Management of Citrus Cultivation in Emerging Rural Communities in Mexico: Practices and Challenges in the Central-Northern Region of Veracruz

Abstract

The central-northern region of Veracruz has experienced significant changes in traditional coffee cultivation and cattle raising due to the increased demand for fresh and industrialized citrus products. However, there is a lack of understanding regarding the use of agrochemicals in citrus production, driven by the belief that “more is better” and a limited awareness of responsible agricultural practices. This research examines citrus crop management in rural communities, focusing on farming practices aimed at improving production by controlling pests and diseases. Data for this study were collected from 51 producers through in-person surveys, using a 48-item questionnaire and the snowball sampling method. The findings reveal that despite 20 years of development, citrus production is still not fully established, and the excessive use of agrochemicals remains widespread. The expansion of citrus groves in the study region has altered the agricultural landscape and the socioeconomic structures of rural communities. Furthermore, environmental concerns about chemical residues in the fruit limit their commercialization and harm the environment through runoff into groundwater and water bodies. To address these issues, it is crucial to raise awareness and guide farmers toward the responsible use of chemicals in citrus cultivation, ensuring sustainable production and mitigating negative environmental impacts in all communities where citrus is grown.

1. Introduction

Citrus goods have a comparative advantage over other agricultural products because of their widespread market acceptance domestically and internationally [1], especially in the US and Canada [2]. This benefit has transformative change Mexico’s agricultural land use over the last thirty years. Traditional crops like coffee and sugarcane have been replaced by citrus cultivation [3], which accounts for 27% of the country’s agricultural production [4]. This transformation, driven by its economic value, has resulted in a new agricultural character in Veracruz’s central-northern region.

Because citrus farming has become the primary source of income for rural communities, this cultivation has significantly altered their social structures and changed the visual environment. In the central-northern region of Veracruz, citrus chains—which include mandarins, oranges, grapefruits, and limes—also act as an economic engine for at least fifteen communities. This growth has additionally driven the expansion of suppliers of technical inputs, transport logistics, and agricultural consulting services. The growing national and international demand for these citrus fruits has driven the expansion of their cultivation in the study region, alongside the increased use of agrochemicals, such as fertilizers and herbicides, to sustain these crops. These factors have not only been discussed in the literature [5,6,7,8] but also by local citrus growers due to the impact that these agrochemicals have on their orchards and the health of the farmers themselves through their use.

The citrus value chain in Citrus District III, which is located in the central-northern region of Veracruz, primarily focuses on Valencia oranges (Citrus sinensis) and Persian limes (Citrus × latifolia). In 2023, this sector generated an average annual value of MXN 2,893,617.90 from a planted area of 57,194 hectares, spanning 17 municipalities in the study region, including Atzalan, Chumatlán, Colipa, Coxquihui, Coyutla, Espinal, Gutiérrez Zamora, Martínez de la Torre, Misantla, Nautla, Papantla de Olarte, San Rafael, Tecolutla, Tlapacoyan, Tuxpan, Vega de Alatorre, and Yecuatla [3]. These municipalities encompass rural communities where 25% of the population experiences social deprivation and 2.5% has insufficient income [9]. The citrus value chain consists of plant suppliers (1), agronomic suppliers (2), orchard production (3), post-harvest processing in extraction and packing (4), commercial services for waxing or packing (5), and transportation services (6) [10].

Although the existing literature extensively covers agricultural practices [11,12,13,14] and methods to improve crop yields [5,6,15,16,17,18], the experiences of small rural producers—often grounded in local traditions and practical adaptations—represent a crucial source of knowledge in citrus crop management. These experiences provide unique insights into the agricultural management of citrus crops within specific contexts for similar communities. However, agricultural practices in citrus orchard management have direct implications for both productivity and orchard sustainability. Studies such as those by [19,20] have recommended that when evaluating orchard production performance, variables related to orchard sustainability and resilience should be included, such as pest and disease control [21,22,23], the risks associated with chemical use [24,25], weed management strategies, and pruning techniques [24]. These variables, supported by previous research, form the foundation of this investigation, highlighting the need for a more detailed examination of citrus orchard management practices in rural regions.

This article aims to characterize the agricultural practices used in citrus cultivation in the central-northern region of Veracruz, Mexico. The research identifies the types of pests and diseases that typically prevail in citrus crops and examines not only the agrochemicals employed but also the cultural practices currently used by citrus growers for their control and remediation, primarily in the cultivation of Persian lime and Valencia orange, which are the dominant crops in the study region. Additionally, this study addresses local citrus growers’ concerns regarding the impact of agrochemical use on orchard productivity and the health of the citrus growers themselves. By examining these issues, this study offers a perspective on managing orchards in rural areas and investigates specific agricultural techniques for citrus crop management. This provides a foundation for future research aimed at improving the sustainability and efficiency of citrus farming in rural regions.

2. Materials and Methods

This qualitative study used a structured questionnaire to record citrus growers’ knowledge and experience of pest management and the customs of rural communities in 17 rural municipalities in the Central-Northern Zone of Veracruz, Mexico [9] (Figure 1). In the study region, the climate is warm–humid–regular, with an average temperature of 23.7 °C−35.6 °C and an average annual rainfall of 1293.6 mm [26]. The predominant soil type is luvisol; less than 50% of the land is used for agricultural activities [27], of which agriculture occupies 28,710.1 ha, while livestock occupies 20,543.0 ha [28].

Citriculture contributes 52.81% to the citrus production of the state of Veracruz in this study area [28,29]. However, there is no government database reporting the number of citrus growers in the study region, which is a situation resulting from the expansion of citrus cultivation in this area.

In this research, the citrus orchards owned by the producers were established as the primary unit of analysis. Data collection was conducted through a questionnaire directed at the owners of these orchards. The questionnaire was designed based on reports of agricultural practices from [30,31,32,33], complemented with knowledge about citrus growers’ perceptions regarding pest control methods, the use of fertilizers and herbicides [24,34], and the expertise of the following specialists in citrus cultivation from the study region: two citrus producers with land extensions of at least 10 hectares and 25 years of citrus cultivation; one researcher from the INIFAP Ixtacuaco campus; one agronomist specializing in citrus cultivation in the study area; and one entrepreneur from a citrus extraction company with at least 25 years in the industry. The research focused on the sections in

Table 1. Profiles considered in the questions are based on citrus cultivation experts.

Section	Topics Related to the Orchard	Questions	Type of Question *
			CL	MC	OE
(1) General information about the orchard	Orchard characteristics	01 a 07	0	7	0
(2) Pests and diseases	Risks associated with the use of chemical components	08 a 15	0	0	8
	Pests	16 a 23	3	3	2 †
	Diseases	24 a 33	3	5	2 ‡
(3) Specific orchard practices	Orchard maintenance practices	34 a 46	0	12	1
Total		46	6	27	13

* CL: closed (dichotomous) | MC: multiple choice | OE: open-ended; ^† Question 23 contains seven open-ended questions. ^‡ Question 33 contains six open-ended questions

that provide a summary of a questionnaire designed for citrus experts, structured in the following three sections: general orchard information, pests and diseases, and orchard practices. The questions are categorized as closed-ended (CL), multiple choice (MC), and open-ended (OE), specifying the quantity for each type. For instance, in the pests and diseases section, there are a total of 26 questions, as follows: 6 closed-ended, 8 multiple choice, and 12 open-ended. Notably, questions 23 and 33 include additional open-ended sub-questions to elicit more detailed responses.

Between 1 July 2023 and 15 March 2024, the owners and managers of the orchards in the research region were given the 46-item questionnaire (Appendix A) in person. Only 51 producers accepted to participate in this study, although 90 were invited to the interview (

Table 2. Number of farms that responded to the research questionnaire by municipality.

Zone	Municipality	Visited	Respondents	Zone	Municipality	Visited	Respondents
Central	Atzalan	8	5	North	Chumatlán	5	2
	Colipa	5	3		Coxquihui	4	2
	Martínez de la Torre	14	6		Coyutla	5	2
	Misantla	10	5		Espinal	4	2
	San Rafaél	5	3		Gutiérrez Zamora	4	2
	Tlapacoyan	5	4		Nautla	3	2
	Vega de la Torre	4	4		Papantla	3	2
	Yecuatla	4	3		Tecolutla	2	1
					Tuxpan	5	3
					Total	90	51

). A descriptive approach was utilized to assess and quantify the attributes due to the small sample size (51 respondents); this was supplemented by an inductive theme analysis, which allowed for an interpretation that was open-ended, flexible, and in line with the goals of the research [35,36,37]. Notably, this research does not differentiate between citrus varieties; instead, it concentrates on the farming methods associated with managing citrus crops.

The non-probabilistic sampling method was “collaborative snowball sampling” [38]. This method has proven effective for accessing information from study units not reported in government agricultural databases or censuses and for study subjects who do not wish to participate due to the protection of their data [39,40]. In this method, the producers who initially responded recommended the participation of new producers, and so on.

The distribution of the questionnaire administration was determined by two key factors, as follows: first, the level of interest shown by citrus growers in participating in the interviews, and second, the challenges associated with contacting growers at their orchards. For instance, in municipalities such as Misantla, which benefit from superior road infrastructure and greater accessibility, a larger number of invitations were distributed (10), given the relative ease of reaching the producers. Conversely, in more remote municipalities with limited connectivity, such as Tecolutla, only two producers were invited, highlighting the logistical constraints and difficulties in accessing these regions. Furthermore, the snowball sampling technique, based on referrals from initial participants, facilitated the identification of additional citrus growers in more accessible areas. However, in more isolated orchards, access to small-scale producers was hindered by distance and the geographical dispersion of the orchards, which limited direct engagement with the growers.

The design of the questionnaire and analysis of the information was carried out by a researcher from the INIFAP campus Ixtacuaco and an agronomist expert in citriculture in the study area, who examined the 51 responses and aimed to determine the most common problems in this area under the aspects listed in

Table 3. Analysis of the survey’s established components.

Dimensions	Objective
Orchard characteristics	Comprehend the production environment and determine the background of the orchard’s main circumstances and practices.
Risks associated with the use of chemical components	Determine the cultivation techniques and work methods, the decision-making process, and the outside advising sources the farmer uses to boost output. Understanding farmers’ worries about chemical use on orchard health was the goal.
Pests	Determine which pests are common in this research region and how well the chemicals and methods employed to manage them work.
Diseases	Determine which diseases are common in this research region and what preventive measures can be taken to enhance crop health and orchard yield.
Orchard maintenance practices	Describe the costs and procedures involved in orchard maintenance.

.

3. Results

3.1. General Information about the Study Orchards

The results are based on data collected from 51 citrus growers regarding their agricultural practices in orchards. It was found that the preferred grafting patterns are sweet orange (68%) and lemon tree (32%) for Persian lime. The largest planted area corresponds to Valencia oranges in the municipality of Tuxpan, Veracruz [3,41].

Table 4. General overview of citrus orchards in the study region. (a). Orchard size and age of citrus trees. (b). Dominant soils reported by producers.

(a)
Orchard	Hectares	Orchards	%
Extension	1–6	19	37.25
	6–10	16	31.37
	10–15	10	19.61
	>16	6	11.76
Age	Years	Orchards	%
	1–4	9	17.65
	4–7	17	33.33
	7–10	20	39.22
	>10	5	9.80
(b)
Soil Type		Orchards	%
Sandy soil		2	3.92
Black soil or humic Soil		27	52.94
Floodplain soil		11	21.57
Mixed		7	13.73
Rocky		4	7.84
Total		51

a provides information on the size and age of the orchards, while Table 4b describes the dominant soil reported by producers in the study region. At least 37% of the orchards cover an area of 1 to 6 hectares. Of these, 52% are situated on black soil and are between 4 and 7 years old. Additionally, at least 39% of these orchards are in full production, with plantations aged between 7 and 10 years.

In the research area, Persian lime is harvested in the following two distinct seasons: the high season, from April to August, and the low season, from October to January.

Table 5. Citrus production according to tree age during the high season.

Information	Age	Kilograms/Tree	%
Production per tree	1–4	25 a 30	59.00
	4–6	46 a 56	23.00
	6–10	66 an 80	10.00
	>10	180 a 200	8.00

shows the production of Persian lime during the peak season, based on the tree’s age, and indicates that most of the yield is derived from young trees (between 1 and 4 years of age). The fruit is collected in two or three harvests during this period. Farmers employ maintenance techniques to stimulate flowering after the tree has ceased producing, aiming to harvest between November and December, albeit with a reduced yield, to sustain citrus production. Although this period is considered the low season, the limited availability of citrus fruits drives up their price.

In contrast, the Valencia orange processing industry in Martínez de la Torre and Álamo Temapache, Mexico, observes an industrial season from January to April–May. Early oranges are processed from January through December in the interim. The research area also includes smaller amounts of marsh, Jaffa, clementine, and navel orange cultivation. These orange cultivars are considered table oranges to compensate for the shortage of Valencia oranges, which are in high demand by the juice concentrate processing industry. Citrus growers can harvest between 50 and 80 kg of fruit per tree, translating to a total production of 11 to 26 tons per hectare for trees aged between 3 and 15 years.

Table 6. Management of citrus orchards.

Management Element	Variable	%
Agricultural practices	Fertilization	40
	Irrigation	35
	Pruning	25
	Pest/disease control	30
	Any practice occasionally	10

shows that 35% of citrus growers use some form of irrigation, benefiting from their proximity to effluents without needing hydraulic infrastructure. Forty percent of growers fertilize their citrus trees, while fewer than 30% implement pest control and trimming.

Approximately 65% of growers obtain their seedlings from nearby nurseries, 35% use grafting techniques, and 5% receive state assistance. Producers own 85% of the land used for citrus cultivation, 13% lease their plantations for a period of five to ten years, and 2% allocate the land to family members, who are responsible for maintaining the plantation and preventing its use for other agricultural purposes. During this phase, 85% of producers work in their own orchards, 10% rent out their orchards for others to work, and 5% work in orchards that have been handed down by family members.

3.2. Pests and Diseases and Associated Costs

Pests and diseases are most prevalent in the research area from early spring to late summer. Farmers apply various compounds to mitigate these issues, often following advice from fellow farmers in the region. Their application and use strategies are generally informed by knowledge gained from managing other crops. Citrus growers reported the following chemical ingredient hazards, as detailed in

Table 7. Risks associated with the use of chemical components.

Possible Risk	The Comment Expressed by Citrus Farmers
Soil erosion	There is concern that using chemical components contributes to soil erosion and negatively affects its quality and fertility.
Fruit contamination	Citrus growers have expressed concern about the possibility of these chemicals contaminating citrus, which could compromise their quality and safety.
Reduced in production	The growers are concerned that lacking proper chemicals or fertilizers could decrease citrus production.
Dehydration of the trees	There is a risk that improper use of chemicals could dry out the trees, affecting their health and yield.
Fruit loss	Citrus growers expressed concern that using chemical components could cause lemons or oranges to fall from the trees prematurely, leading to harvest losses.
Burned fruits	Growers are aware of the risk that citrus may suffer burns due to the improper use of chemicals, which affects their appearance and marketability.
Workers poisoned by pesticide	Workers must take proper precautions when applying chemicals, as there is a risk of poisoning if safety measures are not followed.

. Table 7 presents the risks of using chemical products in citrus orchards, based on a questionnaire given to producers (Section 2, questions 8 to 15), and highlights concerns such as soil erosion, fruit contamination, reduced production, tree dehydration, premature fruit drop, and worker poisoning. Farmers emphasized that improper chemical use can negatively affect soil fertility, fruit quality, and overall orchard productivity, while also stressing the importance of safety precautions to prevent worker intoxication.

Citrus growers identify the red spider mite (Tetranychus urticae), the black stink bug (Proxys punctulatus), the broad mite (Polyphagotarsonemus latus), and Diaphorina citri Kuwayama, known as the Asian citrus psyllid, as significant pests in citrus cultivation. They particularly highlight the fruit fly as a notable pest for oranges.

Table 8. Pests and diseases in citrus orchards: occurrence, infestation sites, and seasonal presence.

Type	Common Name ¥	% †	Site of Occurrence on the Tree					Presence Season
			Stem	Flower	Fruit	Leaf	Root	SPR *	SMR *	AUT *	WIN *
Pests	Red Spider Mite	19	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok
	D.c.; C.n.; A. b.**	19	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	Ok	Ok	—	—
	Ant	19	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok
	Leafminer	10	—	Ok	—	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—
	Snowflake	10	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—
	Green stink bug	7	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	—	Ok	Ok	—
	Aphid	7	Ok	Ok	—	Ok	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	—
	Thysanoptera	4	—	—	Ok	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—
	Red mite	4	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—
	Red louse	1	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—
Diseases	Gom. and Huang ***	37	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok
	Anthracnose	22	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	Ok	Ok	—	—
	Citrus tristeza	21	Ok	—	—	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok
	Melanosis	11	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	—	—	Ok	—	—
	Scab	8	Ok	—	—	—	—	Ok	Ok	—	Ok
	Chlorosis	1	—	—	—	Ok	—	Ok	Ok	Ok	Ok

^† It refers to the proportion of producers who reported it. | ^¥ The scientific name can be found in [15,42]. | * SPR = spring; SMR = summer; AUT = autumn; WIN = winter | ** Diaphorina citri, black stink bug, and white mite. | *** Gomosis and Huanglongbing [42].

illustrates the prevalence of diseases and pests in the research area. The two diseases responsible for tree death are Huanglongbing and Gummosis.

Table 9. Pest and disease management: infestation sites, application methods, and product usage.

Type	Name ¥	Site of Infestation	Type of Application	Products Used (Abbreviations) *.*	Number of Applications per Year
Pests	Aphids	Entire tree	1	GAT, OXI, ROT	3–4, 4, 4
		Entire tree and soil	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
	Red spider mite	Trunk/Stem	1	CAL	2
		Entire tree	1	FOL	4
		Entire tree and soil	1	OXI, ROT	12, 12
	Ant	Around the tree		FOL	4
		Trunk/Stem	1, 3	CAL, CSA *	2, 12
		Foliage	1	CSA	12
	Black stink bug	Entire tree	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
		Entire tree and soil	1	CIP, FOL	4, 3
	Red louse	Trunk/Stem	2	CAL	2
		Entire tree and soil	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
	Leafminer	Entire tree	1	GAT	DE 3 A 4
		Entire tree and soil	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
		Foliage	1	ALI	4
	Whitefly	Trunk/Stem	1	FOL	In every occasion that it is
		Entire tree	1	CIP, GAT	4, 3–4
		Entire tree and soil	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
	Diaphorina citri	Entire tree	1	CIP, GAT, ROT, TEG	4, 3–4, 4, 4
		Entire tree and soil	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
Diseases	Gummosis	Trunk/Stem	1	ALI, CSA *, CCE **	12
		Entire tree	1	CUP, OXI, TEG	In response to the degree of affliction.
	Anthracnose	Entire tree	1	ALI, CUP, OXI, TEG	4, 4, 4, 4
		Entire tree and soil	1	CSA *, CCE **	12, 12
	Citrus Tristeza	Tree	1	NO DATA	Tree removal
	Huanglong-bing	Tree	NO DATA	NO DATA	Tree removal

^¥ The scientific name can be checked at [15,42]. 1. Combat is performed by spraying. 2. During the winter season. 3. Each transition between cold and hot seasons, as well as from hot to cold seasons. * First month: apply every ten days. Second month: alternate monthly with ash solution. ** First month: apply every ten days. Second month: alternate monthly with sulfocalcic broth. *.* Agrochemicals ALI~Aliette^®; CAL~quicklime; CIP~Cipermetrina^®; CUP~Cupravit^®; GAT~Gatillo^®; FOL~Foley Rey^®; OXI~Oxicob 85^®; ROT~Rotaprid^®; TEG~Tega^®; CBS~Bordeaux mixture; CSA~sulfocalcic broth; CCE~ash solution.

lists the pests and diseases present in the research area, along with the agrochemicals used by farmers to manage their crops. It also indicates the number of treatments citrus growers have applied to address these various pests and diseases. Table 9 highlights that citrus growers in this study area particularly value the use of Bordeaux mixture (CBS), sulfocalcic broth (CSA), and ash solution (CCE) as popular artisanal preparations for combating pests and diseases.

Citrus growers have removed trees in cases in which Huanglongbing and citrus tristeza virus are present. During the study period, 92% of producers used chemical compounds to address these issues; 65% sought advice from agricultural pharmacists or other farmers facing similar problems to ensure plentiful and healthy production. The costs associated with controlling diseases and pests in the orchards within the research area are provided in

Table 10. Costs and application frequency of agricultural products per hectare for pest control in citrus orchards.

Product	Unit	Product Presentation	Price in the Region (MXN)	Cost (MXN)	Applications per Year †	Annual Cost (MXN)
Sulfocalcic broth sediments ††	NO DATA	NO DATA	Handmade production	NO DATA	When necessary	NO DATA
Ash solution sediments ††	NO DATA	NO DATA	Handmade production	NO DATA		NO DATA
Aliette®	kg	2	1200.00	1000.00	3	4000.00
Oxicob 85®	kg	1	255.00	553.00	4	2212.00
Bordeaux mixture ††	L	200	448.00	848.00	4	3392.00
Cupravit®	kg	1	275.00	565.00	4	2260.00
Tega®	L	1	325.00	416.00	3	1248.00
Sulfocalcic broth ††	L	62	390.00	790.00	6 *	4740.00
Ash solution (Alkali) ††	L	62	124.00	524.00	6 *	3144.00

^† The cost per application is MXN 400.00 per day/ha. The “per day” refers to the “daily wage” of the farmhand | ^†† Made by the farmer. * 10 applications of 20 L by spraying/ha. It is applied to diseased trees at a dose of 800 mL per tree.

and

Table 11. Agro-chemical product costs and application frequency per hectare.

Product	Unit	Product Presentation	Price in the Region (MXN) *	Total Cost (MXN) **	Applications per Year	Annual Cost per ha (MXN)
Foley rey®	L	1	281.00	681.00	4	2724.00
Sulfocalcic broth †	L	62	390.00	790.00	6	4740.00
Ash solution ††	L	62	124.00	524.00	6	3144.00
Commercial lime®	Kg	25	70.00	1100.00	2	2200.00
Cipermetrina®	L	1	179.00	669.00	4	2676.00
Aliette®	Kg	2	1200.00	1000.00	3	4000.00
Gatillo®	L	1	520.00	920.00	3	2760.00
Oxicob 85®	Kg	1	255.00	553.00	4	2212.00
Rotaprid®	L	1	949.00	476.00	4	1904.00
Bordeaux mixture ††	L	200	448.00	848.00	4	3392.00

* Price obtained in the study region. | ** The cost per application is MXN 400.00 per day/ha. | ^† 10 applications of 20 L by 250 trees/ha. It is applied to diseased trees at a rate of 800 mL per tree. | ^†† Concentrate to be diluted with water.

.

As mentioned in Table 9, Bordeaux mixture is one of the products listed in Table 10. It is prepared to combat moisture-induced fungi and prevent them from penetrating plant tissue. Another option is ash broth, which is a mixture of wood ashes, water, and laundry soap. Once prepared, this homemade solution releases soluble nutrients that act as an organic pesticide. Lime sulfur broth is another substance used, primarily as an acaricide but also effective as a fungicide. This solution targets fungi such as mildew, as well as other insects, pests, and mites. Citrus growers use these compounds as economical options or low-cost cultural practices, making them accessible to rural farmers for controlling both pests and diseases.

The citrus farmer chooses to use these pesticides partly because of advice from other growers and partly because of advice from the agricultural supply shop seller. Additionally, the cost of the item usually impacts their choice to buy (Table 11). In practice in this study region, the citrus grower usually disregards the technical data sheet recommendations for the chemical, thinking that a more significant dose will be more efficient and quicken the herbicide’s action on the weeds. Usually, they lower the dosage for financial reasons, but some citrus producers worry that the increased toxicity factor could negatively impact production by triggering fruit drop and tree withering.

The herbicides Coloso Total 360^®, Faena^®, Faena Fuerte^®, Lafam^®, Takle^®, and Ally Xp^® described in

Table 12. Herbicide costs and application rates per hectare.

Herbicide	Unit	Product Presentation	Cost/Region (MXN)	Total Cost * (MXN)	Applications per Year	Cost/ha (MXN)
Paraquat® †	L	5	510.00	706.00	4	2824.00
Dragocson® †	L	5	566.00	840.00	4	3360.00
Dextrone® †	mL	900	131.00	837.00	4	3348.00
Gramoxone® †	mL	900	170.00	967.00	4	3868.00
Coloso Total® ††	L	1	250.00	1150.00	3	3450.00
Faena® ††	L	10	1795.00	939.00	3	2817.00
Faena Fuerte® ††	L	10	2350.00	1105.00	3	3315.00
Desmonte A® ††	L	5	515.00	709.00	3	2127.00
Lafam® ††	L	5	915.00	949.00	3	2847.00
Takle® ††	L	5	865.00	919.00	3	2757.00
Ally XP® ††	g	10	75.00	775.00	3	2325.00

^† Contact, four applications per year | ^†† 10 applications of 20 L by spraying/ha. Systemic, three applications/year. * Systemic, three applications per year MXN 400.00 per day/ha (cost obtained from suppliers in the study region).

are reported by citrus growers for weed control in orchards. These herbicides have glyphosate as their active ingredient, while Paraquat^®, DRAGOCSON^®, Dextrone^®, and Gramoxone^® primarily contain 1,1′-dimethyl-4,4′-bipyridinium dichloride and 2,4-D amine. Citrus producers frequently neglect specific pesticide usage instructions, such as that some are intended just for non-crop regions, others advise against applying in gusts above 10 km/h, and others are only for broadleaf weeds. Citrus fruit-buying firms have arranged informational and awareness seminars on the appropriate selection and application of these agrochemicals to address this ecological and cultural issue. These gatherings draw attention to farmers’ health hazards, like tree damage and contaminated fruit from improper pesticide application.

Industry leaders note that there is no way to gauge the success of their advice, but they see a decline in the amount, consistency, and quality of fruit from some suppliers. In certain instances, as with oranges, fruit fly larvae have been found in the fruit that was received, which has led juice extractors to urge the setting of traps as a preventive step against this bug.

Notably, 38% of the citrus growers surveyed do not consider keeping records of their agricultural activities to be necessary or worthwhile, whereas 62% consider it necessary. It is important to highlight that for the 38% of producers who do not keep track of their farming methods, the lack of records may be a disadvantage when selling their harvests in markets. This could affect their export performance and any market where consumers inquire about the provenance and handling of the orchard’s produce.

3.3. Practices and Associated Costs for Maintaining and Improving Production with an Organic Trend

Table 13. Orchard cleaning strategies: methods and adoption rates.

Orchard Cleaning Strategy	Variable	%
Without herbicides	Manually	15
	Mechanized	37
	Manual and Mechanized	8
With herbicides	Use some herbicide	40

demonstrates that every citrus grower surveyed cleans up some weeds in their plantations. Of the citrus growers, 15% clean their orchards by hand using a hoe and machete, while 45% either include welding machines or use them exclusively. Herbicide is used by 40% of the remaining growers to control weeds.

Citrus growers in this study report using agricultural techniques at two distinct points to increase crop output. In the first half of the year, 42% fertilize and control pests, and 31% concentrate on controlling pests without fertilizing the tree. By contrast, 27% do not practice pest and disease control or fertilizing. Furthermore, 69% of citrus growers said they did not treat their trees with pesticides during the second part of the year. Comparatively, 31% do not treat pests, focusing exclusively on fertilizing the tree and the soil. While

Table 14. Agricultural practices: adoption rates and application frequencies.

Agricultural Practice	Response	Interviewees (%)	Frequency (Months)
Soil fertilization	Yes, they do it.	56	Every 6
	No, they do not do it.	44	NA
Foliar applications	Yes, they do it.	63	1–3, 2–4
	No, they do not do it.	37	-
Pruning	To develop the tree	34	Every 6
	To shape the tree	25	Every 6
	To stimulate flowering	17	When deemed necessary
Purpose of pruning	To increase production	55	-
	To improve fruit quality	31	-
	For pest and disease control	14	-
Weed control *	Weed trimming with a brush cutter	40	1–3
	Manual weed control	20	2–4
	Herbicide-assisted weed control	40	Every 6
Pesticides	Yes, they apply it.	39	2–4
	No, they do not apply it.	61	-

* Over half of citrus growers have ceased using agrochemicals, citing that manual or mechanized mowing is cost-effective and provides longer-lasting weed control. This practice, which is carried out monthly on average, has become their preferred method.

provides a full breakdown of pruning technique expenses, Table 14 summarizes the methods used to maintain and enhance orchard production.

Citrus growers prune their trees to promote tree growth, encourage flowering, and keep the trees clean, as

Table 15. Costs of pruning methods per hectare in the study region.

Pruning/Mode of Action	Unit	Quantity	Cost/Region (MXN)	Cost/ha (MXN)	Observation
Development pruning †	Per day	12 days per year	400.00/day	4800.00	Performed per day
	Tree	250 tree/ha	30.00/tree	7500.00	Performed by tree
Fruiting pruning ††	Per day	18 days per year	400.00/day	7200.00	Performed per day
	Tree	250 tree/ha	35.00/tree	8750.00	Performed by tree
Tree cleaning pruning †††	Tree	250 tree/ha	35.00/tree	8750.00	Removal of suckers

^† Once a year (June–July) | ^†† Once a year (October–November) | ^††† As needed.

demonstrates. This mostly scissor-handled method has encouraged citrus growers, especially Persian lime producers, dubbed “scissor farmers”, to promote tree blossoming. Sometimes, orange trees and other citrus must be pruned for structural reasons. Agrochemicals can be used to access this technique, as Table 10 illustrates.

Table 16. Herbicide and nutrient application costs per hectare: product, frequency, and total annual expense.

Herbicide	Unit	Product Presentation	Site of Application	Price * (MXN)	Total Cost ** (MXN)	Applications per Year ***	Cost/ha per Year (MXN)
Sulfocalcic broth +	L	62	Tree trunk, Leaf application	390.00	790.00	6	4740.00
Ash solution and laundry soap +	L	62	Tree trunk, Leaf application	124.00	524.00	6	3144.00
Calcium nitrate®	kg	1	At the tree’s base, Leaf application	139.00	456.00	3	1824.00
Potassium nitrate®	kg	5	At the tree’s base, Leaf application	430.00	435.00	3	1740.00
Bocachi +	kg	1000	At the tree’s base	2270.00	2670.00	4	10,680.00
Humic acids +	L	200	At the tree’s base, Leaf application	400.00	800.00	6	4800.00
Urea 46®	kg	50	At the tree’s base	550.00	3250.00	3	9750.00
Sulfamin 45®	kg	50	At the tree’s base	500.00	2900.00	3	8700.00
Triple 17 plus®	kg	50	At the tree’s base	650.00	3650.00	3	10,950.00
Diammonium phosphate (Dap®)	kg	50	At the tree’s base	750.00	4150.00	3	12,450.00

* Price in the study region | ** (Price + MXN 400.00 per day) by application in 1 day/ha | *** Apply 1 kg at the tree’s base. + Artisanal product made by the farmer: 10 applications of 20 L each by spraying for 250 trees per hectare. It is applied to diseased trees, corresponding to 800 mL per tree.

lists the expenses associated with ground fertilization, foliar fertilization, and trunk treatment—three methods used in citrus orchards to preserve and increase crop yield. However,

Table 17. Comparison of weed management practices: costs and applications per hectare.

Agricultural Practice	Unit	Application	Price * (MXN)	Total Cost (MXN)	Applications per Year	Cost/ha (MXN)
Manual weeding **	Per day	10/ha	400.00/day	4000.00	6	24,000.00
Weeding with a brush cutter ***	L	6 L/ha	823.00 ****	564.00	10	5640.00
Weed removal from the soil at the base of the tree #	Per day	13 days/ha	400.00/day	5200.00	2	10,400.00
	Tree	250 trees/ha	25.00/tree	6250.00	2	12,500.00

* Price in the study region. | ** Machete weeding is performed monthly, except from May to August, to retain moisture around the tree base during drought periods: MXN 400.00 per day/ha. | *** MXN 400.00 per day per hectare with a brush cutter. | **** This cost per day/ha includes additives for the weed cutter, 6 L of gasoline, and 12 mL of two-stroke oil. | ^# MXN 400.00 per day/ha (using a hoe).

illustrates the costs of common agricultural methods, such as manual weeding, weeding with a brush cutter, and tree cleaning. These methods include chemical, physical, and cultural regulation. They are performed regularly to preserve and enhance orchard productivity. Standard procedures like foliar application, pruning, and orchard cleaning are carried out in addition to weed cleaning. Chemical control includes inorganic pesticides and herbicides; cultural control includes fertilizing trees or the soil, pruning, and controlling weeds using organic materials.

This study has shown how vital awareness and education are in preventing the negative consequences linked to the usage of agrochemicals. Since people tend to think that the more they use something the more effective it is, these effects are frequently attributed to overuse. Even though these agrochemicals have been crucial in successfully managing weeds and pests, citrus growers worry about the chemical residues on the fruits. Concerns about human health, food safety, and the effects of residual runoff on groundwater and bodies of water have all been brought up by this subject. In this case, the scientific community is concerned about using glyphosate as the primary active ingredient in citrus production, notwithstanding the advantages of using agrochemicals.

Various reports [25,43,44] on the use of glyphosate have driven the development of eco-friendly products and the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices. As a result, citrus growers need to adopt a new approach that prioritizes the use of safer pesticides during the citrus cultivation process.

4. Discussion

Citrus growers in the region use various methods to manage pests and diseases, including foliar nutrients, agrochemicals, herbicides, mechanical or manual weeding, and pruning. Proper pruning balances the tree’s vegetative and reproductive growth, as noted by [19], and citrus growers in this study also emphasize clearing weeds and plant leftovers to promote budding (gives the tree structure) and reduce pests and disease hosts [20].

Integrated pest management (IPM) techniques were identified, combining chemical and biological methods to reduce reliance on agrochemicals and minimize environmental impact [20,21,22]. However, glyphosate is present in 80% of the agrochemicals used for weed control in the area. Despite technical datasheets specifying application methods, 40% to 46% of citrus producers do not follow these recommendations.

Management costs vary among producers. Well-trained and experienced growers tend to invest in higher-quality products and hire experts to ensure proper application. In contrast, smaller growers often use less efficient and more costly techniques, reducing orchard productivity [23]. For instance, 62% of small producers find chemical control too expensive and resort to homemade alternatives, often with poor results [45,46].

This study, as reported by [47,48], shows that sulfur application effectively controls diseases. Larger producers benefit more from their investment in high-quality control measures, while smaller producers face challenges due to limited financial resources and access to advanced technologies. These smaller producers, who account for 60% of the citrus crop in the region, rely on traditional knowledge and empirical practices on plots ranging from 1 to 5 hectares, in contrast to more technologically advanced areas [49].

Citrus growers with experience in other agricultural activities, such as cattle farming or maize cultivation, have adopted citrus management practices [50,51], expanding the cultivated area rather than increasing yield per hectare [52,53]. This highlights the need for technology transfer and training to improve citrus production efficiency and sustainability in the region [54,55]. This is especially important since individual farmers are the stewards and decision-makers of their farming operations [56].

Compared to other citrus-growing regions in Mexico and abroad, management practices in the central-northern Veracruz region are less technology-intensive and more reliant on traditional methods. In contrast, states like Michoacán and Tamaulipas have adopted advanced pest control techniques [57,58], including digital monitoring and biological traps, thereby improving sustainability and productivity [59]. Internationally, countries like Brazil and Spain have promoted more comprehensive approaches, integrating sustainable farming practices that support the adoption of advanced technologies [60,61,62,63].

As citrus farming expands in the region, farmers with experience in other crops or cattle ranching have adopted citrus cultivation techniques through imitation or referral. However, productivity remains low compared to large-scale plantations in other regions. Production is primarily driven by small-scale producers who manage 1 to 5 hectares, accounting for 60% of citrus output. These producers, rooted in rural areas, play a vital role in maintaining orchard productivity despite ongoing challenges in pest and disease control [49].

5. Conclusions

This study highlights the complexity and diversity of agricultural techniques used in managing citrus orchards in Veracruz’s central-northern region. The findings reveal that 61% of citrus growers with land between one and ten hectares face challenges in managing pests and diseases, which are often exacerbated by limited financial resources. In contrast, 11.76% of producers with over 16 hectares are better equipped, often having irrigation systems due to proximity to wells or water sources.

A concerning finding is that 37.27% of small-scale producers (with less than 5 hectares) do not adhere to technical guidelines for agrochemical application. This group either overdoses, believing “more is better”, or underdoses for financial reasons, raising serious concerns about safety and effectiveness.

This study also shows considerable variation in the type, frequency, and costs of cultural treatments, such as fertilization, pruning, and orchard cleaning. Notably, 38% of growers do not see pest management as necessary, while smaller producers (1–5 hectares) often rely on empirical methods, leading to lower yields. Larger producers, however, invest in technical support, which improves productivity. Shared knowledge among farmers helps extend productive cycles and strengthen orchard resilience.

Future research should focus on (1) promoting eco-friendly citrus management methods, (2) educating growers on sustainable practices and safe agrochemical use, (3) assessing the impact of farming techniques on yield and fruit quality, (4) exploring the feasibility of transitioning to more ethical and sustainable citrus production, and (5) evaluating the effectiveness of technical advice to reduce health and environmental risks. These efforts aim to foster sustainable, responsible, and efficient agriculture in the region.