based management technologies for pest control.
   • Provide cultural management practices, including crop rotation, multicropping, and tillage.

5. Objectives: The primary mission of the SCTSCA is to provide a medium for exchanging information about conservation tillage and related technology between and among researchers, extension personnel, NRCS personnel, crop consultants, agrochemical companies and farmers. The primary goal of most conservation tillage research is to develop improved technology to increase yields and/or profitability of agricultural crops and livestock while maintaining or improving the quality of soil and water resources available for agricultural, domestic and recreational uses. The overall objective of the SCTCSA is to expand the conservation tillage systems in the South for the purpose of controlling erosion and reducing environmental degradation.

6. Procedural Plan: The Conference will be conducted annually at various locations throughout the South. Host Southern Land Grant agricultural institutes/colleges will, through a steering committee, make meeting arrangements, provide meeting publicity, and assume leadership in publishing the proceedings. The steering committee consists of some 20 to 30 persons representing Land Grant Institutions, USDA-ARS, NRCS, industry, and the agricultural press. Expanding the use of conservation tillage systems in the South to control erosion and reduce environmental degradation will be achieved by:
   • Providing a forum for and fostering the exchange of conservation tillage and sustainable-agricultural related information and ideas among farmers, researchers, action agencies, extension specialists and agents, and industry.
   • Fostering multi-disciplinary, multi-state, and industry cooperation in addressing conservation tillage issues.
   • Promoting the investigation of related researchable problems.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity:
   Discipline Participation: Entomology, Plant Pathology, Production Agronomy, Weed Science, Soil Chemistry, Agricultural Economics, Nematology, Soil Physics, Agricultural Engineering

   Problem Areas: Plant disease, insect, and nematode control; Soil fertility; animal and other waste utilization; plant nutrient movement; Environmental issues - erosion control, soil and water quality; Conservation tillage planters and other machinery and their utilization; Economics - investment and return, public costs and benefits.

   Participating Agencies: Land Grant and 1890 extension and research organizations; Federal agricultural organizations - USDA-ARS, NRCS; Industry - agricultural chemicals, farm equipment, agricultural press; Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC).

8. Duration: October, 1999 through September, 2004

Request #9.3

Reviewer Comments: AC-5 approves. AC-12 approves. Final SAAESD Action: Approves revision/extension of SERA-IEG-23 to 2004. CES approves. Numerical Identifier Assigned: SERA-IEG-23 AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: James Harper, NC

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-23
Submitted by: James D. Harper (AES) and Raymond Frisbie (CES)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 1/21/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-12 Entomology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Cotton Insects

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: Annual information exchange meetings have been attended by 50-60 persons/year for the past five years. Specific agendas have included annual updates on the boll weevil status in each participating state, eradication program status by state, update on federal weevil eradication operation initiatives from federal eradication program leaders, reports on research and extension programs that are contributing to program implementation and success, discussion of methodology modifications based on previous findings that could enhance program effectiveness, discussion of state referenda and issues involved from grower standpoints, and updates on status of weevil and cotton production trends in post-eradication states. By the end of each annual information exchange session, the participants are up to date on eradication status throughout the U.S.A., research accomplishments, and program directions at local, state, regional and national levels. Participants are clear on how their wor! k fits into the national effort to eradicate the weevil, and they are better prepared to relate to their own clientele how success depends on a wide spectrum of cooperation. Research needs are discussed and research results analyzed relative to their use in eradication program objectives, and new research, outreach, and operational needs are identified in a dynamic fashion as the eradication program progresses.

4. Justification: Insects and related arthropod pests collectively constitute a major impediment for cost-effective cotton production throughout the U. S. and the world. In the United States, the boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis, has historically shaped the pattern and success of cotton production. Where this pest has been economically managed, production has been possible; where it hasn't, cotton production has yielded to other crops. A successful weevil eradication program has essentially eliminated boll weevil from the Far West and from Virginia to Florida westward through Alabama and central and eastern Tennessee. In these states, cotton production has increased dramatically following eradication. However, the weevil still exists from much of Mississippi and west Tennessee through Texas and New Mexico, and will continue to limit production as well as pose the threat of reinvasion into 'clean' states until it is eliminated from these areas. The eradication process has been achieved thro! ugh cooperative efforts of USDA-APHIS, USDA-ARS, the State Agricultural Experiment Stations, the State Cooperative Extension Services, State Departments of Agriculture and other public and private agencies. Many issues on procedures, technology, education and logistics still need to be considered as the program expands into currently infested areas and states. This IEG provides a critical forum for research, extension and regulatory personnel to meet and exchange ideas on how to best work toward the final goal of eliminating the weevil in the U. S. and beyond into Mexico. Attendance over the past four years at the annual meeting has numbered 50-60/year and discussions have been informative and spirited.

5. Objectives:
   
   1. To provide a forum for discussing successes and failures in the boll weevil eradication program as it expands over the weevil's range in the U. S.
   2. To provide a forum for discussing and planning research and extension activities critical to successfully implementing and achieving eradication of the boll weevil in the remaining infested states.
   3. To provide a forum for discussing other arthropod pest problems on cotton that must be managed to insure economically successful production of the crop.

6. Procedural Plan:An annual meeting will be held that will bring together State AES, CES, Department of Agriculture, and commodity representatives, as well as USDA-APHIS, USDA-ARS, industry and other interested personnel. An agenda will be developed to insure that key topics relating to successes in the past year's weevil research, extension and regulatory successes and failure are made known and openly discussed, that plans of all participants for the coming year are outlined, and that recommendations, suggestions, and modifications can be made based on the group's collective experiences.

   It is anticipated that the eradication program will continue for more than five years but be well in place within ten years, at least in the United States. This SERA-IEG will need to concentrate on the weevil eradication objectives during that time frame. Participation by those interested only in Objectives 1 and 2 will fall slightly over this period as individual states achieve eradication goals.

   The objectives would allow for new or unforseen arthropod pest issues to be considered as the weevil diminishes in importance. It is clear from experiences in the states with successful eradication programs in place that applications made for weevil were holding secondary pests in check as well. In the absence of these sprays, such insects are causing problems in certain areas, and their management is having to be addressed. This SERA-IEG has and will continue to provide a forum for these issues under Objective 3.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The participants in this activity will be largely entomologists from the southern and western regions. They will include state AES and CES scientists, State Department of Agriculture personnel, cotton commodity group representatives (National Cotton Council, Cotton Incorporated, individual state cooperatives), USDA-APHIS and ARS scientists and administrators, and limited agricultural product company representatives.

8. Duration: Five years: 1999-2004

Request #9.4

Reviewer Comments: AC-1 approves. AC-5 approves. AC-11 approves: This group, consisting of both agricultural research and extension scientists, is active and functions well in addressing the important issues related to impacts of the Food Quality Protection Act on pesticides and their use in pest management practices. AC-12 approves. Final SAAESD Action: Approves revision/extension of SERA-IEG-1 to 2004. CES approves. Numerical Identifier Assigned: SERA-IEG-1 AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: Richard Jones, FL

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-1
Submitted by: R.L. Jones (AES-FL) and C.B. Ogburn (CES-AL)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/10/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-11 Plant Pathology
• AC-12 Entomology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Southern Region Pesticide Impact Assessment Program

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: The SERA-IEG 1 has met annually since its inception. The Group reviewed and implemented the recommendations of the 1994 Review of the National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program in the regional and state programs. As a result of the review team recommendations, PIAP is now a more focused program that is managed as one program both at the region and state level supported by the two designated lines of funding, Smith/Lever 3d and PL89-106. Annual meetings for the Group have focused on impacts of FIFRA 88 Amendments and the Food Quality Protection Act. Both of these federal acts have far reaching impacts on pesticides and their use in pest management practices. They are complex and information intensive. Information and data needs have been identified by the National and Regional Leadership and prioritized by states according to their needs. In response to USDA's Office of Pest Management Policy, the states in the region are developing crop profiles to outlin! e important production facts, cultural practices and chemical and non chemical pest management practices for important commodities in each state. \tab

4. Justification: Agricultural research and extension scientists are the most knowledgeable about pesticides and other pest management tactics used to manage pests affecting crops grown in the Southern Region. It is important that this expertise be assembled in a united and coordinated manner so that the U.S. Department of Agriculture will have relevant information to respond to regulatory decisions for pesticides made by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The information must also be available to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency for regulatory decision making.

5. Objectives: To provide a forum for research and extension scientists to identify and exchange information and data needs for pesticides, undergoing regulatory review, that are used in the management of pests in agricultural production in Southern Region.

6. Procedural Plan: The SERA-IEG will meet once each year or as determined by the group to share information on the Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (PIAP) project priorities and activities in the Southern Region and consider other appropriate PIAP issues. The time line for implementation and completion of the re-registration of pesticide products and their uses is slated to be completed by 2006.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The SERA-IEG membership consists of extension and research representatives from cooperating Land Grant Institutions in the Southern Region. Each state has a designated State Liaison Representative (SLR) for the Pesticide Impact Assessment Program. Assistants to the SLR also participate. SLRs and Assistants come from Entomology, Plant Pathology, Weed Science, and Agricultural Chemistry disciplines. Other regular participants in the SERA-IEG include the Extension and Experiment Station Administrative Advisors, Regional PIAP Coordinator and representatives from USDA-CSREES and USDA's Office of Pest Management Policy. Other occasional participants include Environmental Protection Agency staff, and Agrichemical Industry representatives.

8. Duration: The duration of this SERA-IEG is proposed to be five years. At the conclusion of the five year period, the activities of the PIAP and its information needs will be reviewed to determine if a continuation of the SERA-IEG is needed.

Request #9.5

Reviewer Comments: AC-3 approves. AC-5 approves. Final SAAESD Action: Approves revision/extension of SERA-IEG-10 to 2004. CES approves. Numerical Identifier Assigned: SERA-IEG-10 AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: Helen Shaw, NC

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-10
Submitted by: Helen A. Shaw (AES-NC) and Bill Hicks (CES-TN)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/13/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-3 Home Economics Research Administration
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)

Preproposal:

1. Title: Housing in the Rural South

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: The SERA-IEG 10 has met annually to share informatin and discuss issues related to housing in the Southern Region. During these meetings each state participating in the SERA-IEG has shared the activities of its research and Extension programs in housing. Representatives from non-profit organizations and from state and federal agencies were invited to make presentations at the meetings and provided the participants with information about current housing trends and programs. Opportunities to network with these groups resulted in shared resources and collaborative projects for several members (states).

4. Justification: Housing has traditionally been a problem in the rural South. Historically, issues of quality, affordability, and availability were a concern for many families and communities. Although housing has improved in many southern communities due to a robust economy, state and federal efforts, and improved community intrastructure, these same problems still remain for many households. Currently, other housing issues are affecting households in the South as well. Demographic changes indicate that the provision of appropriate housing throughout the life span is a concern for many families. Environmental concerns, such as radon, indoor air quality, moisture, water quality, and energy efficiency, affect many households in both new and old housing. First time home buyers in rural areas still struggle with mortgage availability, and alternative housing that could meet the needs of diverse populations is not always present in small communities.

   Housing is a basic human need. It is the major expenditure of most households, as well as their major source of wealth. It is important to the physical and psychological well-being of individuals and families. Because of the critical role that shelter has in the lives of people, it is important that southern researchers and Extension specialists discuss issues that impact housing, so that programming and research can continue to be meaningful and applicable to the needs of the people and communities of the region.

5. Objectives: The objectives of the SERA-IEG are to bring together housing researchers and Extension specialists to:
   
   1. Present housing research and Extension interests and capabilities of institutions in the region.
      
   2. Discuss current and future housing problems and needs that can be effectively addressed through regional research and Extension efforts.
      
   3. Identify current national research and Extension priorities related to housing.
      
   4. Meet with housing industry professionals and agencies to explore opportunities for interactions.

6. Procedural Plan: Housing researchers and Extension specialists will meet jointly on an annual basis to share information and identify housing research and Extension needs and priorities. Each meeting will include participation from various housing industry professionals.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Housing researchers with Agricultural Experiment Station appointments, Housing Extension Specialists, Specialists from USDA. Other housing researchers and faculty, and representatives from housing agencies and non-profits will be invited to attend the annual meetings.

8. Duration: The SERA-IEG extension is requested for five years.

Request #9.6

Reviewer Comments: AC-3 approves. AC-5 approves. Final SAAESD Action: Approves Development Committee. Numerical Identifier Assigned: DC 99-01 Administrative Advisor Appointed: Helen Shaw, NC

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish (for new MRF project)
Submitted by: Helen A. Shaw (AES-NC)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/13/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-3 Home Economics Research Administration
• AC-4 Food Science and Technology
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)

Preproposal:

1. Title: Genetic and Dietary Factors Contributing to Obesity

2. Activity Type: Development Committee to initiate new multi-regional funded (MRF) project to address the causation and control of obesity in humans.

3. Accomplishments: n/a

4. Justification: The prevalence of obesity in the U.S. has increased markedly, such that over 50% of adult Americans are now classified as either overweight or obese. Obesity disproportionately impacts minority populations, with prevalence increasing to approximately 66% in minority women and Mexican-American men. Moreover, this problem extends into the next generation. Ten percent of 4-5 year-old children are obese, a nearly two-fold increase over the previous decade, and 25% of U.S. children are either overweight or at risk for obesity, a number that has been growing more rapidly than obesity prevalence in adults. It is noteworthy that these increases have occurred despite modest public health successes in reducing the percentage of calories derived from fat in the American diet. Obesity results in a number of co-morbidities, including increased risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, some cancers, osteoarthritis, gallstones, sleep apnea, reduced fertility, depression and eating disorders. Consequently, obesity causes a dramatic increase in all-cause mortality, with approximately 300,000 excess deaths annually in the U.S. attributable to obesity-related co-morbidity.

   In addition to these health-related consequences, obesity exerts profound economic impact. Annual direct costs of obesity and obesity-associated co-morbidity are approximately $51 billion or 5% of total health care expenditures (1995), with another $47-48 billion in indirect costs (lost workdays, restricted activity days). Thus, the annual cost of obesity in the U.S. is nearly $100 billion, approximately 10% of total health care expenditures, and is likely to increase with the increasing prevalence of the disease. As part of research strategy for developing "A Healthy Educated Citizenry", the President's Science Advisor has identified the need for human nutrition research "that is ultimately aimed at promoting health, preventing disease, and reducing health care costs". Obesity is clearly a multifactorial disease which results from genetic, environmental and behavioral inputs. The heritable component of body mass index or body fat is generally estimated to range from 25-40%, although some studies suggest a much higher genetic component. The cloning of several rodent genes linked to obesity, each having a corresponding human homologue which has also been cloned, along with the identification of a number of candidate genes contributing to human obesity in select populations lends hope to the development of genetically based intervention and prevention strategies. However, it is also recognized that the recent rapid growth of obesity prevalence has not resulted from a sudden genetic shift and must therefore be viewed as an interaction, with an altered environment acting upon a suscecptible genotype. It is therefore important to study the interaction between genotype and diet (environment) as a key contributing factor in addition to the separate contributions of each.

   The Southern Region experiences an increased prevalence of obesity-related co-morbidity, and this focus area is consistent with both regional and national areas of emphasis and expected outcomes (establishment of relationship between diet and chronic diseases, and decrease obesity and chronic diseases in targeted populations). No current regional research projects deal with either the causation or control of obesity. However, substantial expertise already exists in the region, with ongoing related individual projects in multiple state experiment stations. Moreover, this expertise is complementary rather than overlapping. Integrating this expertise in a regional project would provide for a comprehensive synergistic approach which is not possible to achieve within a single institution due to limitations in personnel, equipment, and research material (including study populations).

5. Objectives:
   
   1. Identify candidate genes/genotypes which confer increased or decreased susceptibility to diet-induced obesity.
      
   2. Identify genetic and biochemical control points in appetite and energy storage regulatory systems which may be targets for either dietary or pharmacological manipulation.
      
   3. Determine whether altering patterns of food consumption and selection (i.e. macronutrient and micronutrient quantities and dietary sources) affect the risk of obesity in selected populations and/or genotypes identified in (1) above.
      
   4. Develop and evaluate population-specific prevention and intervention strategies.

6. Procedural Plan: Four universities (Stations), represented by members of Advisory Committee -14 (Human Nutrition), have expressed interest in regional obesity research. These include The University of Georgia, Louisiana State University, The University of Kentucky, and The University of Tennessee (Knoxville). Additional potential participants in the region have been identified via a search of the CRIS database. These individuals will be contacted to enlist them as participants and identify specific research programs within the proposed regional research project. Once established, the committee will organize projects within each objective for collaborative study and will develop proposals for regionally funded obesity research. The development committee will review obesity research in the region and identify areas requiring further emphasis and/or areas of significant overlap.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Disciplines that should be invited to participate include, but are not limited to, the following: Nutrition, Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Food Science, Veterinary Medicine, Public Health, Medicine, and Animal Science. Agencies that should be invited to participate incude, but are not limited to, the following: Colleges of Agriculture, Colleges of Medicine, Schools of Public Health, The Food and Drug Administration and USDA (ARS and FSIS).

8. Origin of the Request: AC-14, Southern Region Advisory Committee on Human Nutrition. AC-14 members preparing this proposal: Dr. Michael Zemel,(TN); Dr. Preston Mercer, (KY); and Dr. Roy Martin, (GA).

9. Duration: Two years.

Request #9.7

Reviewer Comments: AC-1 approves. Applaud the inclusion of turfgrass. This is needed not only in sod production, but also for use on home lawns, golf course fairways, athletic fields, etc. AC-5 approves. Final SAAESD Action: Approves Development Committee Numerical Identifier Assigned: DC 99-02 Administrative Advisor Appointed: James Fischer, SC

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Replacement of S-264
Submitted by: James R. Fischer (SC)
Date submitted to Executive Director: 2/16/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-6 Horticulture

Preproposal:

1. Title: Microirrigation of Horticultural Crops in Humid Climates

2. Activity Type: Development Committee to write new project to replace S-264.

3. Accomplishments:
   Objective 1 - To develop management systems using microirrigation techniques to apply water and nutrients to horticultural crops while minimizing adverse impacts on water quality and quantity and to determine these effects on water resources.
   Microirrigation system optimization studies on a wide range of horticultural crops from turfgrass, peppers, watermelons, and tomatoes to citrus, apples and grapes have improved the engineering designs and operation of the systems as well as determining optimal irrigation scheduling in varying climates.

   Objective 2 - To determine the economic benefit of different system components and design for greater efficiency in microirrigation systems.
   Engineering studies on irrigation system performance and component life expectancy has improved the economics of system design and maintenance. The many crop irrigation trials in this project have been analyzed for economic costs and benefits and the results communicated to the growers.

   Objective 3 - To develop expert systems (knowledge-based software) for the application management and design of micro-irrigation systems.
   Expert systems for dealing with system plugging due to water quality and bacteria have been developed.

   Related Effort - The S-264 group has developed a web page due to the efforts of Dr. Bob Edling as LSU: http://gumbo.bae.lsu.edu/~redling/s264/s97texas.html.

4. Justification:
   Importance of Problem - Increasing national and world population has placed increasing emphasis on efficiency of utilizing our precious natural resources. Water quantity is a critical resource in limiting supply as is groundwater quality. We must make the most efficient use of water resources and protect water quality. Irrigation of agricultural crops is a major user of water and can be a source of problems with water quality if not used efficiently. The extremely high efficiency of microirrigation systems are ideally suited to modern water resource management strategies. Also, the low cost of such systems and reduced water usage as well as positive effects on crops improves farm profitability and is very well-suited to smaller farms.

   Extent of the Problem - Irrigation is normally associated with arid climates. However, there are many times during the years, lighter soils and locations in the eastern US, especially in the warmer southeastern region, where crop growth and productivity is reduced due to water deficits. This problem is especially more important with high value horticultural crops that require more optimal conditions for the yields and product quality needed to compete in national and world markets.

   Need for Cooperative Work - Since irrigation is not used in all places and for all crops in this region, there are relatively few irrigation scientists at each university in the eastern region. Consequently, there is a very strong need in this group for continuing exchange of information, experience and ideas as well as for cooperation and coordination. Additionally, the blend of irrigation engineers with horticulturists provides an integration not feasible in most universities.

   Relationship to Current Regional/National Priorities - This project fits well in the broader priorities of water and soil resource conservation and management as well as improving farm profitability and reducing environmental impacts for farms of all sizes.

   Impact on Science - The research in this project has impacts primarily on the applied sciences of agricultural engineering and horticulture although there is also in-depth research on engineering principles and plant physiology supporting the applied aspects. The combination of engineering and horticulture has impacts on systems approaches to crop production.

5. Objectives: The specific objectives of the project will continue similarly to the current objectives given above although there is likely to be more emphasis on more integrated production systems and adaptation of this work to evolving precision agriculture techniques. The flexibility and level of control of microirrigation is ideally suited in both these directions.

6. Procedural Plan: As before the general approaches have been to determine the timing and volume needs of the crops for irrigation, engineer systems to deliver this efficiently, develop control methods to optimize system operation, and evaluate the economic and environmental impacts of the systems.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Current members are from universities in the Southeast as well as Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, as well as New Jersey and New York. Universities and appropriate USDA labs throughout the eastern US that deal with irrigation will benefit by participation in this project.

8. Origin of Request: The source of the proposal is the current S-264 Technical Committee.

   Submitted by: Alan N. Lakso, Chair, S-264 Technical Committee, Dept. Horticultural Sciences, NYS Agric. Exper. Station, Geneva, NY 14456. Ph 315-787-2399; Fax 315-787-2216; email - anl2@nysaes.cornell.edu; http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/hort/faculty/lakso/

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG (or SERA-CENTER**)
Action Requested: Establish new activity
Submitted by: Jim Fischer (AES-SC) and Jon Ort (CES-NC)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/2/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-4 Food Science and Technology
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-6 Horticulture
• AC-7 Agricultural Economics
• AC-11 Plant Pathology
• AC-12 Entomology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Southeastern Small Fruit Center (University of Georgia, Clemson University, and North Carolina State University)

2. **Activity Type: SERA-IEG or SERA-CENTER. The developers of this SERA recognize that certain aspects of the request do not fit any of the current SERA categories. They suggest that perhaps a new category "SERA-Center" would be more appropriate and ask for concurrence on establishing a new category more appropriate for this activity.

3. Accomplishments: n/a

4. Justification: The University of Georgia, Clemson University and NC State University have made substantial investments in basic and applied research and computer information delivery systems that can prove valuable to the future economic development of the region's strawberry, blueberry, grape and bramble industries. The Southeastern Small Fruit Center is needed to more effectively link and share land grant system resources within the region and to assure timely application of new knowledge and technology. Small fruit crops are knowledge and technology-intensive enterprises, and it is far more cost effective to meet the demands for small fruit crop information and research with a regional approach that capitalizes on the individual strengths of each cooperating land grant university.

5. Objectives:
   
   1. By electronically pooling their information and program resources, the southern land grant universities have the potential to create a Virtual Small Fruit Center website that can substantially resolve differences in the quality of educational offerings from state-to-state. The new website will serve to keep specialists, agents, growers and students well informed on the latest small fruit research and technical findings. It would also give instant access to a variety of small fruit extension publications, budgets, and crop advisories. In this process, the Center will undertake the development of an electronic version of the now outdated Chandler Strawberry Notebook (1995), and will also undertake the development of an electronic Best Practices Blueberry Production Guide and a Small Fruit Pest Management Guide for the three state region. It is visualized that, in addition to the traditional information mentioned above, interactive in-service training might be develop cooperatively between the states and done through the Web; regional field meetings might be conducted through the Web; and it is visualized that there may be fundraising done via the virtual center in support of relevant research and extension activities while maintaining the essentially free service of the Land Grant System.
      
   2. Establish administrative support for the regional center with an executive committee (EC) appointed by the Experiment Station and Extension Directors. The EC and the Director of the Southeastern Small Fruit Center will give leadership and coordination to a strategic planning process that will target research and extension position/program/project areas of critical importance to the region.
      
   3. The Director will seek appropriate rewards and recognition for participating faculty and agents in regional research and extension initiatives of the Center.
      
   4. The Director will be charged with documenting "economic and societal benefits" arising from the activities of faculty, agents and staff (webmaster, technical writer, etc.)

6. Procedural Plan:
   
   1. It was agreed on October 7, 1998, that the development of the Virtual Small Fruit Center should be a top priority of the newly formed regional center. The website will require a part-time webmaster and one technical writer. NC State University has already committed program and faculty resources to the development of the Small Fruit Center, including office space on the new Centennial Campus and 1/5th of the Director's and 1/5th of the Assistant Director's salary and benefits. The Director and Assistant Director of the Southeastern Small Fruit Center are responsible for organizing regional multidisciplinary research and extension teams that will directly contribute timely, relevant and reliable information to the website. Clemson University is committed to the support a webmaster for the development of a virtual Small Fruit Center Web page. This individual will be based at Clemson. A technical writer will be hired in January 1999 (after signing of the MOU) to ensure the content of the Web pages remains current and that appropriate educational materials, including newsletters and regional production, pest and economic management guides, are developed in a timely and efficient manner. The Director in consultation with the Webmaster and the EC will develop the job description for the Technical Writer in December 1998. The Webmaster at Clemson can commence work on the Virtual Small Fruit upon official approval of this two-year assignment by Clemson University. A survey regarding the computer literacy of small fruit growers will be conducted in early 1999 by the Director, Webmaster and IT specialists at Clemson and University of Georgia. The server for the regional website will be located at the University of Georgia. The IT specialists (at UGA, Clemson and NC State) will cooperate in developing home pages that will properly identify their institution as the primary web information source to end-users from each state. It is anticipated that a user-friendly regional Small Fruit Center Web site can be operational by January 2000.
      
   2. At the regional level, the Center is the small fruit research and extension focal point for representing the nature, importance and needs of the three land grant institutions to its various regional publics. As such, the Center can provide leadership and coordination to a strategic planning process that intertwines university departmental programs, faculty strengths and research and extension capabilities of the University of Georgia, Clemson and NC State University. At the Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists annual meetings (1999-Memphis, TN; 2000-Lexington, KY), the Director will meet with a regional advisory group of faculty and area specialists (approved by EC on November 4, 1998) to review regional research and extension activities (i.e.website, specific regional research projects) and to identify strategic faculty positions that may be 'at risk' because of an impending retirement.
      
   3. Peer reviewed website contributions are evidence of scholarly achievement, and the Director will be seek to establish an acceptable peer review process for website contributions by faculty and agents.
      
   4. In order to achieve measurable outcomes, the Center will establish industry baseline data (acreage, industry value) in 1999. The EC will also establish appropriate process evaluation measures (tasks, milestones, time-lines) for a review of the Center in 2001 (two years).

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity:
   1. List of disciplines (7): Plant Pathology, Horticultural Science, Soil Science, Entomology, Ag Economics, Ag Engineering & Food Science.
   2. Information Technology (IT) Specialists at each land grant institution.
   3. Center Advisory Committee (CAC) of regional faculty (2 members/state).

8. Duration: January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2000 (two years)

Request #9.9

Reviewer Comments: AC-5 approves. AC-7 approves: Strive to be more timely with publication. Good effort to involve extension. Strong support for this project. Final SAAESD Action: Approves new SERA-IEG to 2004. CES approves. Numerical Identifier Assigned: SERA-IEG-30 AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: Lavaughn Johnson, AL

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: New SERA-IEG from IEG-10
Submitted by: Lavaughn Johnson (AES Advisor of IEG-10) and Jack Bagent (CES-LA)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/19/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-7 Agricultural Economics

Preproposal:

1. Title: Southern Natural Resource Economics Committee

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: (of IEG-10)This group has been meeting as SRIEG-10. SRIEG-10 was last renewed in April 1994. The group has met on an annual basis since then, holding five workshops on a variety of topics (listed below) that have contributed to the professional development needs of SRIEG-10 members and others in attendance. In addition to the workshop, each meeting includes a session for SRIEG-10 members to present research proposals, research results, teaching activities, extension activities, and other topics of general interest as a forum to exchange information and ideas among the group members. The group also holds an informal meeting at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association annual meeting to discuss planning for upcoming workshops.

   The primary objectives of this activity have been to bring together natural resource economists in a forum that promotes the exchange of information on research and extension activities within and outside of the southern region. Programs over the last five year period have focused on natural resource topics of importance to the southern region, contributed to identification of future research and extension needs, and promoted discussion among the participants on how to address those needs.

   Workshops held since 1994 include:

   • May 12-13, 1994, "Linkages Between Economics and Ecology: The Eco-Eco Interface."
   • May 18-19, 1995, Auburn, AL, "Interstate Water Allocation Economics."
   • May 23-24, 1996, Atlanta, GA, "Incentive Based Approaches to Environmental Regulatory Reform."
   • May 22-23, 1997, Atlanta, GA, "Industrialized Animal Agriculture, Environmental Quality, and Strategies for Collaborative Problem Solving and Conflict Resolution."
   • May 21-22, 1998, Atlanta, GA, "Implementation of Nonpoint Source Policies in Southern Agriculture."

   Workshop proceedings published since 1994 include:

   • "Interstate Water Allocation Economics and Incentive-Based Approaches to Environmental Regulatory Reform," Upton Hatch and Lynn Reinschmiedt, Editors, SRDC No. 206, SRIEG-10 No. 33, June 1997.
   • "Industrialized Animal Agriculture, Environmental Quality, and Strategies for Collaborative Problem Solving and Conflict Resolution," William M. Park, Editor, SRDC No. 208, SRIEG-10 No. 34, December 1997.

   Workshop proceedings in review include:

   • "Linkages Between Economics and Ecology: The Eco-Eco Interface," E. Jane Luzar and John Bergstrom, Editors.
   • "Implementation of Nonpoint Source Policies in Southern Agriculture," Steven A. Henning, Editor.

4. Justification: SRIEG-10 has played an active role in the visibility and coordination of research, extension, and teaching programs in natural resource economics in the southern region. The annual workshops and published proceedings have attracted interest from scientists beyond the southern region in participating with the group.

   SRIEG-10 members have expressed two specific benefits from membership and participation in the group. First, participating in meetings provides the opportunity for members and other interested participants to exchange information on proposed and ongoing research, extension, and teaching programs. Members are able to stay current on research and extension activities being done by colleagues across the region and nationally, and benefit from methods and results reported at the meetings. This sharing of information helps to prevent duplication and facilitates further research and extension activity. Second, members view SRIEG-10 meetings as an opportunity for professional development. Careful selection of program topics and speakers allows meeting participants to continue learning about specific natural resource issues, follow advances in natural resource economics research and extension methods, remain current with respect to natural resource and environmental policy, and obtain knowledge in topical areas that, while important to extension and teaching programs, may be peripheral to their individual research areas. Where appropriate, speakers from fields other than economics are included in programs to address interdisciplinary aspects of program topics.

   In the past SRIEG-10 has been a predominantly research oriented group, though some members have joint research/extension appointments, and extension representatives have been invited as program speakers on a regular basis. Given the links between research, teaching, and extension that have been traditional elements of SRIEG-10, formalizing our extension ties and broadening the base of our membership seems to be a natural progression for this group. Such a move would expand the potential for indepth discussion of topics from conception as a researchable problem to dissemination and implementation of results.

5. Objectives:
   1. Bring together natural resource economists involved in research, extension, and teaching.
   2. Exchange existing information, identify ongoing research and extension programs in natural resource economics, identify research and extension needs, and discuss approaches for addressing those needs.
   3. Provide information from annual programs to interested parties through publication of program proceedings, where appropriate.

6. Procedural Plan: The SERA-IEG will meet at least once each year for 2-2 1/2 days. The main portion of this time will be allocated to a formal workshop/conference. The workshop will address an issue defined narrowly enough to allow in-depth treatment of the subject. The topic for each meeting will be based on the group's interest, as well as topical issues that arise. Speakers from outside the natural resource economics discipline and within the discipline will be included. Typically, members of the group will be included in the program to report on specific research and/or extension activities related to the topic. A second component of the meeting will be presentations by group members of research proposals, research results, extension program proposals or summaries, or other topics of interest to the group. A business meeting will be held at the end of each workshop to discuss the next meeting's topic, appointment of a planning committee, selection of a meeting site, and election of officers.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The group will include primarily natural resource economists in the southern region with research and/or extension appointments. However, participation by interested scientists in related disciplines and/or outside the region will be encouraged. Participation by members of USDA agencies and other public and private organizations will be also encouraged.

8. Origin of Request: Proposal for a SERA-IEG in natural resource economics comes from the current SRIEG-10 membership. Current officers of SRIEG-10 are: Chair - Steve Henning, Louisiana State University; Co-Chair - Upton Hatch, Auburn University; and Secretary-Treasurer - John Bergstrom, University of Georgia.

9. Duration: Five years

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-3
Submitted by: David Teem (AES-AL) and B. E. Caldwell (CES-NC)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/23/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-2 Animal Sciences
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-6 Horticulture
• AC-11 Plant Pathology
• AC-12 Entomology
• AC-13 Forestry

Preproposal:

1. Title: Integrated Pest Management

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: SERA-IEG-3 has annually brought research and extension professionals together to discuss ideas and experiences related to integrated pest management. This group has slowly and steadily impacted the IPM grants program in the Southern Region by providing inputs on priority areas for funding and on mechanisms to encourage participation by all pest disciplines. SERA-IEG-3 has also become a forum for reporting accomplishments of previously funded IPM grants.

4. Justification: Losses due to pests and efforts to control pests are major obstacles to crop and livestock production in the Southern Region. In addition, the cost of controlling pests in recreational areas and households combined with the environmental concerns associated with pesticide usage makes IPM a high priority in the Southern Region and the U.S. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency has set a goal to have 75% of U.S. cropland using IPM practices by the year 2000.

   This multitude of pest situations combined with the numerous pest disciplines make the coordination of all aspects of IPM critical. Historically, IPM has revolved around entomology with less emphasis on plant pathology, weed science, nematology, and other related disciplines; however, for IPM to be truly effective, all aspects must be integrated. SERA-IEG-3 originated with the Experiment Station and Extension Directors naming individuals from each state to provide recommendations on coordination of the IPM activities in the region. This need for coordination is as great or greater today than when this SERA-IEG was formed.

5. Objectives: To bring together, on an annual basis, research scientists and extension specialists from a diversity of disciplinary backgrounds who share a common interest in integrated pest management:
   
   1. To exchange current information on the status of new research findings and extension programs.
      
   2. To provide a forum for reporting findings from projects funded from IPM grants.
      
   3. To provide recommendations on the coordination and operation of the Southern Region IPM Grants Program.

6. Procedural Plan: This group will meet annually at an appropriate location in the Southern Region to exchange ideas and discuss common problems related to coordination of IPM activities in the region. A chairperson and secretary for SERA-IEG-3 are currently in place. During the first meeting of the new group, the Administrative Advisors will facilitate the election of new officers. Future annual meetings will be arranged by the chairperson, working with the Administrative Advisors, and minutes of the meetings will be distributed by the secretary.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Each Experiment Station and Extension Director will be responsible for appointing an individual to represent research and extension respectively, and this group will serve as the voting executive committee for recommendations to the Directors. Other participants should be encouraged and may represent entomology, plant pathology, weed science, nematology, toxicology, engineering, physiology, sociology, and other appropriate disciplines.

8. Duration: Five years.

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: New Development Committee to replace S-183
Submitted by: David H. Teem, AL
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/1/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-6 Horticulture

Preproposal:

1. Title: Phenology, Population Dynamics and Interference: A Basis for Understanding Weed Biology and Ecology

2. Activity Type: Development Committee

3. Accomplishments:
   Objective 1 - Document and characterize weed population dynamics as affected by long term rotational systems. The impact of tillage and herbicide inputs on weed population dynamics in cotton has shown that the high level of herbicide input was required in both conventional and reduced tillage systems and that cotton yield paralleled level of weed control with the highest levels of herbicide input resulting in the highest production. Studies on the influence of the set-aside program on weed populations have shown that management during the 5-year set aside program had no effect on weed populations observed in the subsequent two years of crop production.

   Objective 2 - Determine reproduction biology and develop population managementstrategies for sicklepod and yellow nutsedge. These studies are not completed but data \tab thus far indicate potentially useful results; for example, sicklepod seed extracted from soil samples are approximately 80% viable and approximately 50% of these are hard-seeded and require mechanical scarification before imbibing water. This has great implications for the acceptable threshold levels and allowing sicklepod to produce seed when considering the long-term management of this weed.

   Objective 3 - Document and characterize the interference associated with selected weed/crop interactions. Studies on Palmer Amaranth have shown that increasing weed densities up to 8 weeds per 10 meters of row decreased cotton lint yield 11% for each weed per 10 meters of row. Other studies on the competition of smooth amaranth and common purslane with lettuce have shown that method of phosphorus (hand vs. broadcast) can be important in reducing competition and is different for each weed species. General - One overall accomplishment of this project which is very near completion is the publication of a monograph "Weed Interference with Crops: A Compendium of Methods." This publication will be extremely important to many scientists in the U.S. and foreign countries.

4. Justification:
   Importance of the Problem - The impact of weeds on agriculture has been shown in many ways throughout history (i.e. development of the hoe, planting crops in rows for cultivation, development of herbicides), and it is estimated that in the United States weeds result in crop yield losses of over $6 billion. In addition, the use of herbicides exceeds all other pesticides combined and is currently approximately 200 million Kg. Any efforts at developing truly integrated pest management programs must include weeds and a basic understanding of their biology and ecology.

   Extent of the Problem - The full extent of the problem is not well understood due to lack of information on the size, distribution, diversity, and longevity of the soil seed population (seed bank). In addition, weed-crop interference occurs in virtually all crops; however, the losses due to the interference and the economic threshold values are not well understood or documented.

   Need for Cooperative Work - Many of our most troublesome weeds are found in all states in the Southern Region and in order to document and understand the importance of soils, climate, and ecotypes, it is critical to have experiments with common methods across locations. This data is needed for integrated pest management programs and can best be achieved by well designed regional experiments.

   Relationship to Priorities - This project is a critical part of Integrated Pest Management and this is important to improving farm profitability and for reducing environmental impacts.

   Impact on Science - The information generated from this project will provide a more basic understanding of weed biology/ecology in areas such as seed bank dynamics and weed/crop interactions. This information will then be used for more applied projects such as predictive models and economic thresholds for integrated pest management programs.

5. Objectives: The objectives for the new project will be similar to the objectives in the current project; however, the specific weed species being studied across the region will be modified.

6. Procedural Plan: Prior to the first meeting, new membership will be solicited in an effort to strengthen the project. At the first meeting, a new chairperson and secretary will be elected, and future annual meetings will be arranged by the chairperson in consultation with the Administrative Advisor. Annual meetings will be held at appropriate locations for discussion of project activities and the opportunity to view ongoing project research.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The current project includes primarily weed scientists, agronomists, horticulturists, and plant physiologists from the land grant system and USDA-ARS in the southern region. Additional membership from botanists, ecologists, plant modelers, soil scientists, and engineers will be encouraged.

8. Duration: Two years.

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Replacement of S-268
Submitted by: David H. Teem, AL
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/3/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-11 Plant Pathology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Evaluation and Development of Plant Pathogens for Biological Control of Weeds

2. Activity Type: Development Committee to write replacement project for S-268.

3. Accomplishments:
   Objective 1 - Evaluate selected pathogens as bioherbicides. A very large number of pathogens have been tested on a broad range of weed species\tab by contributors to this objective. Three pathogens have been identified as good candidates for commercial development and are being evaluated with common protocols. These three pathogens are:
   1. Colletotrichum truncatum (COLTRU) for control of hemp sesbania in cotton, rice, and soybeans.
   2. Alternaria sp. for control of dodder.
   3. Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis for control of Asteraceae weeds.

   Objective 2 - Enhance the efficacy of bioherbicide candidates. Several processes and materials are being developed and tested to enhance efficacy through inoculum formulation and enhancement of infection and disease development. The use of various oils and surfactants for reducing dew periods along with multi-pathogen strategies are promising.

   Objective 3 - Develop systems for mass-production of stable bioherbicide formulations. Development of liquid culture production methods for spores and microsclerotia of Colletotrichum truncatum (COLTRU) has successfully led to field trials for hemp sesbania control in cotton and rice. PestaTM granules have been developed for several pathogens and viability during extended storage periods has been retained.

   Objective 4 - Develop genetic characterization and transformation of bioherbicide\tab candidates as a means of enhancing efficacy and assessing environmental risk. Several studies are being conducted under this objective; however, results are inconclusive at this time.

4. Justification: Weeds continue to be a major concern in the U.S. with annual crop losses estimated at over $6 billion and the use of herbicides exceeding the use of all other pesticides combined. In addition to the environmental concern with such extensive herbicide use there is a continuing concern for development of resistant weeds. For example, it took approximately 25 years for the first atrazine resistant weeds to be identified but less than 10 years for sulfonylurea resistant weeds to appear. Bioherbicides have great potential for controlling weeds that have developed resistance to synthetic herbicides. The extent of troublesome weeds combined with the diversity of pathogens and climatic conditions makes it critical to have experiments with common methods across locations. This can best be achieved by well designed regional experiments. The information generated by this research! will provide fundamental information on weed and pathogen biology which can be used to develop better methods for production and application. The successful commercialization of plant pathogens for control of weeds has potential as an important component in Integrated Pest Management Programs.

5. Objectives: The objectives of the new project will be similar to the objectives in the current project; however, the specific pathogens and weed species will vary.

6. Procedural Plan: Prior to the first meeting, new membership will be solicited in an effort to strengthen the project. At the first meeting, a new chairperson and secretary will be elected and future annual meetings will be arranged by the chairperson in consultation with the Administrative Advisor. Annual meetings will be held at appropriate locations for discussion of project activities and the opportunity to view ongoing project research.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The current project includes primarily plant pathologists, weed scientists, and chemists from the Land Grant University System and the USDA-ARS. Membership includes scientists from locations outside the southern region, and annual meetings attract scientists from numerous foreign countries. Additional participants may include mycologists, biochemists, genetic engineers, and agricultural engineers.

8. Origin of the Request: S-268 technical committee.

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Establish new SERA-IEG
Submitted by: Gerald Jubb (AES-VA) and William Lambert (CES-GA)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/10/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-12 Entomology
• AC-13 Forestry

Preproposal:

1. Title: Southern Pine Beetle Working Group

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: n/a

4. Justification: Research and extension faculty, forest health professionals, and foresters in the southern region are interested in current activities in southern pine beetle (SPB) research, detection, and management. Working relations among these groups could be improved by increased communication among colleagues and increased funding for research activities. In a 1998 meeting held in concert with the Southern Forest Insect Work Conference (SERA-IEG-12) in Asheville, NC, recommendations were made to organize a SERA-IEG to improve cooperation and communication among colleagues interested in working on SPB. The group could foster and focus cooperative work and lead to a unified strategic plan for attracting funding and improving our understanding of SPB and its management. It would be inappropriate to attempt this level of activity under the SERA-IEG-12 umbrella, since this proposed SERA-IEG has a more specific focus of activity.

5. Objectives:
   
   1. Have annual meeting to share results of ongoing efforts and proposed activities regarding SPB. These meetings will also serve to develop and coordinate cooperative projects among participants.
      
   2. Develop a strategic plan that identifies research and extension areas where increased effort is needed.
      
   3. Build teams that can work in these areas and develop strategies for obtaining increased funding.
      
   4. Provide more exposure to the problems and impacts of SPB, with strategic targeting of important individuals and/or organizations who have appropriate authority and/or influence.

6. Procedural Plan: Yearly meetings will provide a forum for participants to be updated on research, management activities, and extension work associated with SPB. Meetings will also provide us an opportunity to strategize and make decisions on future actions. We will set up a listserve to encourage participants to interact more freely and conveniently. This will enable the group to act on issues or initiatives without having to wait for annual meetings.

   The next meeting of the informal SPB group in August, 1999 will be used to:

   1. Develop the rules for operating as a group. This will include incorporating or modifying this proposal into the group's charter.
   2. We will solicit updates from researchers and professionals on their current SPB activities.
   3. We will initiate the development of a strategic plan by identifying the most important areas of science and management that need to be addressed and advanced.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: This SERA-IEG will encompass researchers, extension specialists, and professional forest health specialists throughout the southern region. The areas of expertise are wide-ranging. The IEG will attempt to maintain an Executive Committee that consists of two participants from each of the following groups: university faculty, federal scientists, federal forest health specialists, state forest health specialists, and private industry.

8. Duration: Five years

9. Origin of the Request:

   Dr. Scott M. Salom (contact person) Department of Entomology Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0319 (salom@vt.edu) \tab Stephen Clarke USDA Forest Service Forest Health Protection 701 N. 1st St. Lufkin, TX 75901 (sclarke/r8_tx@fs.fed.us) Ron Billings Texas Forest Service P.O. Box 310 Lufkin, TX 75902-0310 (tfs.pcs@inu.net)\tab

   Jim Meeker Florida Division of Forestry PO Box 147100 Gainesville, FL 32614-7100 (meekerj@doacs.state.fl.us) Forrest Oliveria USDA Forest Service Forest Health Protection 2500 Shreveport Hwy. Pineville, LA 71360 (Oliveria_Forrest/r8_kisatchie@fs.fed.us)\tab John Reeve USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station 2500 Shreveport Hwy. Pineville, LA 71360 (jreeve/srs_pineville@fs.fed.us)

   C. Wayne Berisford Dept. of Entomology University of Georgia Athens, GA 30602 (berisford@bugs.ent.uga.edu) Kier Klepzig USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station 2500 Shreveport Hwy. Pineville, LA 71360 (kklepzig@asrr.arsusda.gov)

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: DC to replace S-269
Submitted by: Everett Emino, FL
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/10/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-6 Horticulture
• AC-11 Plant Pathology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Biological Control and Management of Soilborne Plant Pathogens for Sustainable Crop Production (S-269 title)

2. Activity Type: Development Committee

3. Accomplishments: The members of S-269 prepared a research proposal as a group and submitted it to the Southern Directors IPM Committee and the Southern Region Extension IPM Committee and was funded for two years. The title is "Evaluation of Biological Seed Treatments to Control Seedling Diseases of Cotton and Snap bean." Ten states received $3,000 each for two years except for MAFES which received $15,000 for a 0.5 FTE technical support person for Dr. Bill Batson as project coordinator. The Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station was the lead station in handling the grant.

   The members of S-269 have also jointly published results of their regional experiments. These citations are:

   • Batson, W.E., Jr., Caceres, J., Adams, P., Brannen, P., Conway, K., Elliott, M., Huber, D., Keinath, A., Rothrock, C. Schneider, R., Molsenbocker, C., and Sumner, D. 1997. Efficacy of biological seed treatments for control of seedlings disease of snap bean, 1996. Biol. Cult. Tests 12:166-167.
   • Batson, W. E., Jr., Caceres, J., Adams, P. D., Conway, K. E., Elliott, M. L., Huber, D. M., Keinath, A. P., Rothrock, C. S., Schneider, R. W., Molsenbocker, C. E., and Sumner, D. R. 1997. Efficacy of biological seed treatments for control of the cotton seedling disease complex, 1996. Biol. Cult. Tests 12:26-27.

   The project has three objectives. The project was approved in 1995. Annual reports are available for 1996 and 1997. The report for 1998 is in the final stages of preparation. Progress on biological control of soilborne disease is slow but steady.

4. Justification:
   1. Importance: Soil diseases continue to be a major problem in the South. With the removal of methyl bromide, alternative strategies for disease control are imperative.
   2. Extent of Problem: The South has high soil disease pressure on crops.
   3. Need for Cooperative Work: Biological control research lends itself to a regional approach. Complex ecosystems require complex multifaceted research approaches.
   4. Benefits: Further development of biological control agents for soil disease control will reduce losses as well as provide for alternatives to chemicals that are increasingly under attack for environmental and safety concerns. Such systems of disease control fit well with the environmentally friendly concepts of sustainability.
   5. Relation to priorities: This work fits in with priorities of "Pest Management Strategies" and "Protecting and Enhancing Soil and Water Resources."
   6. Impact on Science: This work continues to contribute to understanding fundamental relationships of soil ecology, disease and the manipulation and integration into disease control systems.

5. Objectives:
   1. Selection and optimization of biological control agents and evaluation of seed treatment and other application techniques, to enhance biological control of disease caused by soilborne plant pathogens.
   2. Determination of the applicability and efficacy of biological control agents across different pathogens, crop species, and cultivars to select biological control agents for more effective disease control.
   3. Implementation of management strategies include crop sequences, tillage, and other cultural practices to promote biological control with indigenous organisms.

6. Procedural Plan: The group plans to write a formal project around these objectives.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Scientists in the Southern Agricultural Experiment Stations, USDA/ARS and the Forest Service participate at some level. An annual planning and reporting meeting is held to focus on regional objectives and planning for the coming year. Every three years the committee meets with regional groups from the western and central regions for a broader symposia on biological control research to share information across regions.

8. Duration: 2 years

9. Origin of Request: Submitted by the Administrative Advisor on behalf of the S-269 Technical Committee.

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Extension of SERA-TF-11
Action Requested: One-year extension to 9/2000
Submitted by: D.C. Coston (AES-OK), Ron Brown (CES-MS)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/29/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

Justification: This group has been working well together and has developed a connected internet system for exchanging information concerning capabilities in each of the centers. They are now utilizing this system to connect clients who come into one of the centers with the capabilities (expertise, facilities, etc.) wherever it exists. There are several additional items for defining cooperation and collaboration they would like to complete. The Task Force is asking for a one-year extension of their authorization until September 30, 2000, rather than asking for authorization of another type of activity.

• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-7 Agricultural Economics

Preproposal:

1. Title: Economics and Management of Risk in Agriculture and Natural Resources

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: Information Exchange Group (IEG)-70 participants have hosted a conference every year since the group's inception. These conferences have attracted the top agricultural economists in the areas of risk and environmental management, and attendance has ranged from thirty to fifty researchers each year. In addition to university researchers, participants have included USDA economists and administrators, private sector economists and graduate students. Information has been exchanged three ways. First, the conference programs consisted of 1.5 days of formal research presentations, outlining cutting-edge research in the two subfields of economics. Second, there has been ample opportunity for informal exchanges of information among researchers, policymakers and representatives from the private sector during meal breaks and in the evenings. Third, abstracts of presented papers and an executive summary of each conference are being mounted on a website and linked to several others so that a broader audience can be made aware of the output of the group. This activity was begun with the 1998 conference with support from the Farm Foundation and will be continued with future conferences.

4. Justification: Risk and uncertainty are pervasive in agriculture and other natural resource industries. Decisions are constrained by limited and uncertain knowledge. The unpredictability of future weather patterns, vagaries of government policies affecting resource values and commodity prices, and the growing importance of environmental considerations in policy making add to the uncertainty surrounding decision analysis. Although these uncertainties are widespread, their nature and impact vary across firms, regions, and government agencies. Much progress has been made in understanding decision making under uncertainty, but the knowledge base is incomplete. There is a continuing need to examine both short- and long-term risks in agriculture and other natural resource based industries. Better understanding of how risk management practices affect the economic and natural environment, influence the adoption of new technology, and interact with public policies will improve farm-level decision making, as well as aid policy makers in addressing important policy issues in which risk is important.

   One of the strengths of the predecessor regional projects has been the national scope of the participating institutions. Although many problems and opportunities for research may be of local appeal, the earlier projects have demonstrated the analytical procedures developed jointly may often be employed to address issues of local importance. The formation of this SERA-IEG would continue the tradition of IEG-70, W-149, S-180 and S-232 in bringing together cooperating researchers from around the country to strengthen and coordinate research, policy, and extension efforts is risk analysis. There has been a change in the nature of risk research in agricultural and resource economics. A review of the termination reports of the earlier regional projects illustrates extensive research efforts resulted in characterizing producer attitudes towards risk, deriving distributional aspects of commodity price, yield, and production attributes, and developing improved decision models for considering risk from the perspective of the individual decision maker. Through the efforts of the cooperators in these earlier projects, consideration of risk in now widespread in applied research. Many of the models developed under the earlier projects are now utilized by agricultural and resource economists never affiliated with the risk projects. Consequently, efficiency gains in risk research may arise by revising the regional research format to a more open format by including a broader spectrum of researchers, policy analysts, and extension educators. Participants would share resource problems they are addressing that are significantly constrained by risk and uncertainty. Alternative approaches to incorporating risk considerations into the decision framework might be discussed, as well as developing new or revised approaches appropriate to particular situations. Continuation of the significant contribution of risk analysis to policy making will be ensured by the continued involvement of individuals from governmental entities.

   In short, a SERA-IEG is seen as an improved vehicle for development and dissemination of risk related research and extension information given the maturity of the field. The exchange of ideas will continue to enhance the research and extension productivity of the individual cooperators, foster cooperative endeavors within and across regions, and provide a resource for policy makers needing access to a pool of trained specialists in risk analysis.

5. Objectives: The SERA-IEG will provide a scientific/professional forum to facilitate the exchange of theoretical and methodological approaches to risk analysis, and to nurture the development of original concepts and preliminary research efforts related to agriculture and natural resources. Specific focus issues will include:
   
   1. Micro-level modeling of natural resource and environmental risk issues, including ground- and surface-water pollution, and increased emphasis on agricultural sustainability, and increased conflicts in resource demands between agricultural and competing users.
      
   2. Firm level risk management modeling, including the production, financial, marketing and environmental impacts and risks associated with new technology and the potential benefits resulting from improved access to information.
      
   3. Economic theory and the behavioral foundations of decision making under uncertainty, including simultaneity issues in risk assessment, asymmetric risk attitudes, and state-dependent utility.
      
   4. The impact of public policy on the risk environment of individuals, firms, and sectors within the economy, including exogenous trade shocks, food safety regulations, changes in financial and farm insurance institutions, and resource pricing policies.

   Opportunities are expected to arise for spin-offs of the SERA-IEG into regional research project proposals, as well as collaborative efforts in attaining extramural grants and contracts related to risk analysis.

6. Procedural Plan: Annual meetings will continue to be held to allow the exchange of information about ongoing research and extension information in risk and uncertainty. Advertisement of the meetings will be designed to reach a large number of potential participants, such as announcements placed in the bimonthly newsletter of the American Agricultural Economics Association. Advance registration and early preparation and distribution of program schedules will enhance the professional attractiveness of these meetings. A proceedings volume will continue to be published by participating stations on a rotating basis. Additional professional activities organized by the predecessor projects have included paper sessions and organized symposia at various annual Agricultural Economics Association meetings, and will be continued under the SERA-IEG framework. Annual elections will be conducted to fill the position of Chair, Secretary, and members of the program committee. Nominations, elections, and other administrative concerns of the SERA-IEG will be conducted during an open business meeting held in conjunction with the annual meeting.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Participation in the SERA-IEG will include agricultural economists from state experiment stations and cooperative extension services conducting research and extension activities in the area of risk and uncertainty. Continuing contributions from USDA economists working in the Economic Research Service, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, Risk Management Agency, and the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation will be encouraged through announcements of the meetings, as well as solicitation within these groups for invited papers.

8. Origin of the Request: This request originated through discussions of members of the current information exchange group, IEG-70, and is being submitted by Dr. Michael E. Salassi, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station (Administrative Advisor), with Extension support by Dr. Jack Bagent, Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service.

9. Duration: 5-years

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish DC to replace S-265
Submitted by: Larry A. Crowder, OK
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 4/23/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-1 Crops and Soils
• AC-5 Agricultural Engineering (Reviews all requests)
• AC-11 Plant Pathology
• AC-12 Entomology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Development and evaluation of entomopathogens and their toxins for control of insect pests

2. Activity Type: Development Committee to replace S-265

3. Accomplishments: II. Accomplishments: The members of S-265 prepared a research proposal and submitted it to the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors in 1995. The project was approved for 5 years and is titled "Development and Integration of Entomopathogens into Pest Management Systems." The project is national in scope and involves scientists from 21 State Agricultural Experiment Stations, 12 USDA/ARS laboratories and 2 USDA/FS laboratories. It is also unique it that it encourages active participation by commercial industries involved in agricultural biotechnology and biocontrol.

   The project has three objectives:

   1. Characterize indigenous, exotic and genetically altered entomopathogens for use in integrated pest management (IPM) systems
   2. Examine the population dynamics of entomopathogens and insect hosts as influenced by ecological conditions
   3. Incorporate entomopathogens into IPM systems.

   Progress has been made in the following areas:
   Objective 1:

   • Isolating new entomopathogens (bacteria, fungi, microsporidia, nematodes and viruses) and maintaining them in repositories for access by cooperating scientists.
   • Assessing the biological activity of these entomopathogens against target and nontarget pests.
   • Identifying determinants that regulate pathogen infectivity, virulence and host specificity.

   Objective 2:

   • Quantifying the ecological effects and environmental fate of indigenous, exotic and genetically altered entomopathogens.
   • Defining the interactions between entomopathogens and other biotic components within the ecosystem.
   • Defining the impact of abiotic factors on the survivorship and performance of entomopathogens.

   Objective 3:

   • Establishing pathogen efficacy against target pest insects;
   • Developing delivery systems and formulations for pathogen introduction.
   • Implementing these pathogens as a management strategy in IPM systems.

   Further details on specific entomopathogens, pest insects and commodity systems are available in the Annual Reports for 1996, 1997 and 1998.

   From 1996 through 1998, members of S-265 have:

   1. Published 317 technical research papers.
   2. Published a handbook on the Web - "Microsporidia (Protozoa): a Handbook of Biology and Research Techniques" SAAESD, SCSB no. 387, August 1997
   3. Produced and distributed an educational IPM video - "Insect Parasitic Nematodes: Tools for Pest Management" 1998.
   4. Prepared and distributed an educational IPM poster - "Entomopathogenic Nematodes" 1998.

4. Justification:
   Importance of Problem - There is an urgent need to accelerate the development and implementation of cost-effective, environmentally safe alternatives to chemical pesticides for insect control. As more and more chemical pesticides show up in groundwater, are implicated in health problems and are no longer effective due to pest resistance, biological control as a pest control technology is becoming more desirable. There is an opportunity to immediately develop and implement entomopathogen technology that will significantly improve food safety and affordability, reduce the transmission of animal disease, protect biodiversity, enhance water quality and preserve the environment.

   Extent of Problem - Effective control of noxious insects continues to be an overriding concern throughout all aspects of American agriculture. Over use of chemical pesticides associated with mitigating the damaging effects of agricultural pests and disease vectors, accelerated insect resistance to existing chemical pesticides and environmental pollution are world-wide problems. Current methods for insect control are not sustainable. The use of entomopathogens is a key component in IPM.

   Need for Cooperative Work - Regional research is essential to the development of entomopathogens for pest control. Microbial insecticides, nematodes and transgenic plants are registered for crop protection across state lines. This requires tests of efficacy, persistence, resistance management and other parameters under different sets of environmental conditions. Entomopathogens and their host pest insects are not limited by artificial boundaries. Host insects, non-target organisms and entomopathogens must be exchanged among scientists for optimal development.

   Benefits of the Research - Further development and implementation of entomopathogens for biological control of insects will directly benefit farmers, consumers and the environment. Use of entomopathogens as applied microbial insecticides or as classical biological controls will significantly lessen the use of chemical pesticides and therein reduce labor costs, potential health hazards to humans and wildlife, and pollution of soil and groundwater.

   Relationship to Current Regional/National Priorities - This project is a critical part of biological control and integrated pest management. ESCOP has established the development of pest management strategies as one of its highest-priority initiatives and has identified biological control, including the use of entomopathogens as a priority research objective. The discovery and development of entomopathogens and other biologically based pest management technologies have further been identified in the Southern Strategic Research Plan as requiring more focused effort within the Southern Region.

   Impact on Science - The proposed research will contribute significantly to greater implementation of entomopathogens as biological control agents of noxious insect pests throughout the US. The work will further increase our basic fundamental knowledge of the physiological and ecological relationships among entomopathogens, their toxins and host insect populations including virulence, pathogenicity, transmission mechanisms, persistence and host resistance.

5. Objectives: The general approach for the new project will be similar to the current project. However, objectives will be modified with greater emphasis on specific host insect-entomopathogen-commodity systems as indicated below:
   1. Utilization of microbial pathogens for control of fire ants.
   2. Evaluation of microbial pathogens for control of mosquitoes and other Diptera of medical importance.
   3. Development of microbial pathogens for control of gypsy moth and other forest insects.
   4. Development of entomopathogenic fungi and viruses for management of leaf-feeding insect defoliators of fruits and vegetables.
   5. Development of entomopathogenic fungi for management of homopteran and other piercing-sucking arthropods.
   6. Development of entomopathogenic nematodes and fungi for control of soil and cryptic insects.
   7. Development of entomopathogenic nematodes for suppression of plant parasitic nematodes.
   8. Insect resistance management with transgenic microbials (bacteria and virus) and plants.
   9. Enhanced persistence and environmental fate of entomopathogens.

6. Procedural Plan: New membership will be solicited prior to termination of the current project. At the first meeting, a new Chair, Secretary and Member-at-Large will be elected and future annual meetings will be arranged by the Chair in consultation with the Administrative Advisor. Annual meetings will be held at appropriate locations for discussion of project activities and the opportunity to view ongoing project research.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The current project involves insect pathologists, entomologists, microbiologists, molecular biologists, biochemists, geneticists, bacteriologists, mycologists, nematologists and vector biologists from State Agricultural Experiment Stations, USDA/ARS laboratories and USDA/FS laboratories throughout the US and Puerto Rico. Participation also includes scientists from commercial industries involved in agricultural biotechnology and biocontrol.

8. Origin of Request: Current S-265 Technical Committee (Submitted by: Theodore G. Andreadis, Chair, S-265 Technical Committee, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, CT 06504. Ph. 203 974-8510; Fax 203-974-8502; email - tgand@caes.state.ct.us)

Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Revision of SERA-IEG-2
Submitted by: Janet Johnson (AES-VA) and Melissa Mixon (CES-MS)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 7/7/99
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

• AC-4 Food Science and Technology

Preproposal:

1. Title: Enhancing Food Safety Through Control of Foodborne Disease Agents

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: The SERA-IEG-2 group has held several successful meetings. The group h