Request #0.1 - Terminate IEG-32
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: n/a
Action Requested: Terminate IEG 32
Submitted by: L.A. Crowder, OK
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 2/21/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

The membership of IEG-32 requests termination of this activity. Meeting attendance has continued to decline over the years due to retirements and changes in work assignments. The remaining members will meet informally during the S-281 meetings.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Termination approved 5/9/00. Numerical Identifier Assigned: AES Administrative Advisor Appointed:

Request #0.2 - Terminate IEG-30
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: n/a
Action Requested: Terminate IEG-30
Submitted by: W.H. Brown, LA
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/22/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

In recent years, this IEG has not served the function for which it was intended, that being for scientists to gather periodically for in-depth exchange of information on their research programs, findings, and accomplishments. There no longer seems to be a critical mass of research scientists in the SAES in the southern region with cottonseed quality as a major program thrust. Thus, there is little interest in continuing this IEG.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Termination approved 5/9/00. Numerical Identifier Assigned: AES Administrative Advisor Appointed:

Request #0.3 - New DC to replace S-272
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: New activity to replace S-272
Submitted by: W.H. Brown, LA
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/21/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: AC-3, AC-5

Preproposal:

1. Title: Development of Innovative and Value-Added Products from Agriculturally-Produced Materials

2. Activity Type: Development Committee

3. Accomplishments: The present activity is multi-state project S-272, Development of Textile Materials for Environmental Compatibility and Human Health and Safety. The current project has developed innovative non-woven products with innovative linking methods. Cotton and cotton/polyester mixtures have been developed and evaluated. Non-conventional agricultural fibers including sugarcane bagasse, kenaf, and others have been evaluated for spinning and weaving characteristics. A number of other useful fabric studies have been conducted including uv light transmission, fabric colorfastness of soybean based dyes, and anti-microbial finishes.

4. Justification: The continued development of innovative uses of cotton and other agriculturally-produced fibers is needed to maintain the competitiveness of natural fibers with synthetics. Advancements in the textile sciences have resulted in narrow specializations which require scientific synergy to fully realize the potential of innovative products or processes. Textile engineers, chemists, and colorists from AES, 1890 institutions, non-land-grant institutions, and ARS laboratories are expected to continue to cooperate and interact in the new activity which is expected to have a major scientific impact. For example, the current S-272 project has resulted in 30 journal articles, 5 patent applications, and numerous other proceedings, abstracts, and theses during the last two years only. The benefits of cutting-edge research are needed to continue to keep agriculturally-produced fibers competitive with those from synthetic sources. The development of new, value-added products is an integral part of Goal 1 of the USDA Strategic Plan.

5. Objectives: The objective will be to continue the development of new and innovative textile products and processes involving agriculturally-produced materials or residues.

6. Procedural Plan: Scientists currently participating in S-272 will determine research needs and specific objectives based on the final year's progress of S-272 and the current state of textile science innovation.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: AES scientists, 1890 institution scientists, ARS scientists, and non-land-grant university scientists from the southern and north-central regions. Disciplines included would be textile engineers, textile chemists, and textile colorists.

8. Duration: Two years

Request #0.4 - One-year Extension of IEG-61
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: n/a
Action Requested: One-year extension of IEG-61
Submitted by: V.H. Watson, MS
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/28/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

IEG-61 members are participating with DC98-01 in writing a replacement project for S-258 and will become part of that project when approved. Thus a one-year extension for IEG-61 is requested to allow time for the new regional project to be completed.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Extension approved 5/9/00 with new termination date 2001. Numerical Identifier Assigned: AES Administrative Advisor Appointed:

Request #0.5
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish new DC to replace S-273
Submitted by: G. A. Arkin, GA
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 4/3/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: AC-1, AC-5, AC-7

Preproposal:

1. Title: Development and Assessment of TMDL Planning and Assessment Tools and Processes

2. Activity Type: Development Committee

3. Accomplishments: The proposed activity is an outgrowth of S-273: Development and Application of Comprehensive Agricultural Ecosystems Models, which was initiated with the following objectives: (1) Modify, improve and evaluate under a variety of land uses and geographic areas existing hydrologic/chemical/sediment models incorporating biotic and economic components. (2) Develop new and improved systems to integrate existing data sources to enhance the applications of the comprehensive models. (3) Collect and assemble comprehensive databases necessary for model development and evaluation. Participants come from 15 different universities and federal agencies. This project, which is scheduled to end in September 2001, has been successful in improving models used for watershed assessment, developing user interfaces to facilitate model uses, and in developing data for model and best management practice development and evaluation. An additional goal of the project has been mentoring young professionals involved in water quality modeling. The project has had limited success in attracting economists and ecologists to the project and this is a major goal of the proposed activity.

4. Justification: The USEPA in August 1999 proposed rules that would require states to submit plans through the TMDL planning process to clean up all waterways in the US that fail to meet water quality standards. Costs associated with the effort are estimated to range from one to three billion dollars over the next decade. According to the USEPA, agriculture is the largest source of water quality impairment in the US. As a consequence, agriculture will be the focus of many TMDL studies and the TMDL planning program may possibly result in the first nationwide regulatory programs for agricultural nonpoint source pollution control. Secretary of Agriculture, Dan Glickman, members of S-273, and many others have expressed concern over the TMDL planning process. Specifically, Glickman states "the USDA is concerned about the science being used in assessing and attributing the effects of nonpoint source pollution. These models have a high degree of uncertainty and there are gaps in the data regarding what is natural background pollution versus what is caused by human activity." Because of our expertise in agriculture, upland water quality modeling, agricultural pollution control, and the TMDL planning process, we believe that we are in a unique position to evaluate existing watershed and TMDL tools to insure that they are based on sound science and are used in a sound manner. Similarly, we would like to develop new tools that are based on the best science available to insure that required water quality improvements are obtained with minimum hardship to the American agricultural community. This work will require an interdisciplinary team of university scientists, agency personnel, and private sector representatives. We have already identified interested agency personnel in the USDA, USEPA, USGS, and NOAA. Draft objectives to accomplish this are listed below.

5. Objectives:
   1. Develop, improve and evaluate under a variety of land uses, and geographic areas, hydrologic/chemical/sediment/biologic watershed models for use in TMDL development and implementation. (Includes model development and evaluation, development of new and improved systems to integrate existing data sources to facilitate model use, and collect and assemble data necessary for model development and evaluation.)
   2. Assess potential/likely economic benefits and costs and equity issues associated with TMDL implementation at the watershed and individual landowner scale.
   3. Assess the potential/likely water quality and ecological benefits of TMDL implementation at the watershed level.

6. Procedural Plan:
   1. Objective 1: Project members will, as a group, or as topic specific subcommmittees, develop and evaluate existing models for use in TMDL development and implementation, develop and evaluate new systems for integrating existing data sources, and collect and assemble data necessary for model development and evaluation. Grant proposals will be prepared and submitted from the group or the group's subcommittees to fund this objective.
   2. Objective 2: The new project will include both economists and ecologists as regular memmbers. These members will take the initiative on evaluating the economic and environmental impacts of TMDL implementation and will use established economic and ecological assessment tools to accomplish the objective. Grant proposals will be prepared and submitted from the group or the group's subcommittees to fund this objective.
   3. Objective 3: Assessing potential/likely water quality and ecological benefits of TMDL implementation at the watershed level will be accomplished by evaluating various modeling scenarios and through watershed-scale data collection efforts. Grant proposals will be prepared and submitted from the group or the group's subcommittees to fund this objective.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity:
   • University Participants: Agricultural Engineers, Ecologists, Economists, Environmental Engineers, Hydrologists
   • Agency Participants: NOAA, USDA-ARS, USDA-ERS, USDA-NRCS, USEPA, USGS
   • Private sector: agricultural organizations, environmental organizations, TMDL consultants

8. Origin of Request:
   • Jerry Arkin, SAAESD Administrative Advisor, e-mail: dirgrf@gaes.griffin.peachnet.edu
   • Current members of S-273: Development and Application of Comprehensive Agricultural Ecosystems Models
   • Theo A. Dillaha, Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, e-mail: Dillaha@vt.edu
   • Michael Hirschi, Agricultural Engineering, University of Illinois, e-mail: mch@uiuc.edu
   • George Vellidis, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of Georgia, email: yiorgos@tifton.cpes.peachnet.edu

Request #0.6 - Terminate SERA-IEG-24
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: n/a
Action Requested: Terminate SERA-IEG 24
Submitted by: L.R. Verma, LA
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 4/07/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

The Administrative Advisors of SERA-IEG-24 requests termination of this activity. Lack of participation and common interests are cited as reasons that the membership does not plan to seek renewal.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Termination approved 5/9/00. Numerical Identifier Assigned: AES Administrative Advisor Appointed:

Request #0.7
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: IEG
Action Requested: Renew IEG-33
Submitted by: V. H. Watson, MS
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 4/10/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: 1, 5

Preproposal:

1. Title: Review of Cooperative Variety Testing Programs in the Southern Region

2. Activity Type: IEG

3. Accomplishments:
   • Developed protocols for evaluating new varieties compared to conventionally developed methods.
   • Initiated a Service Awards Program (First award was presented to a public sector participant from Missouri.)
   • Increased participation, including members outside the Southern Region. (These include participants from Illinois, Missouri, and Purdue).
   • Developed a new comprehensive program, new statistical methods, and new standardization/harmonization procedures.
   • Implemented a Web accessible discussion group.
   • Became the first regional activity to develop and utilize a homepage for posting of minutes, reports, meeting information, etc.

4. Justification: Evaluation of crop varieties is a major activity in all state agricultural experiment stations. While this is often considered unattractive research because it does not generate technical publications, it is recognized that an effective variety testing program is tremendously important. The need for effective variety testing programs will continue to escalate because of further developments and improvements in crop varieties. Also, the increased availability and use of computers provides opportunities for other innovative approaches to handle and process data and provide recommendations on a prescription basis. The key to the success of this type of program has been the integration of both public and private sector participants with each sector naming co-chairs that alternately provide leadership for the activity.

5. Objectives:
   • Improve variety test through development of standard test procedures, use of check varieties, and standardization of reporting variety test results.
   • Provide names and addresses of variety test personnel to facilitate cooperation.
   • Provide an interface for discussion and resolution of problems common to public and private agencies.
   • Recognize individuals making significant contributions to variety testing programs.

6. Procedural Plan:
   • Share publications across state lines and functions.
   • Keep an up-to-date directory of personnel in both public and private sector agencies accessible on the activity's homepage.
   • Through homepage discussion group, maintain easy interaction of participants.
   • Engage services of external speakers to provide insights into new techniques. Invited speakers are both University and industry related.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: University personnel throughout all regions, industry representatives, and private sector individuals are encouraged to participate in this activity.

8. Duration: September 30, 2000 - October 1, 2005

Request #0.8
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish
Submitted by: William H. Brown
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 4/21/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:1, 2, 4, 12

Preproposal:

1. Title: Biotechnology and Bioconversion Engineering and Processes

2. Activity Type: Development Committee to write new MRF project

3. Accomplishments: n/a

4. Justification: Investments of billions of dollars in biotechnology have resulted in an extensive technology base that is poised to make a major revolution in our society. A core of Biological and Agricultural Engineers have emerged in recent years that are conducting essential engineering research to develop technology for this area. Much of the fundamental research that has been done will require the application of engineering technology to "scale up" to commercial application.

5. Objectives: Develop a Multi-State Research Project that will involve science and engineering disciplines to address the areas shown in the following procedural plan.

6. Procedural Plan: Research areas may include bioreactor analysis and design, modeling of bioreactor processes, tissue culture engineering, enhanced extraction of high value components from agricultural by-products, bioinformatics, bioseparation technologies, solid state fermentation, biosensors, process scale up, new food products from GMO's, quality preservation, functional foods, and production of pharmaceuticals and nutraceuticals from renewable resources.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Disciplines that might participate include Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Microbiology, Plant Science, Animal Science, and Entomology. States which are potentially interested include Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

8. Duration: 2000 - 2002

9. Origin: This proposal originates from AC-5, the Agricultural Engineering Department Heads.

Request #0.9
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish
Submitted by: Fred Knapp, KY
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 6/07/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:2, 5, 12

Preproposal:

1. Title: Sources, Dispersal and Management of Stable Flies on Beef and Dairy Cattle in North America

2. Activity Type: Development Committee

3. Accomplishments: This request for a new activity originated in the S-274 technical committee meeting, February 2000. Work on the existing project objectives has led to the conclusion that the stable fly is far more important in grazing cattle production systems than was previously realized, yet little was being done to understand its origins and develop management strategies. Participating scientists in the project concluded unanimously that the existing project's objectives are too broad and inclusive to maximize the value of multistate collaboration and interdependence. After lengthy discussion, the committee resolved that newly concentrated effort should be focused on the stable fly. The present request for a new activity will follow up on that problem.

4. Justification: Grazing and confined cattle are major components of agricultural production in the United States (http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/volume1/us-51/toc97.htm). In 1997, a total of 1.9 million farms of all kinds earned $200 billion in on-farm cash receipts. Of those, 1.0 million farms (53% of all farms) sold cattle and calves worth $40.5 billion (21% of all receipts), and 99 thousand (6%) sold milk worth $19 billion (10%). Between 1992 and 1997, numbers of beef and dairy operations in small and middle size ranges have declined slightly, whereas growth has occurred in the number and size of large, intensive operations.

   Stable flies (Stomoxys calcitrans [L]) are significant pests in all segments of the beef and dairy industries during spring, summer and fall. Adults attack the animals, mainly on their legs, suck blood and disrupt animal behavior. These effects translate into obvious discomfort and reduced thriftiness. Research accomplished under NC-154 demonstrated that attacks by stable flies reduce rate of gain by by feeder steers and heifers by as much as 20% per day, and feed conversion by as much as 15%. When extrapolated to all beef cattle on feed in the US, losses and control costs probably exceed $200 million, or approximately 10% of cash receipts for fat cattle.

   Current control strategies for stable flies in feedlots consist of source reduction against breeding larvae, and insecticides against adults on animals and their surroundings. Source reduction through sanitation is key to preventing local fly reproduction, because stable flies are known to develop as larvae in manure, soiled bedding and decaying feedstuffs. Larval stable flies have also been recorded in a wide array of other decaying organic substrates, and adult flies are presumed to disperse kilometers from points of origins. Hence, feedlot sanitation can be overwhelmed by immigrants from neighboring sources. Feedlot managers are often forced to use insecticides to provide direct protection during the worst times of the year. Unfortunately, insecticides are costly, they provide temporary relief, they are losing effectiveness to resistance, and they are falling into political disfavor. Research is needed to develop alternatives.

   Stable flies are a newly recognized problem in grass based dairy, cow-calf and stocker operations, and their effects have not been studied. Grazing cattle will stand in water and bunch together to avoid attack. Some producers and veterinarians believe stable flies reduce milk output, conception rates and calf weaning weights. Others believe standing in water increases incidence of foot rot, and that bunching leads to calf injuries and contributes to pasture and rangeland erosion. These effects have not been studied.

   No options exist for managing losses to stable flies on grazing animals. Source reduction is not viable, because producers are unable to define the sources of the flies attacking their animals. The flies do not breed in fresh dung. Furthermore, insecticides have never been effective or practical, because cattle can not be worked frequently enough to maintain insecticide residues on the animals' legs. Research on the sources of stable fly populations in pasture and rangeland could improve effectiveness of source reduction, and alternatives to insecticides are sorely needed for grazing operations, as well as the other beef and dairy sectors.

5. Objectives: The Development Committee will draft a proposal for a new, nationally coordinated research and extension effort to be centered on four specific topics: (1) To characterize summertime developmental habitats of stable flies and their overwintering success in those habitats throughout North America; (2) To assess dispersal and reproduction by stable flies on local and regional scales; (3) To estimate economic impact of stable flies on grazing cattle; and (4) To develop sustainable management strategies and tactics that will be adopted by producers, based on results from objectives (1) - (3).

6. Procedural Plan: The development committee, once appointed, will assemble views of stakeholders and prospective participants to refine project objectives and develop detailed procedures. It is anticipated that the development committee will consist of AES and ARS scientists who will be able to hold a first meeting in conjunction with the National Livestock Insect Workers' Conference in St. Augustine, FL, in June 2000. A prospectus will be disseminated to invite input from key participants, and from significant beef cattle and dairy organizations in September, 2000. Following comment, a draft of the project will be distributed to all participants in January, 2001, and be discussed at the 2001 meeting of the S-274 technical committee in Kansas City in February, 2001. The development committee will then be able to revise and submit a full proposal for a new RRF Research Project in June, 2001.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: The development committee should be a multidisciplinary team, consisting of scientists with background and experience in entomology, beef cattle management, meteorology and economics of pest management. Such scientists are available in the state AES system (FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, LA, MN, NE, NY, TN, TX), and in federal ARS laboratories in Gainesville (FL), Kerrville (TX), Lincoln (NE) and Clay Center (NE).

8. Cite the Origin of the Request: This request originated in the 2000 meeting of the technical committee of S-274. Administrative Adviser Dr. F. W. Knapp suggested that a new activity would be inorder, and recommended that it be initiated through Directors in the Southern Region. The S-274 technical committee nominated five scientists and all have consented to serve on a writing committee: J. A. Hogsette (ARS, FL), C. L. Jones (AES, TN), R. D. Moon (AES, MN) and J. B. Campbell (Chair, AES, NE).

9. Duration: 2000-2002

Request #0.10
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish
Submitted by: Fred Knapp, KY
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 6/14/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: 2, 5, 12

Preproposal:

1. Title: Arthropods and Manure Management: Impact on Nuisance Factors, Plant Nutrients and Food Safety

2. Activity Type: Development Committee for new MRF project.

3. Accomplishments: This request for new activity originated at an S-274 technical committee meeting, Feb. 11, 2000. S-274 is a broad project addressing a wide range of arthropod pests of livestock and poultry. Much of the effort of this project was on pastured cattle, but progress was also made on natural and chemical controls of littler beetles and pest flies which are primary concerns in manure management in confined animal feeding operations (CAFO's). The current request for new activity will build on these important accomplishments in pest control and also address the other manure nuisance factors of odors and dust, along with other manure management concerns of nutrient management and food safety.

4. Justification: Confined animal feeding operation (CAFO's) tend to concentrate in certain areas to achieve economy of scale and to be close to packing and processing plants, rendering plants and other infrastructure to support intensive food animal production. Feedstuffs are shipped from relatively large areas to these animal production centers, resulting in large accumulations of manure. If well managed and utilized this manure is valuable in crop and forage production. Poor management of this resource leads to a wide range of nuisance, ecological and health problems.

   Some areas of high animal production such as northern Georgia, and the Delmarva peninsula, do not have enough cropland within economical hauling distance to properly utilize the plant nutrients in their manure. In these situations soils may receive more nitrogen and phosphorous than can be utilized in that crop year. Chronic overloading leads to eutrophication of waterways as excess nutrients in the form of nitrates contaminate surface waters and groundwater. Breaching of manure holding lagoons can have catastrophic local effects such as fish kills. Water quality problems are a major concern associated with CAFO's, however house flies, darkling beetles, dust and odors are frequently associated nuisances which can greatly lower quality of life of nearby residents. These problems may occur anywhere that manure management is not optimal, but are most severe in high production areas. Some recent outbreaks of food borne diseases have been linked to fresh fruits and vegetables especially those that are organically grown. Manure used to fertilize organic produce is one of the suspected routes of contamination.

   We propose to compare three manure management systems for swine and caged layer manure. These will be (1) conventional deep-stack as in a high-rise production house, (2) black soldier fly larval digestion, and (3) soldier fly digestion followed by vermiculture. N, P, K and other plant nutrient concentrations will be determined in manure or the resulting residue. Presence and level of nuisance factors will be monitored. Manure and/or manure residues along with insect and annelid products will be monitored for bacterial pathogens.

   Soldier fly digestion of the manure is expected to result in about a 50% reduction in P and well over 50% reduction in N. These nutrients are incorporated into the soldier fly prepupal biomass which is self-collected for use as a feedstuff. Soldier fly prepupae are produced at an 8% dry matter conversion rate from hen manure into a 42% protein, 35% fat feedstuff. Rearing earthworms in the soldier fly digested residue will produce other valuable products and may further reduce the pollution potential. Preliminary studies indicate that bacteria are reduced in soldier fly occupied media, a process that may favorably reduce the pathogen burden of organically grown vegetables. A cooperative effort is needed to study these manure management systems in major poultry and swine production areas. Such studies will enlist several disciplines determining the practicality of these systems in several areas.

5. Objectives:
   1. Evaluate environmental pollution potential, nuisance factors (house flies, litter beetles, dust, odor) and food safety factors (pathogens on manure, manure residues and insect and annelid feed products) as affected by manure management.
   2. Technology transfer - extend practical information discovered in this study to producers through extension bulletins and presentations at selected producer meetings.

6. Procedural Plan: Caged layer and swine manure will be managed in high-rise type houses, or an experimental approximation that simulates the same general continuous-accumulation manure environment. Manure management will be conventional deep-stack, soldier fly larvae (SFL) digestion, and SFL digestion followed by vermiculture. Pollution potential of the manure/residue, pathogen burden of the manure/residue and resultant feedstuffs, and character of the nuisance factors (insects, dust, odor) will be evaluated respectively by the appropriate agronomic chemical, bacteriological, entomological or engineering procedures.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Agronomy, bacteriology, agricultural engineering and entomology will be necessary to achieve these research objectives and disseminate useful findings to producers. Participation by land-grant university and USDA-ARS scientists is anticipated.

8. Origin of the Request: This request was originated in a Regional Project S-274, technical committee meeting Feb. 2000. Administrative Advisor Dr. Fred Knapp suggested that this new activity was in order and should be initiated through the Directors in the Southern Region. The S-274 technical committee nominated Nancy Hinkle (CA), Wes Watson (NC) and Craig Sheppard (GA) to serve on the initial writing committee.

9. Duration: 2000-2002

Request #0.11
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: Extend DC 98-01
Action Requested: Extend for one year
Submitted by: Johnny Wynne, NC
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 07/06/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

DC98-01 writing committee has completed a proposed project which is currently being peer reviewed. The requested one-year extension will allow the development committee to make any revisions and get a new project on cotton genetics established.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Approved extension to 2001. Numerical Identifier Assigned: DC 98-01. AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: J. Wynne, NC

Request #0.12
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: n/a
Action Requested: Terminate S-270
Submitted by: Larry Rogers, LA
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 3/29/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

The S-270 committee felt that the major objectives of the project had been accomplished and requested a termination date of April 1, 2000 rather than September 30, 2001. This request and a termination report was submitted to CSREES 3/29/00.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Approved Numerical Identifier Assigned: n/a AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: n/a

Request #0.13
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: n/a
Action Requested: Termination of DC 99-03
Submitted by: Larry Rogers, LA
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 7/07/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: n/a

DC99-03 was established to write a replacement project for S-183. The committee will probably decide at its July 25-27 meeting to terminate the Development Committee and request an Information Exchange Group.

Reviewer Comments: Final SAAESD Action: Approved Numerical Identifier Assigned: n/a AES Administrative Advisor Appointed: n/a

Request #0.14
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: New Development Committee
Action Requested: Establish
Submitted by: Frank Gilstrap, TX
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 7/11/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: 5, 12

Preproposal:

1. Title: Biological Control of Arthropod Pests and Weeds

2. Activity Type: Development Committee to write replacement project for S-267

3. Accomplishments: During the five years of the project, considerable changes have occurred in the theory and practice of biological control, and these changes are reflected in the emphases and accomplishments of the regional project. The four objectives emphasized in this project are activities important to the Southern Region. Within each of these areas, subcommittees were established to facilitate interaction. Originally, these subcommittees were taxonomically based, but in 1997 the subcommittees were reformed such that they were aligned more closely with the overall objectives of the group. Many participants were active in multiple subcommittees. The revised subcommittees were: (1) biological control of weeds, (2) evaluation of natural enemies, (3) nontarget effects of natural enemies, and (4) rearing and release of natural enemies.

   The studies conducted under the umbrella of this Regional Project addressed a diverse array of pest problems and issues related to the theory and practice of biological control. Several studies were continuations of projects initiated under one or more of the previous Regional Projects, and carried forward. In addition, numerous studies were begun under the current project and will carry on beyond its termination.

   Major changes in policy and production occurred during the Project. Insecticidal transgenic varieties were released, and are now widely used in the Southern Region. This has created new opportunities for developing biological control in row-crop systems, which participants in this Project have begun to exploit. In addition, the passage of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) has greatly enhanced interest in developing alternatives to broad-spectrum pesticides. Finally, fast-tracking of environmentally- benign pesticides by EPA has encouraged the pesticide industry to develop greater partnerships within the biological control community trying to integrate biological control and selective insecticides. The persistence and/or continued spread of the musk thistle, tropical soda apple, melaleuca, and the Brazilian peppertree serve to remind us of the need for constant concern about invasive species. However, all these target pests also were impacted by activities of this Project.

4. Justification: A component of the Southern Region Strategic Plan developed in 1996 is to “Discover and develop effective pathogens, parasites, predators, and other biologically based techniques such as host-plant resistance, naturally derived pesticides, and male sterility techniques to mitigate or manage pest populations” (SAAESD 2000). Further, the Plan recognizes the need to “Create biocontrol techniques and integrate them with crop protection chemicals.” The Experiment Station Directors ranked biologically-based pest management technologies as the second most critical need for agriculture in the Southern Region, underscoring the importance of work in this discipline. The southern United States has a mild climate compared with the northern states, and as such supports a great diversity of pest arthropods and plants. Further, a moderate climate coupled with extensive international exchange in the Region create ideal circumstances for the incursion and persistence of injurious invasive species.

   The need for environmentally and economically sustainable production systems is growing as social pressure for safe food and fiber increases. In 1993, the Clinton Administration announced its goal of having integrated pest management (IPM) practiced on at least 75% of the production acreage in the US by the year 2000. Biological control constitutes a cornerstone of IPM, and its use must be broadened and fine- tuned to effectively achieve widespread IPM implementation. In addition, the passage of the Food Quality Protection Act in 1996 is requiring progressive detailed review of existing pesticides, and will certainly reduce the variety of pesticides available for use. Simultaneously, the more target-specific pesticides now being developed are costlier than their broad-spectrum predecessors and will add economic burdens to growers, as they must use combinations of more expensive insecticides to achieve results comparable to those formerly attained with conventional broad-spectrum materials. Given the poor recent prices for commodities, growers may face grave economic situations if forced to rely strictly on the more expensive novel pesticides or transgenic crop technology to manage pests. The situation becomes even more complicated when considering pest management in natural and urban areas, where economic, environmental, or human risk concerns may entirely preclude the use of pesticides. The need for developing biological control programs for pests in a variety of situations is more acute than ever.

   Although work addressing nontarget effects of introduced natural enemies was initiated in the current Project, this area is in need of considerably more, and more detailed effort. Putative nontarget effects must be confirmed or refuted, and a sound framework to ensure low-risk introductions established. The advent of new technology (e.g., insect-resistant transgenic crops, selective pesticides) provides new opportunities to implement biological control in production systems that were previously inimical to the survival of natural enemies. The integration of these new technologies with natural enemies will require specific information on the interactions between the technology and corresponding natural enemies.

5. Objectives:
   1. Cooperatively survey for, import, and assess natural enemies for invasive pests.
   2. Assess integration of exotic and indigenous natural enemies with current and novel pest management approaches, to improve environmental and economic sustainability.
   3. Evaluate effects of introduced natural enemies on target and nontarget organisms.
   4. Characterize and quantify the role of indigenous natural enemies in suppressing pest and beneficial species.
   5. Improve colonization and efficacy of natural enemies through habitat manipulation for resident species and improvement of rearing, distribution, and establishment of released exotic or native natural enemies.

6. Procedural Plan: The initial Southern Regional projects (S-192 and S-238) were focused primarily on importation biological control. The objectives of the current Project (S-267) were broadened to reflect the widening interests in conservation and augmentation biological control in the Southern Region. The objectives of the proposed Project are further expanded to incorporate the novel technology (e.g., transgenic varieties, cultural practices, selective pesticides) and needs (e.g., suppression of invasive species, alternative pest management tools, cost-effective and environmentally-sound pest management) in the Southern Region.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Agricultural Experiment Stations in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Also, Agricultural Research Service, USDA [Aquatic Weed Research Laboratory, Biological Control Mass Rearing Research Unit, Center for Medical, Agricultural, and Veterinary Entomology, Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Research Laboratory (USDA-IBPMRL, Tifton, Georgia), Plant Science and Water Conservation Research, Laboratory (USDA-PSWCRL, Stillwater, Oklahoma), Southern Insect Management Research Laboratory, Southeastern Fruit and Tree Nut Research Laboratory, Subtropical Agricultural Research Laboratory, Beneficial Insects Research Unit, U.S. Horticultural Research Laboratory, U. S. Vegetable Laboratory (USDA-USVL], Others [Florida A&M University (1890) (FAMU), Florida Department of Agriculture (FDA), Florida Division of Plant Industry (FDPI), North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDA), U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Waterways), and National Biological Control Institute, USDA-APHIS (NBCI)

8. Duration: 2000-2002

Request #0.15
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: IEG
Action Requested: Renewal to 2005
Submitted by: E. R. Emino, FL
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 8/9/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: 1, 5

Preproposal:

1. Title: Soil Survey

2. Activity Type: IEG

3. Accomplishments: IEG-22, Soil Survey meets as part of the Southern Regional Soil Survey Work-Planning Conference. Successful planning and coordination continues as a result of the conference. This is a formal mechanism for participants in each of the southern states to exchange technical information developed by the cooperators involved in the soil survey program.

4. Justification: The Southern Regional Soil Survey Work-Planning Conference has been held every two years to coordinate and work out details of the national and regional soil survey. IEG-22 is the experiment station personnel involved in the soil survey and meeting in conjunction with the Work-Planning Conference. This session of IEG-22 is needed to discuss the research program that relates to the soil survey.

5. Objectives: To coordinate and evaluate the cooperative soil survey underway in each of the southern states and to exchange technical information developed by the cooperators involved in the soil survey program. Relation to the Associations Strategic Plan: This IEG transcends several SAAESD high priority areas including Goal 4. An Agricultural System Which Protects Natural Resources and the Environment; Objective on Air, soil, and water conservation and enhancement. Also supports Goal 1. Further this activity is consistant with GPRA Goal 4 objective 101, Appraisal of Soil Resources and supports other goals and abjectives.

6. Procedural Plan: Continue bi-annual meetings with the Southern Soil Survey Work-Planning Conference to have improved and better coordinated research programs of the regional and national survey.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Work-Planning Conference representative from USDA-NRCS, USDA-Forest Service, State Department of Agriculture, TVA, 1890 Land-Grant Institutions and Tuskegee, 1860 Land-Grant Institutions and private industry representatives.

8. Duration: 2000-2005

Request #0.16
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: IEG
Action Requested: Establish new IEG
Submitted by: N. M. Cox, MS
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 8/11/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: 1, 2

Preproposal:

1. Title: Supplementation strategies for cattle using southern forages.
   (Alternative titles: (1) Protein and energy characterization of Southern forages with supplementation strategies for cattle; (2) Associative effects of supplements on intake and digestibility of low quality southern forages.)

2. Activity Type: IEG

3. Accomplishments: n/a

4. Justification: Efforts to improve production efficiency continue to be of high importance. Feed represents the largest economic input in life-cycle beef production. A large proportion (greater than two-thirds) of feed cost is in meeting energy requirements. Efficient energy utilization in beef cattle also enhances economic efficiency of beef production and minimizes overfeeding of other nutrients. Less waste nutrients from cattle production also improves air and water quality.

   Bermudagrass typifies forage Southern farmers grow to feed cattle. It is inherently low in protein and/or energy required to meet animal nutrient requirements. Supplementation with feed grains and feed by-products is often necessary to enhance animal performance and farm profits. The form of energy the in supplement is often incompatible with Southern forages resulting in poor forage intake and animal performance. In general, when total energy and protein requirements of ruminants are met, it seems that supplements with lower energy content and/or slower energy degradation rates perform better. (See Appendix A for more technical discussion of energy and protein supplementation.)

   Recently the National Research Council revised the nutrient requirements for beef cattle (NRC, 1996) with Update 2000. Many of the previously recognized problems of meeting animal nutrient requirements have been addressed by use of a rumen simulation model (level 2) and may explain the differences in performance between various supplements to bermudagrass forage. However, the model has not been adequately validated using Southern forages. Wet chemistry analyses to characterize rumen degradation rates of energy and protein have not been done and/or reported for many of the Southern forages and supplements used.

   The focus of this Information Exchange Group (IEG) is to identify through discussion critical/key research issues, biological relationships and nutritional management strategies related to forage utilization by ruminants. The intent is to develop livestock feeding strategies that will improve economic efficiency of forage-based livestock production. This will be done by interpretation of energy utilization data for development of effective, efficient production systems that minimize waste of nutrients. Continuous communication and collaboration among scientists working in their disciplines can lead to the most rapid development and transfer of new knowledge related to sustainable livestock production from forage-based systems.

5. Objectives:
   1. To facilitate a timely review and exchange of research data, information and ideas among scientists interested in improved supplementation strategies for beef cattle.
   2. To identify common research needs, interests, and strengths in order to foster cooperative research relationships and minimize duplication of research efforts within the group.
   3. To develop databases regarding rumen degradation values of energy and protein sources to validate and improve the models used for diet analysis of beef cattle.
   4. To summarize recent information regarding supplementation practices and improve profitability of beef cattle production in the Southern region.

6. Procedural Plan: This IEG will meet annually for discussion of current research, discussion of limiting areas of knowledge, presentation of new ideas for further research, and discussion of new applications in production settings. New cooperative arrangements for research are expected to arise from discussion at the annual meetings and through discussions that participants have using e-mail. Annual meetings will be held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Southern Section of the American Society of Animal Science or other professional meetings, when possible, to encourage attendance by graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, extension personnel, and others interested in our objectives. Officers will include a chair and a secretary. Duties of the chair are to organize the annual meeting and coordinate communication between meetings through an e-mail group consisting of the members and participants of the IEG. Duties of the secretary are to take minutes at the annual meeting and to prepare the annual report. An individual will be elected at each annual meeting by the participants to serve as secretary and chair-elect.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: On August 8, 2000 this proposal was sent to 24 scientists in the Southern Region that work in the interdisciplinary plant-animal interface, forage quality and ruminant nutrition. Their interest is presently being solicited and others in their institutions whom might also be interested. There has not been enough time to get all of the responses. However, to date (8/11/00) there are 9 scientists from Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas who have indicated an interest in participating in this IEG. More interest is anticipated. This diversity will contribute to the ability of this IEG to meet its objectives.

8. Duration: 2000-2005

Request #0.17
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: SERA-IEG
Action Requested: Establish SERA-IEG from SERA-TF-11
Submitted by: D.C. Coston, OK and R. A. Brown, MS
Date Submitted to Executive Director:
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews:

Preproposal:

1. Title: Coordination of Value-Added Activities

2. Activity Type: SERA-IEG

3. Accomplishments: SERA-TF 11 had developed a network among value- added centers across the Southern Region. This network is coordinated through a web-site. The centers are using this system for information as they serve clients in their respective states. They are also using this system to access unique facilities and to coordinate meetings and events.

4. Justification: Most states have "value-added initiatives" underway. These are closely linked with economic development. The SERA-TF 11 group has studied ways to better link the resources across the region and, then hope to expand the network throughout the nation. They have proposed that the appropriate vehicle is a SERA-IEG.

5. Objectives:
   1. Expansion of the search engine that has been established at Mississippi State to link value-added centers in the Southern Region be expanded to link centers throughout the U.S.
   2. The search engine is linked to the SRDC home page. Link to SAAESD home page and, when ASRED's home page is complete, link to it.
   3. Seek funding for ongoing maintenance of the nationwide search engine.
   4. Explore establishment of a virtual center to facilitate international marketing of value-added products produced by small and medium size processors.
   5. Identify food technology as a "low technology" industry as an opportunity for expansion. Seek research and education funding to assist.

6. Procedural Plan: Membership would be sought from throughout the region. Many of the members will be those who served on SERA-TF 11. Most communication would be electronically.

7. Proposed kinds of participation in the activity: Solicitation of members would be from value-added and food related centers in the region. Other likely members might include faculty and staff who are involved in economic development that includes value-added products and facilities as part of their agendas.

8. Origin of the request: SERA-TF 11, chaired by Lowell Satterlee from Oklahoma State reviewed value-added and food center programs. They have identified the agenda as noted in item IV above. They are requesting formation of a SERA-IEG to accomplish these objectives. AC-4 (Food Science Administrators) recently reviewed the request and endorses it.

   This recommendation is supported by Ronald A. Brown, Extension Director at Mississippi State, and D. C. Coston, Experiment Station Director at Oklahoma State, who have served as the Administrative Advisors for SERA-TF 11.

9. Duration: 2000-2005

Request #0.18
Checklist:
Type of Activity Proposed: DC
Action Requested: Establish new Development Committee to write replacement for S-275
Submitted by: Frank E. Gilstrap (TX)
Date Submitted to Executive Director: 11/28/00
Requested Advisory Committee Reviews: 2, 5

Preproposal:

1. Title: Animal Manure and Waste Utilization, Treatment, and Nuisance Avoidance for a Sustainable Agriculture

2. Accomplishments: During the five years of Project S-275, the interdisciplinary group of scientists and engineers from 22 states collectively advanced the science and practices of animal manure and waste management and utilization. A wide range of comprehensive research activities was carried out and significant progress was made with respect to efficient animal feeding practices, innovative and alternative animal manure handling and treatment technologies, precision land application methods and equipment, integrated manure nutrient and crop management systems, and minimizing the impact of manure management to air and water quality and public health. Strong collaboration among the researchers was fostered through annual meetings as well as other means of communication. Numerous technical and extension publications have been produced as the result of studies carried out under the umbrella of this regional project. More than 250 publications were generated in the first four years from 1996-2000. Most of the studies are still underway and will be carried on beyond the termination of the current project. In addition, new research ideas have been formulated and will be developed into studies in the new regional project.

3. Statement of Issue(s) and Justification: The need for advanced science and technology in animal waste management continues as social and regulatory pressures for safe food and clean environment increase. The regulatory climate around animal production has changed drastically in the past five years. A great deal of activity has occurred at the state and local levels on regulations and/or restrictions to control livestock and poultry production facilities, as well as the management of waste materials from those facilities. Following the announcement of the Clean Water Action Plan (CWAP) by President Clinton and Vice President Gore in February of 1998, EPA and USDA jointly developed and published Unified National Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) Strategy in March of 1999. The Strategy calls for AFO owners and operators to take actions to minimize water pollution from confinement animal facilities and the land application of manure. To accomplish this goal, the Strategy established a national performance expectation that all AFOs should develop and implement technically sound, economically feasible, and site-specific comprehensive nutrient management plans (CNMPs) to minimize impacts on water quality and public health. Coordinated research, technical innovation, and technology transfer and increased data coordination are among the seven strategic issues that should be addressed to better resolve concerns associated with AFOs. Extending and expanding the concerted and collaborative research effort of the investigators involved in the regional research project will ensure that the strategic issues are being addressed in a timely and effective manner.

   Nearly all the manure from AFO's in the US is currently land applied. It will require increased resources to develop and transfer technologies to the producers on topics such as site specific land application, effective manure handling and treatment systems for modifying and improving the properties of animal manure for optimal nutrient utilization, animal diet modifications for reducing excretion of nitrogen, phosphorous, and other environmentally sensitive chemical elements, crop system selection to best use the manure nutrients, and reducing nitrogen loss via ammonia volatilization. The development of equipment to quickly determine the nitrogen and phosphorus content of soils and manures is essential to make it possible for the applicators to more accurately apply manure to meet the crop needs. A holistic watershed approach needs to be taken to manage the nutrients from various sources including animal manure to prevent the adverse impact on surface and ground water quality. Advanced and cost effective technologies are needed to explore the uses of manure as raw materials for value-added products, such as feed, fuel, and chemicals. Improved animal facility design, manure treatment technologies and management practices are needed to minimize the generation and emission of odors, gases and particulates from AFOs. The fate and transport of pathogens from manures to the various parts of food chain will require extensive research. Innovative approaches need to be taken to avoid the contamination of foods with effluents from animal production facilities.

   The institutions and individuals participating in the proposed MRF have demonstrated the capabilities to address all the needs listed.

4. Objectives:
   1. Develop management tools, strategies and systems for land application of animal manures that optimize efficient, environmentally friendly utilization of nutrients and are compatible with sustained land and water quality.
   2. Develop, evaluate, and refine physical, chemical, and biological treatment processes in engineered and natural systems for management of manures and other wastes.
   3. Improve outdoor air quality through development of methodology, technology and management practices to reduce odors, gases, airborne microflora, particulate matter and other airborne emissions from animal production systems.
   4. Develop and evaluate feeding systems for their potential to alter the excretion of environmentally-sensitive nutrients by livestock.

5. Procedural Plan: All objectives will be addressed through a broad range of basic experiments, applied research, demonstrations and Extension activities. Most of the research and outreach activities are long-term efforts enhanced over the years by the MRF project. There are new projects as well. Here are highlights:
   Obj. 1 (land application) – a multi-state effort will use soil and water sampling techniques to determine the fate of manure nutrients applied to a wide variety of soils, cropping systems and climates. Protocols will be developed that will enable planners to better match the nutrient needs of crops and the supplied nutrients from animal manures, thus making it possible to reduce over- or under-fertilization and decrease environmental impacts. Equipment and technologies will be developed to enable precision application of slurry manure based on crop needs and nutrient concentration.

   Obj. 2 (Manure treatment) – a spectrum of basic research areas will be investigated, exploring ways to treat manure and other waste products. Constructed wetlands, riparian buffer areas, and other biological treatment systems will be evaluated for their effectiveness in removing nutrients from wastewater. Commercial and near-market hardware technologies for manure treatment will be tested and the results compared for economic feasibility. Scientists will explore technologies that enhance the uses of waste materials as feed, fertilizers, chemical stocks, and other products.

   Obj. 3 (Outdoor air quality) – Scientists will develop standard sampling and quantification techniques for emissions from animal production facilities, and will identify the key odors, pathogens, particulates and endotoxins emitted. Human health, nuisance, and long term environmental impacts of emissions from livestock production will be studied. Techniques for controlling emissions will be recommended.

   Obj. 4 (Feeding strategies for reducing nutrient excretion) – Scientists will employ different feeds, feed additives and feeding methods for enhancing nutrient bioavailability (uptake by the animal) and/or for limiting nutrient consumption (better balancing of the nutrients supplied with the animals’ needs).

6. Internal and External Linkages: The following experiment stations will be participants of this project: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. In addition, the scientists from USDA-ARS and USDA-CSREES will also be invited to participate.

   As a Multistate Research Activity, the objectives and work plans for a project to replace S-275 will address the following priority areas identified by the Southern Region:

   • Goal 1 - An agricultural system that is highly competitive in the global economy (objectives A, B, F, H, and I)
   • Goal 4 - Greater harmony between agriculture and the environment (objectives A-E, and G)

7. Performance Goal(s):
   • Output indicators: The project participants will measure output by experiments completed and results reported, results summarized for dissemination to public, and refereed journal articles published.
   • Outcome indicators: Examples of impacts will be best management practices (BMP’s) implemented by livestock producers, appropriate site-specific Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans written for farms, and measurement protocols adopted by the research and regulatory communities.

8. Educational Plan: Results of the research activities will be disseminated as appropriate through various outreach media. A major educational tool will be EPA/USDA’s National Curriculum for Livestock and Poultry Environmental Stewardship, which contains lessons addressing virtually all areas in the objectives of the Project proposal. Curriculum lessons will be updated as needed to relate the results of the Project’s activities.

9. Governance (Officers): Current officers of S-275 which will be involved in development of a new proposal are: Chair, Ted Funk, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Chair-Elect, Wendy Powers, Iowa State University. Secretary, Larry Jacobson, University of Minnesota.

10. Origin of the request: The requesting scientists include H.H. VanHorn, Florida Ag. Experiment Station; G.L. Newton, Georgia Ag. Experiment Station; P.W. Westerman, North Carolina Ag. Experiment Station; D.E. Brune, South Carolina Ag. Experiment Station; G.W. Evers, Texas Ag. Experiment Station; J.P. Fontenot, Virginia Ag. Experiment Station; R.H. Zhang, California Ag. Experiment Station; and R. Hegg, USDA-CSREES.

11. Duration: 2 years