One-irrigation barleys were bred to be grown with only a single irrigation near planting time. To further our understanding of how to manage these new cultivars, two one - irrigation barley genotypes (Seco and 2 -22 -9) were grown at four seeding rates (20, 40, 60, and 80 lbs seed /A); four nitrogen rates (0, 50, 100, and 150 lbs N /A); two phosphorus rates (0 and 100 lbs P₂O₅ /A); four row spacings (6, 12, 18, and 24 inch); and three planting dates (Nov 19, Dec. 23, and Jan. 22). The optimum seeding rate, fertilizer rate, and row spacing were dependent on genotype and planting date. The optimum seeding rate was 40 to 60 lbs /A for Seco and 80 lbs /A for 2 -22 -9. An increase in seeding rate decreased kernel weight and kernel number per head but increased head number. A positive response to nitrogen fertilizer was not obtained due to the high levels of residual soil nitrogen at planting (20 ppm NO₃⁻N) except for the case of Seco at the Dec. 23 planting date. Phosphorus fertilizer increased yield only at the Nov. 19 planting date and if accompanied by 100 lbs N /A. Soil phosphorous levels were 2 ppm PO₄⁻P and a positive response was expected Kernel weight was not influenced by Nor P fertilizer. Kernel number per head increased with certain combinations of genotype and planting date. Head number decreased with N rate but increased with phosphorus. The optimum row spacing was 18 inches at the Nov. 19 planting and 12 inches for Seco at the Jan. 22 planting date. At other combinations of genotype and planting date, no differences in grain yield were detected due to row spacing. Kernel weight increased with row spacing at the Nov. 19 planting date; kernel number per head was generally not affected and, head number decreased with row spacing. The results of this study surest that any recommendations on how to grow one - irrigation barley are gross approximations because of variations due to year, planting date, and genotype.

WestBred 881 durum commands a premium price due to its superior quality, but it produces a lower yield than other commonly grown cultivars. This study was initiated to improve our understanding of how to grow WestBred 881. Two dumm cultivars (WestBred 881 and Aldura) were planted at five seeding rates (30, 60, 120, 180, and 240 lbs seed /A) and five row spacings (3, 6, 12, 18 an 24 inches) at the Marana Agricultural Center. The optimum seeding rate was 180 lbs /A for WestBred 881 and 120 lb /A for Aldura. An increase in seeding rate resulted in decreased kernel weight and number and increased head number. At row spacings of 3, 6 and 12 inches, grain yield of WestBred 881 was 6120, 6300, and 6060 lbs /A and grain yield of Aldura was 6350, 6770, and 7190 lb /A, respectively. WestBred 881 has larger kernels than Aldura but fewer kernels per head and heads per unit area. The yield advantage of WestBred 881 relative to Aldura at higher seeding rates was due to in kernels per head. At the closer row spacings, the advantage was due to kernel weight, kernels per head and heads per unit area.

WestBred 881 durum commands a premium price due to its superior quality, but it produces a lower yield than other commercially available cultivars. Studies conducted at Maricopa in 1987 suggested that yields of WestBred 881 may be increased by 3-inch row spacing. Studies were conducted at three commercial farms in an effort to mimic the effect obtained with 3-inch row spacing by using conventional grain drills to obtain more uniform plant spacing. Seeding twice in parallel directions did not result in the desired effect because the seed planted in the first pass was covered by extra soil from the second pass, and the seedlings emerged from cracks made by the disk openers from the second pass. Broadcasting on beds resulted in a poor stand and non- uniform plant distribution compared to drilling the beds. Planting twice in perpendicular directions to each other resulted in a more uniform plant distribution than drilling once, but a slightly poorer stand was achieved due to extra wheel traffic and yields were not significantly increased. The best method to obtain a more uniform plant spacing may be to seed with a 3-inch drill.

Three varieties of feed wheat were compared in an on farm demonstration in the Safford valley. AC79 -97, developed by the University of Arizona for the Safford area,produced the largest amount of high protein feed Comparing 200 and 300 pound per acre seeding rates, both AC79 -97 and Super -X yielded slightly more grain at the 200 pound rate than at the 300 pound rate. Yolo, a feed wheat variety that has done well in the Sacramento valley in California, yielded slightly lower than the Super-X.

Planting date is an important consideration when growing small grain varieties under reduced water use conditions. The objective of this study is to document interactions of planting date and varieties grown with a single irrigation near planting. Field studies were conducted at the Maricopa Agricultural Center during the 1988, 1989, and 1990 growing seasons. Six barley, durum, and wheat varieties were compared at four planting dates from November to February. Early November or early December planting dates were optimum. The relative performance of the varieties differed depending on the year and planting date. The highest yielding varieties over most planting dates were Solum and 6-39-1-1 (barleys), Mexicali (durum), and B85-277A and M83-39-18 (wheats). Improvement of barley, durum, and wheat genotypes for reduced water use conditions continues at the University of Arizona, and notable progress in durum and wheat performance has been achieved recently.

Yield trials were conducted at the Maricopa Agricultural Center during the 1990 -91 growing season. Barley, Durum and Wheat varieties as well as experimental lines from various seed companies were tested for yield performance. Gustoe and Sunbar 409 barleys, Turbo and Aldura durum wheats; and 911 and Klasic bread wheats were the highest yielding commercial varieties in this yield trial.

Planting date can have a tremendous effect on small grain yield. The purpose of this study is to document the interactions of planting date with current small grain varieties. Field studies were conducted at the Maricopa Agricultural Center over the 198$ 1989, and 1990 growing seasons. Six barley, durum and wheat varieties were compared at four planting dates from November to February. WestBred Gustoe was among the highest yielding barleys and WestBred Turbo was among the highest yielding durum regardless of planting date. The highest yielding wheat was WestBred 911 at the November plantings, Klasic at the December and January plantings, and Topaz and Klasic at the February plantings. The varieties also responded differentially to planting date in terms of plant height, kernel weight, heading and maturity date, but not test weight. This study demonstrates the importance of planting date in choosing a small grain variety.

A 12-inch row spacing is commonly used to evaluate small grain varieties at the Maricopa Agricultural Center and other experiment stations. The objective of this study was to document the interactions of varieties and row spacings. Sir barley, durum, and wheat varieties were planted in the 1989 and 1990 growing seasons at the Maricopa Agricultural Center at four planting dates (November, December, January, February) and 6 and 12-inch row spacings. At the December planting date, which is near optimum, WestBred 881 and Topaz performed best at a 6-inch row spacing while Gustoe, Aldura, Klasic, and WestBred 911 performed best at a 12-inch row spacing. Caution must be exercised when interpreting variety trials planted in 12-inch rows anti, in addition, conducted under growing conditions different from commercial practice.

This experiment was conducted to quantify herbicide carry -over effects on wheat, after plowing the cotton down with conventional and reduced tillage systems. Cotton layby applications of cyanizine, diuron, and prometryne at 1.5 lbs/Ac active ingredient did not result in wheat yields that were significantly different from the untreated checks within any of the tillage systems.

In the last two decades a drive for sustainable fashion emerged, grew and ultimately failed. In its beginnings the boom of green fashion and the saturation of labelled so-called sustainable garments, followed by the realization that most of the labelling did not hold any consistency behind it, overwhelmed consumers and made them immune to the effects of green marketing. This occurred because of the approach the fashion industry took regarding the topic. They needed to sell their products no matter what, and if a green tag with a recycling logo and a “green is the new black” motto would help them, they would embrace it. However, after several scandals and inquiries about the validity of the sustainable claims advertised, consumers grew rapidly disappointed and eventually unconcerned, falling back into their usual consumption habits without regard for ethical and environmental aspects. Nevertheless, once uncovered, the issues emerging from the production of garments could not be hidden once again, and companies were then required to take regulatory measures in order to mitigate the effects of the industry, if only to satisfy the general public’s knowledge and perceptions of the brands. As is well known this is not yet standard procedure and the ideal scenario for sustainable fashion production is still a road that continues on, but a small battle was won in the sustainability agenda and corporate social responsibility is nowadays common practice within large enterprises, again, if only for the sake of their stakeholders view. The truth, however, proves to be that this is not enough. Of the main environmental issues caused by clothing, not production, but use and consumption proved to be the most critical points in the larger picture. The amount of water, energy and waste created by laundering alone poses one of the biggest threats to the sustainable fashion notion, as well as the ever increasing textile waste in landfills. These issues are related entirely to each individual user and their actions, but the endeavor of making the large public aware of this issue is being undertaken by several, relatively small enterprises both private and public that don’t seem to be succeeding according to the studies. The public is not going to voluntarily wake up and undertake the quest for consuming and disposing sustainably unless they become aware first of their actions, and are given enough infrastructure to do so. This thesis concentrates on the problematic of consumer awareness regarding both use and disposal phases as well as the existing or possible solutions that help mitigate the devastating effects on the environment clothing is causing nowadays. / Program: Master programme in Fashion Management