The following peer-reviewed research articles, and news and editorial coverage, were published in California Agriculture, Volume 60, Numbers 1 to 4 (January-March, April-June, July-September, October-December), 2006.

Key to 2006 special sections:
BT = Biotech risks and benefits
CA = California Agriculture 60th anniversary
CT = Conservation tillage
FP = Food policies, food choices
LT = Restoring Lake Tahoe clarity

Research articles

Animal, avian, aquaculture and
veterinary sciences
Van Eenennaam AL. 2006. What is the future of animal biotechnology?
Cal Ag 60(3):132–9. BT
Van Eenennaam AL, Olin PG. 2006. Careful risk assessment needed
to evaluate transgenic fish. Cal Ag 60(3):126–31. BT

Economics and public policy
Blank SC, Boriss H, Forero L, Nader G. 2006. Western cattle prices vary
across video markets and value-adding programs. Cal Ag 60(3):160–5.
Block Joy A, Pradhan V, Goldman G. 2006. Cost-benefit analysis conducted
for nutrition education in California. Cal Ag 60(4):185–91.
Miner J. 2006. Market incentives could bring U.S. agriculture and nutrition
policies into accord. Cal Ag 60(1):8–13. FP
Rickard BJ, Sumner DA. 2006. EU support reductions would benefit
California tomato growers and processors. Cal Ag 60(4):207–10.

Food and nutrition
Blackburn ML, Townsend MS, Kaiser LL, et al. 2006. Food behavior checklist
effectively evaluates nutrition education. Cal Ag 60(1):20–4. FP
Heneman K, Zidenberg-Cherr S. 2006. Is lead toxicity still a risk
to U.S. children? Cal Ag 60(4):180–4.
Howard PH. 2006. Central Coast consumers want more food-related
information, from safety to ethics. Cal Ag 60(1):14–9. FP
Ikeda JP, Lexion CL, Turner BJ, et al. 2006. Dietary quality is not linked
across three generations of black women. Cal Ag 60(3):154–9.
Lagunas-Solar MC, Zeng NX, Essert TK, et al. 2006. Radiofrequency power
disinfects and disinfests food, soils and wastewater. Cal Ag 60(4):192–9.

Human and community development
Meyers JM, Miles JA, Faucett J, et al. 2006. Smaller loads reduce risk of back
injuries during wine grape harvest. Cal Ag 60(1):25–30.

Land, air and water sciences
Gertler AW, Bytnerowicz A, Cahill TA, et al. 2006. Local air pollutants
threaten Lake Tahoe’s clarity. Cal Ag 60(2):53–8. LT
Grismer ME, Ellis AL. 2006. Erosion control reduces fine particles in
runoff to Lake Tahoe. Cal Ag 60(2):72–6. LT
Miller WW, Johnson DW, Loupe TM, et al. 2006. Nutrients flow from
runoff at burned forest site in Lake Tahoe Basin. Cal Ag 60(2):65–71. LT
Mitchell JP, Munk DS, Prys B, et al. 2006. Conservation tillage
production systems compared in San Joaquin Valley cotton.
Cal Ag 60(3):140–5. CT
Veenstra JJ, Horwath WR, Mitchell JP, Munk DS. 2006. Conservation
tillage and cover cropping influence soil properties in San Joaquin Valley
cotton-tomato crop. Cal Ag 60(3):146–53. CT

Natural resources
Hatchett B, Hogan MP, Grismer ME. 2006. Mechanical mastication thins
Lake Tahoe forest with few adverse impacts. Cal Ag 60(2):77–82. LT
Long RF, Kiser WM, Kiser SB. 2006. Well-placed bat houses
can attract bats to Central Valley farms. Cal Ag 60(2):91–4.
Manley PN, Murphy DD, Campbell LA, et al. 2006. Biotic diversity interfaces
with urbanization in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Cal Ag 60(2):59–64. LT
Thompson LC, Forero L, Sado Y, Tate KW. 2006. Impact of
environmental factors on fish distribution assessed in
rangeland streams. Cal Ag 60(4):200–6.

Pest management
Daane KM, Bentley WJ, Walton VM, et al. 2006. New controls
investigated for vine mealybug. Cal Ag 60(1):31–8.

Plant sciences
Christensen LP, Beede RH, Peacock WL. Fall foliar sprays
prevent boron-deficiency symptoms in grapes. Cal Ag 60(2):100–3.
Ellstrand NC. 2006. When crop transgenes wander in California,
should we worry? Cal Ag 60(3):116–25. BT
SIDEBAR: Ellstrand NC. 2006. Scientists evaluate
potential environmental risks of transgenic crops.
Cal Ag 60(3):119–20. BT
Hanson BR, May DM. 2006. New crop coefficients developed for high-yield
processing tomatoes. Cal Ag 60(2):95­–9.
Lobell DB, Cahill KN, Field CB. 2006. Weather-based yield forecasts
developed for 12 California crops. Cal Ag 60(4):211–5.
Pitcairn MJ, Schoenig S, Yacoub R, Gendron J. 2006. Yellow starthistle
continues its spread in California. Cal Ag 60(2):83–90.

News departments

Editorial overview
Goldman CR. 2006. Science a decisive factor in restoring Tahoe clarity.
Cal Ag 60(2):45–6. LT
Editorials
Ludden P, Van Alfen N, Angle S. Wise use of biotechnology critical
to sustainable future. Cal Ag 60(3):2. BT
Sams B. Of Mendel, wikis and open source: New models for
knowledge creation. Cal Ag 60(4):2.
White J. California Agriculture delivers access to
peer-reviewed research. Cal Ag 60(1):2. CA

Index-2005
Cal Ag 60(1):39.

Introduction
Models clarify Tahoe clarity loss Lake Tahoe:
From research to policy. Cal Ag 60(2):49­–52. LT

Letters
Cal Ag 60(1):4; Cal Ag 60(2):43–4; Cal Ag 60(3):108;
More voices: Making the case for open access. Cal Ag 60(4):172–3.

Outlook
Lemaux PG. Timeline uncertain for agricultural biotechnology.
Cal Ag 60(3):114­­–5. BT
Sokolow AD, Grossi RE, Kawamura AG, Sumner DA. Panel debates
next Farm Bill’s impact on California. Cal Ag 60(1):5–7. FP

Research updates
Research seeks to adapt conservation tillage for California fields.
Cal Ag 60(3):112–3. CT
UC’s Sagehen reserve is California’s newest experimental forest.
Cal Ag 60(2):47­–8. LT
UC works to monitor, prevent, contain avian flu.
Cal Ag 60(3):110–2.
Weed control helps prevent erosion into Lake Tahoe.
Cal Ag 60(2):48. LT

Special coverage
30 years ago in California Agriculture. Cal Ag 60(4):216. CA
40 years ago in California Agriculture. Cal Ag 60(3):168. CA
50 years ago in California Agriculture. Cal Ag 60(2):104. CA
60 years ago in California Agriculture. Cal Ag 60(1):40. CA
Celebrating a work in progress: UC journal delivers research
to Golden State and beyond. Cal Ag 60(4):174­–5. CA
Citrus Research Center­­–Agricultural Experiment Station;
UC Riverside marks a century of agricultural innovation —
still thriving in an urban empire. Cal Ag 60(4):176–9.
Information for Contributors. Cal Ag 60(3):166–7.