)aIfr

Intral Science
Library
EC 16 1992
rsity of Florida

Gulf Coast Research
and Education Center

5007 60th St. E., Bradenton, Florida 34203-9324
SInstitute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida

GULF COAST RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, IFAS
5007 60th Street East
Bradenton, FL 34203 ;

Bradenton GCREC Research Report BRA1992-14 G July

BELL PEPPER VARIETY TRIAL FOR SPRING 1992 UnivC

T. K. Howe and W. E. WatersI

Florida vegetable statistics for 1990-91 indicate that the value of fresh market
green peppers was $173.6 million, up $62 million from the previous year (1).
Production of 14.4 million bushels came from 20,000 acres with an average price
of $12.09 per bushel. This was the first time the state average exceeded 700
bushels per acre. The value of green peppers was only surpassed by tomatoes in
Florida during 1990-91.

Pepper production is concentrated in the southwest, southeast and west central
portions of the state (1). Manatee County ranked fourth in harvested acreage at
1700 acres. A variety trial was conducted at the GCREC in Manatee County during
the spring of 1992 to evaluate yield and horticultural characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Soil in the trial area was sampled before field preparation and analyzed by the
IFAS Soil Testing Lab. The pH = 6.9, NH -N = 0.5 ppm and NO -N = 8.0 ppm were
determined from a water extract (2). While the elements P = 41 ppm, K = 41 ppm,
Ca = 751 ppm, and Mg = 129 ppm were determined by Mehlich I extraction (3). The
soil analysis was unavailable before field bedding operations, however. Raised
beds of EauGallie fine sand were formed January 27. The 33-inch wide, 8-inch
high beds were placed on 5 ft centers with seepage irrigation ditches spaced
every 6 beds. An acre was equivalent to 8712 linear ft of bed. Fertilizer
included 18-0-25-2 (N-P Os-KO0-MgO) at 1437 Ib/A placed in 2 grooves on the bed
surface 12 inches to each side of bed center. Superphosphate (0-20-0 with 80 lb
per ton minor elements as F503) at 523 Ib/A was also banded, but to the false
bed. Beds were fumigated with methyl bromide (66%):chloropicrin (33%) and
covered with black polyethylene.

Seed of all entries were sown into vermiculite on January 7 and germinated in the
laboratory. Seedlings were transferred 14 days later into 1.5 x 1.5 x 2.5 inch
containerized cells containing a peat:vermiculite media (1:1, v:v) amended with
dolomite (11.3/lb), superphosphate (5.6 lb) and hydrated lime (2.8 lb), each per
cu. yd. of media.

'Research Program Coordinator and Center Director, respectively.

Transplants were set into the field on February 24 in 2 rows spaced 10 inches
apart with an in-row plant spacing of 11 inches. At transplanting, plants were
drenched with water. Four replications of 20 plants per entry were arranged in
a randomized complete block design. Plants were staked and tied later in the
season.

The crop was scouted for pest problems throughout the season. Thrips,
sweetpotato whitefly, worms, pepper weevils, aphids and leaf miners were noted.
None caused significant damage to the crop. Insect populations were managed with
acephate (thrips), oxamyl (sweetpotato whitefly and pepper weevil), Bacillus
thurinqiensis plus methomyl (worms), dimethoate (aphids) and insecticidal soap.
Bacterial spot appeared in mid-April, following heavy rain. Leaf samples were
taken on May 6 from 10 different entries and sent to Dr. R. E. Stall (Plant
Pathology Dept., Univ. of Florida), who diagnosed them as infected with
Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria, race 2. The crop was treated with
mancozeb and tribasic copper to control bacterial spot and fungal pathogens.

Fruit were harvested on May 12, 21 and June 1. Pickers on May 12 harvested only
the largest green fruit. Harvesting for size meant some smaller fruit were
passed over by pickers and matured to red or yellow by the second harvest. At
the third harvest, which was scheduled slightly later than ideal, there was also
a mixture of mature color and green fruit. Total fruit harvested were counted,
weighed and gleaned of cull fruit (5) which were also counted and weighed. Virus
(undiagnosed, mosaic-like symptoms) damaged fruit were tabulated separately.

Yields were computed on a weight basis and were expressed as 28-lb bushels.
Qualitative evaluations of horticultural characteristics and disease incidence
were made for all entries just prior to the first harvest. A sample of 8
marketable fruit per plot was taken at random from the earliest fruit harvested.
These fruit were measured for length, diameter and pod wall thickness and the
number of lobes were counted.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Temperatures were near normal for most of the production period, with the
exception that the overnight lows were 3 degrees lower than average (Table 1).
Rainfall was greater than normal in February, March and April, but less than
normal in May and June. Episodes of windy, cool and/or wet weather did have an
adverse effect on fruit shape, which became squatty, and increased the incidence
of bacterial spot.

Characteristics of plants and fruit along with ratings for disease incidence and
overall acceptability for each entry are in Table 2. These qualitative
evaluations were made on a single replication for each entry before harvesting
began with the exception of the bacterial spot rating, for which all plots were
evaluated.

Seasonal yields for three harvests ranged from 780 bu/A for 'Jupiter' to 1621
bu/A for XPH 5985 (Table 3). Fifteen other entries were not significantly
different than XPH 5985 in total marketable yield. The number of marketable
fruit per plant ranged from 2.9 for 'Jupiter' to 5.5 for PS 3187. Nineteen other
entries were similar to PS 3187 in the marketable fruit borne per plant. Average
marketable fruit weight was greatest for 'Camelot' at 8.0 oz. Five other entries
met or exceeded a 7.0 oz average fruit weight: PS 55887, 'PR 901-3,' XPH 5985,

XPH 5989, and 'King Arthur.' The proportion of harvested fruit which were culled
ranged from 17% for PS 3187 to 46% for 'Ssupersweet 860R,' 'Orobelle,' and
'Jupiter.' Only 4 other entries, XPH 5985, PS 55887, 'Bell King,' and 'Camelot'
were similar to PS 3187 in low cull fruit yield. Virus-like damage, misshapen,
puckered and streaked fruit, was minimal during the season and greatest for
'Crispy.'

At the first harvest on May 12, the marketable yields ranged from 31 bu/A for RNK
9131 to 502 bu/A for 'PR 901-3' (Table 4). The yield of 502 bu/A for 'PR 901-3'
was the highest of all 31 entries. None of the other entries exceeded 350 bu/A
at this time. Marketable fruit per plant ranged from 0.1 for RNK 9131 to 1.3 for
'PR 901-3.' Nine other entries were similar to 'PR 901-3' in fruit per plant.
Average marketable fruit weight ranged from 6.4 oz for RNK 9131 and RNK 9140 to
8.7 oz for 'PR 901-3.' Eleven entries with fruit weights exceeding 7.4 oz were
not significantly different from 'PR 901-3.' Cull fruit production was less than
25% of total harvest at this date. Only 'Ssupersweet 862R' and 'Crispy'
displayed any virus-like symptoms.

Fruit dimensions of marketable fruit were quantified from a sample of the
earliest fruit harvested (Table 5). Average fruit length ranged from 3.2 inches
for 'Ssupersweet 862R' to 5.2 inches for 'Carlos.' 'Carlos' produced longest
fruit, followed by 'Bell King' at 4.6 inches. No other entries were similar in
length to these two cultivars. Although not quantified, fruit length diminished
as season progressed. Table 2 indicates which entries became more squatty on a
season-long basis. Fruit width ranged from 3.0 inches for 'Carlos' to 3.7 inches
for XPH 5989. Only 'PR 901-3' was not significantly different from XPH 5989.
The ratio of fruit length to width ranged from 0.9 to 1.8, where 1.0 indicates
a blocky fruit shape. Long, narrow fruit were produced by 'Carlos,' 'Bell King,'
and 'Crispy.' Wall thickness ranged from 0.212 inches for 'Carlos' to 0.291
inches for 'PR 901-3' and 'Whopper Improved.' Only 'Verdel,' PS 55887 and
'Memphis' were similar in wall thickness to 'Whopper Improved' and 'PR 901-3.'
All entries averaged at least 3 lobes per fruit; most averaged between 3.5 to 3.7
lobes.

At the second harvest on May 21, yields generally increased with the exception
of 'Ssupersweet 862R,' 'PR 901-3,' and HMX 8862 (Table 6). Yields ranged from
146 bu/A for 'Ssupersweet 862R' to 736 bu/A for XPH 5985. 'Ssupersweet 860,' PS
3187, 'Bell King,' 'Camelot,' PS 55887 and 'PR 300-7' were similar in yield to
XPH 5985. The number of marketable fruit per plant ranged from 0.5 for
'Ssupersweet 862R' to 2.3 for XPH 5985. Twelve other entries were not
significantly different from XPH 5985 in the number of fruit per plant. Cull
fruit ranged from 4 to 28% of the total harvest, with most entries at or below
15% culls. Virus symptoms were greatest for 'Crispy' with 16% of its total
harvest culled. Six other entries showed virus symptoms on the fruit at this
time.

On June 1, the third harvest, yields were highest of all harvests for all entries
except XPH 5985, 'Ssupersweet 860,' 'Camelot,' and 'Jupiter' which yielded more
at the second pick (Table 7). Yield ranged from 353 bu/A for 'Jupiter' to 972
bu/A for 'Mello.' PS 3187, 'PR 300-1,' RNK 9131, 'Memphis,' 'Verdel,' 'Bell
King,' PS 55887 and 'Ranger' were not significantly different than 'Mello' in
yield. 'Mello' exceeded four marketable fruit per plant, and PS 3187 and 'PR
300-1' each exceeded three marketable fruit per plant. Average marketable fruit
weight ranged from 4.9 oz for RNK 9138 to 7.9 oz for 'Camelot.' 'Camelot' had

the largest fruit size of all entries;'all others were below 7.0 oz.
accounted for between 25 to 61% of the total fruit harvested. Only
showed any signs of virus at this harvest.

Cull fruit
two entries

Summary: Best seasonal performance came from these entries which combined high
yield with high average fruit weight and a low proportion of cull fruit. Several
entries showed these qualities (Table 3). When high early yield (Table 5) and
desirable horticultural qualities such as blockiness, thick walls and little to
no bacterial spot infestation are considered (Table 2, 4), outstanding'
performance came from 'PR 901-3.' As nice as this pepper was, fruit became
squatty in later harvests. Superior mid-season performance, along .with good
season-long performance, came from XPH 5985, PS 3187, 'PR 300-7,' PS 55887 and
'Camelot.' However, PS 55887 and 'Camelot' were not resistant to race 2 of the
bacterial spot organism; 'Camelot' was not thick walled and was slightly long
fruited (in a short-fruited season); and XPH 5985, PS 3187 and 'PR 300-7' were
not among the most thick-walled entries. Strong mid-late season performance came
from: PS 3187, PS 55887, 'Verdel,' and 'Memphis'. 'Verdel' and 'Memphis' are
not resistant to bacterial spot race 2, but were blocky and thick-walled.

Note: The information contained in this report is a summary of experimental
results and should not be used as recommendations for crop production. No
discrimination is intended or endorsement implied where trade names are used.

Acknowledgment: The authors wish to thank the following organizations/firms
which donated funds toward vegetable cultivar research during 1991-92
(alphabetical): Abbott & Cobb, Agrisales, American Takii, Asgrow Florida Co.,
Florida Pepper Exchange, Green Cay Farms of Boynton Beach, Market More, Neuman,
Nunhems, Pepper Research, Petoseed, Rogers NK and Sakata Seed America.

LITERATURE CITED

1. Florida Agricultural Statistics Service. 1992. Vegetable Summary 1990-
91. Florida Agric. Statistics Serv., Orlando, FL.

2. Geraldson, C. M. 1967.
system of soil testing.

Evaluation of the nutrient intensity and balance
Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. of Fla. 27:59-67.

3. Hanlon, E. A. and J. M. DeVore. 1989. IFAS extension soil testing
laboratory chemical procedures and training manual. Fla. Coop. Ext. Circ.
812.

4. Stanley, C. D. 1992. Temperature and rainfall report for 1991.
Bradenton GCREC Res. Rept. BRA1992-2.

5. United States Department
of peppers. USDA Agric.

of Agriculture. 1981. U.S. standards for grades
Mktg. Serv., USDA, Washington, DC.

Table 1. Temperature and rainfall at the GCREC during the fall of 1992 and
the 38-year averages (4).

Average daily temperature (oF)
1992 38-yr. avq. Rainfall (in.)
Month Max. Min. Max. Min. 1992 38-yr. avq.

February (24-29) 77z 60z 73y 51Y 5.382 3.11Y
March 75 56 77 55 4.05 3.38
April 81 61 81 59 2.93 1.65
May-June (1) 86z 62z 87y 65y 0.15z 3.24Y

ZTransplanted February 24, 1992. Last harvest June
statistics for 1992 are from these dates. June 1,
figures.
YStatistics for entire month.

1, 1992. Weather
1992 is in the May 1992

Table 2. Characteristics and seed sources of pepper entries evaluated during the spring 1992 trial.

N Oj >.) a0) LO
WU 4- 0 4-3 4J .- -
r 0 U C >) S_ (0 U >'
ro M E O 0 E 0)0W)-P
= O4 >,S, X 3>) > s-, a)(n >, -. S_ a= M
o) En4, 0 P4-) 4 4-3 4-1 r S.- 4- -P 4-) 0 S.-.4-)MS.. 4 e S..L a) -0 M C
4-3 .-- = 4- C C r -. Qj .- --r_4- = -r0- 0G)0 OP 4 S_. -
O O S ro.r- (-tQ (O N a r- > 3 J- 3 r- 4-)3 L to (n > U O U C -Ie
seedsupC ierEntrv c 5LJ -- S -r- '- r O 0" .r -r- Q) o CL Cc > mn
Seed Supplier/Entry va c cO C. = C. L V) CL L. L U CD = L a LL_ L -_ LL_ V) -U Co V) t-1 D =r Comments

Abbott & Cobb
Ssupersweet 860
Ssupersweet 862R

9 semi tall
9 semi tatt

Asgrow
Ranger 9
Rebell 1,2 10
XPH 5985 1,2,3 9
XPH 5989 8
Burpee
Crispy 9
Enza Zaden (Precision Agric. Prod.)
Thickwatt Red 10
Ferry-Morse
FMX 1153 9
FMX 1154 9
Harris Moran
Bell King 8
HMX 8862 8
Neuman
Hello 8
Nunhems
Carlos 8
Pepper Research
PR 300-1 1,2,3 9
PR 300-4 1,2,3 9
PR 300-6 1,2,3 9
PR 300-7 1,2,3 8
PR 901-3 2 7

Petoseed
Bell Captain 9
Camelot 9
Capistrano 10
King Arthur 2 9
PS 3187 2 9
PS 55887 9
Rogers NK
Galaxy 8
Jupiter 8
Memphis 8
Orobelle 9
Verdel 10

Whopper Improved 8
0177 2 9
9131 1,2 10
9138 1,2,3 8
9140 1,2,3 8

up med

semi sh

semi tall
semi med

up med
semi med

10 pend
10 pend

10 pend
10 up
10 pend
10 pend

8 pend

8 pend

9 pend
10 pend

9 yellow S 7,BS
9 red S 9,BS

8 red S 9,BS
10 red B 10
9 red B 10
8 red S 10

9 red E-B 8,BS

8 red E-B 5,BS

7 red B 8,V
8 red B 7,V

9 pend 8 red E-B 9 BER, 7 BS
9 up 8 red E-B 9,BS

9 8 squatty fruit later in season
8 9 squatty fruit later in season;
checking

8 9 squatty fruit later in season
10 9
10 9
10 9 squatty fruit later in season

9 9

7 6 heavy defoliation

10 7
10 7

8 8
9 9

mishapen fruit

purpling fruit; checking

semi med-tall 9 pend 9 yellow B 9 BER, 8 BS 9 6 severely mishapen fruit

up tall

9 pend 8 red E 8, BS

tall
tall
med
med
med

med
med
med
med
med
med

tall
sh
med
med
tall

med
tall
tall
tall
med

pend
pend
pend
pend
pend

pend
pend
pend
pend
pend
pend

pend
pend
pend
pend/up
pend

pend
pend
pend/up
pend
pend

red
red
red
yellow
red

8 8

10
10
10
10
10

5,BS
5,BS
8,BS
10
10
5,BS

10
7,BS
8,BS
8,BS
7,BS

8,BS
10
10
10
9,BS

purpling fruit
purpling fruit; fruit of variable
size and shape

severe checking

very nice fruit

purpling fruit

squatty fruit later in season
purpling fruit
squatty fruit later in season
purpling fruit, smooth fruit;
checking

Late maturing

Table 2 (continued).

'Resistance to Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria by race number.
'Rated 4 May 1992: 1 = poor or severe; 10 = excellent or none.
xup = upright; semi = semi upright/spreading.
"sh = short (<17"); med = medium (18-23"); tall (24-29").
Vup = upright; pend = pendant.
"B = blocky; E = elongate; S = squatty. Reflects entire season assessment, fruit became more squatty as season progressed.
tRated 4 May 1992: 1 = severe; 10 = none; Disease/disorder appraisal included virus (V), blossom end rot (BER) and bacterial spot (BS). Rated for a single replication.
'Rated 4 May, 1992: 1 = severe; 10 = none. Rated for all four replications.

Table 3. Total marketable yield, fruit size, percentage culls and plant stand for the spring 1992.
(Harvested May 12 and 21, June 1, 1992).

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Totaly Virus-y Plant
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls Stand
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%) (%)

XPH 5985 1621 aX 5.4 a 7.0 b-d 24 d-g < 1 b 100 a
PS 3187 1586 ab 5.5 a 6.7 c-i 17 g 0 b 100 a
PR 901-3 1475 a-c 4.7 a-c 7.1 bc 31 b-f < 1 b 100 a
PR 300-7 1471 a-c 5.0 ab 6.7 c-h 30 b-f < 1 b 100 a
PS 55887 1455 a-c 4.6 a-e 7.4 b 22 fg 0 b 100 a

XPH 5989 1388 a-d 4.6 a-e 7.0 b-d 36 a-e < 1 b 100 a
King Arthur 1368 a-e 4.5 a-f 7.0 b-e 37 a-c 0 b 100 a
Bell King 1353 a-e 5.0 ab 6.3 g-k 24 e-g 0 b 100 a
Mello 1333 a-f 5.4 a 5.8 k-m 33 a-f 0 b 99 ab
Ssupersweet 860 1322 a-f 4.7 a-c 6.5 d-j 32 b-f 0 b 100 a oo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HMX 8862 1316 a-f 4.6 a-e 6.7 c-i 28 c-f 0 b 99 ab
Whopper Improved 1300 a-g 4.5 a-f 6.7 c-i 28 c-f 1 b 100 a
Camelot 1288 a-g 3.7 b-g 8.0 a 24 d-g 0 b 100 a
Verdel 1280 a-g 4.5 a-f 6.5 d-j 30 b-f 0 b 100 a
Carlos 1264 a-g 4.6 a-d 6.3 f-k 33 b-f 0 b 100 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Memphis 1214 a-h 4.2 a-g 6.7 c-i 28 c-f 0 b 100 a
Ranger 1187 b-i 4.9 ab 5.7 Im 29 b-f 0 b 98 b
RNK 9131 1156 c-i 4.4 a-f 6.1 i-m 28 c-f 0 b 100 a
PR 300-1 1125 c-i 4.8 a-f 5.8 k-m 29 b-f 0 b 100 a
Rebell 1060 c-i 4.2 a-g 5.7 Im 36 a-d 0 b 100 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PR 300-4 1028 d-i 3.5 c-g 6.8 b-g 30 b-f 0 b 100 a
Capistrano 1004 d-i 3.3 c-g 6.9 b-f 40 a-c < 1 b 100 a
Crispy 997 d-i 4.2 a-g 5.5 mn 37 a-c 5 a 100 a
Ssupersweet 862R 968 e-i 3.4 c-g 6.6 c-j 46 a < 1 b 99 ab
Orobelle 953 e-i 3.7 b-g 6.0 j-m 46 a 0 b 100 a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3 (continued).

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Total' Virus-Y Plant
Yield Fruit itFruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls Stand
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%) (%)

RNK 9140 935 f-i 3.9 b-g 5.5 mn 31 b-f 0 b 100 a
Bell Captain 919 f-i 3.2 d-g 6.6 c-i 39 a-c < 1 b 100 a
PR 300-6 897 g-i 3.1 fg 6.5 c-j 39 a-c 0 b 100 a
RNK 9138 835 hi 3.8 b-g 5.1 n 42 ab 0 b 99 ab
Thickwall Red 821 hi 3.2 e-g 6.1 i-l 37 a-c 0 b 99 ab
Jupiter 780 i 2.9 g 6.4 e-j 46 a 0 b 99 ab
Jupiter 780 i 2.9 g 6.4 e-j 46 a 0 b 99 ab

ZBushel = 28 lb.
YBy weight, as a
xMean separation

Acre = 8712 linear feet of bed.
percentage of harvested fruit.
by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.

Table 4. Marketable yield, fruit size and percentage of culls of pepper entries for the first
harvest, May 12, 1992.

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Totaly Virus-y
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%)

PR 901-3 502 aX 1.3 a 8.7 a 10 ab 0 b
PR 300-7 337 b 1.1 ab 7.3 b-f 5 ab 0 b
HMX 8862 331 b 1.0 a-d 8.0 a-e 6 ab 0 b
XPH 5989 330 b 0.9 a-e 8.4 a-c 11 ab 0 b
King Arthur 327 b 1.0 a-c 7.7 a-e 17 ab 0 b

PS 55887 286 bc 0.8 a-f 8.3 a-c 1 b 0 b
Camelot 274 b-d 0.8 a-g 8.3 a-c 6 ab 0 b
XPH 5985 270 b-d 0.8 a-g 8.5 ab 5 ab 0 b
Whopper Improved 253 b-d 0.7 b-h 7.9 a-e 2 ab 0 b
Verdel 252 b-d 0.8 a-g 7.6 a-f 7 ab 0 b
.................................................................................................
Ssupersweet 860 235 b-e 0.8 a-g 6.8 d-f 20 ab 0 b
Ssupersweet 862R 195 b-f 0.6 b-i 7.2 c-f 12 ab 2 ab
PR 300-4 188 b-f 0.6 b-i 7.3 b-f 0 b 0 b
Carlos 174 b-f 0.6 b-i 7.3 b-f 12 ab 0 b
Ranger 172 b-f 0.6 b-i 6.8 d-f 9 ab 0 b

Rebell 168 b-f 0.6 b-i 6.8 ef 0 b 0 b
Memphis 139 c-f 0.4 c-i 7.2 c-f 10 ab 0 b
Orobelle 132 c-f 0.4 c-i 7.5 a-f 16 ab 0 b
PS 3187 129 c-f 0.4 d-i 7.6 a-f 5 ab 0 b
Thickwall Red 125 c-f 0.4 c-i 7.0 d-f 0 b 0 b

Capistrano 121 c-f 0.4 e-i 7.2 c-f 24 a 0 b
Mello 109 c-f 0.3 f-i 8.1 a-d 4 ab 0 b
Bell King 101 c-f 0.3 f-i 7.3 b-f 7 ab 0 b
PR 300-6 91 d-f 0.3 f-i 7.0 d-f 3 b 0 b
Crispy 84 d-f 0.3 f-i 6.8 ef 3 b 3 a

Table 4 (continued).

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Totaly Virus-Y
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%)

Jupiter 59 ef 0.2 g-i 7.6 a-f 25 ab 0 b
Bell Captain 48 ef 0.2 i 7.5 a-f 0 b 0 b
RNK 9138 46 f 0.2 hi 6.8 d-f 5 ab 0 b
PR 300-1 44 f 0.1 i 7.6 a-f 0 b 0 b
RNK 9140 42 f 0.2 i 6.4 f 7 ab 0 b
RNK 9131 31 f 0.1 i 6.4 f 0 b 0 b
RNK 9131 31 f 0.1 i 6.4 f 0 b 0 b

zBushel = 28 lb.
YBy weight, as a
xMean separation

Acre = 8712 linear feet of bed.
percentage of harvested fruit.
by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.

Table 5. Marketable fruit dimensions.z

Ratio Wall
Entry Length (in.) Width (in.) Length/Width Thickness (in.) No. Lobes

XPH 5985 3.8 d-hy 3.4 c-e 1.1 e-i 0.260 c-e 3.3 a-d
PS 3187 3.7 e-i 3.3 e-i 1.1 d-g 0.268 b-d 3.6 a-c
PR 901-3 3.8 d-h 3.6 ab 1.0 f-l 0.291 a 3.5 a-c
PR 300-7 3.7 e-j 3.4 c-e 1.1 e-j 0.256 d-f 3.4 a-d
PS 55887 3.9 c-f 3.4 c-e 1.1 d-g 0.283 ab 3.5 a-c

XPH 5989 3.5 g-l 3.7 a 1.0 kl 0.267 b-d 3.5 a-c
King Arthur 3.5 h-l 3.4 c-e 1.0 h-i 0.263 c-e 3.6 a-c
Bell King 4.6 b 3.1 i-k 1.5 b 0.236 fg 3.2 cd
Mello 3.8 d-g 3.4 c-e 1.1 e-h 0.216 ij 3.4 a-d
Ssupersweet 860 3.4 j-l 3.5 b-d 1.0 j-1 0.252 d-g 3.5 a-c

HMX 8862 4.1 cd 3.3 e-g 1.2 d 0.263 b-d 3.3 a-d
Whopper Improved 3.7 e-i 3.3 e-i 1.1 d-g 0.291 a 3.6 a-c
Camelot 4.0 c-e 3.4 c-e 1.2 d-f 0.256 d-f 3.7 ab
Verdel 3.5 g-1 3.4 c-f 1.1 f-k 0.287 a 3.5 a-c
Carlos 5.2 a 3.0 k 1.8 a 0.212 j 3.7 a

Memphis 3.5 h-I 3.4 c-e 1.0 h-l 0.279 a-c 3.6 a-c
Ranger 3.7 e-j 3.3 e-h 1.1 d-h 0.228 h-j 3.7 ab
RNK 9131 3.6 f-k 3.2 g-j 1.1 d-g 0.252 d-g 3.7 a
PR 300-1 3.6 f-k 3.3 c-g 1.1 e-i 0.267 b-d 3.6 a-c
Rebell 3.8 d-g 3.2 f-j 1.2 de 0.252 d-g 3.2 cd

PR 300-4 3.8 d-g 3.3 e-i 1.2 de 0.236 g-i 3.6 a-c
Capistrano 3.4 kl 3.4 c-e 1.0 i-i 0.252 d-g 3.6 a-c
Crispy 4.1 c 3.1 jk 1.3 c 0.260 de 3.3 a-d
Ssupersweet 862R 3.2 1 3.4 c-e 0.9 kl 0.263 b-d 3.4 a-c
Orobelle 3.3 1 3.5 bc 0.9 1 0.248 d-h 3.5 a-c

Table 5 (continued).

Ratio Wall
Entry Length (in.) Width (in.) Length/Width Thickness (in.) No. Lobes

RNK 9140 3.7 e-i 3.1 i-k 1.2 de 0.232 g-i 3.7 a
Bell Captain 3.7 e-i 3.3 d-g 1.1 d-h 0.236 f-h 3.5 a-c
PR 300-6 3.5 h-l 3.3 c-g 1.0 g-l 0.267 b-d 3.0 d
RNK 9138 3.4 i-l 3.1 h-k 1.1 e-j 0.228 h-j 3.5 a-c
Thickwall Red 3.8 d-g 3.4 c-f 1.1 d-h 0.244 e-h 3.2 b-d

Jupiter 3.4 j-l 3.4 c-e 1.0 i-l 0.256 d-f 3.5 a-c

zAverages from samples of eight fruit per replication taken from the earliest harvest.
YMean separation by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.

.........____ ___________ __ ~

Table 6. Marketable yield, fruit size and percentage of culls of pepper entries for the second
harvest, May 21, 1992.

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Total Virus -
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%)

XPH 5985 736 aX 2.3 a 7.3 a-e 14 a-g < 1 b
Ssupersweet 860 623 ab 2.1 ab 6.9 b-g 16 a-f 0 b
PS 3187 577 a-c 1.8 a-c 7.3 a-e 5 fg 0 b
Bell King 577 a-d 2.0 ab 6.7 b-g 13 a-g 0 b
Camelot 568 a-d 1.6 a-c 8.0 a 17 a-f 0 b

PS 55887 500 a-e 1.5 a-c 7.6 ab 8 b-g 0 b
PR 300-7 493 a-e 1.6 a-c 7.0 a-g 14 a-g 0 b
XPH 5989 450 b-e 1.4 a-d 7.5 a-c 15 a-g < 1 b
PR 901-3 442 b-f 1.4 a-d 7.4 a-d 25 a-b 1 b
Whopper Improved 439 b-f 1.5 a-d 7.0 b-g 14 a-g 2 b

Carlos 436 b-f 1.5 a-c 6.6 c-g 23 a-d 0 b
King Arthur 434 b-f 1.4 a-d 7.2 a-f 24 a-d 0 b
RNK 9131 426 b-f 1.4 a-d 6.9 b-g 4 g 0 b
Capistrano 393 b-f 1.2 b-d 7.2 a-e 19 a-f 2 b
Memphis 387 b-f 1.2 b-d 7.3 a-e 9 c-g 0 b
.................................................................................................
PR 300-6 386 b-f 1.3 b-d 7.0 b-g 8 d-g 0 b
Jupiter 367 b-f 1.2 b-d 7.1 a-f 24 a-d 0 b
Ranger 348 b-f 1.3 b-d 6.5 c-h 13 a-g 0 b
Verdel 348 b-f 1.2 b-d 6.9 b-g 10 b-g 0 b
Rebell 334 b-f 1.2 b-d 6.4 e-h 9 a-g 0 b

HMX 8862 327 b-f 1.1 b-d 6.9 b-g 13 a-g 0 b
PR 300-4 302 c-f 0.9 cd 7.5 a-c 10 a-g 0 b
RNK 9140 301 c-f 1.1 b-d 6.4 e-h 4 g 0 b
Crispy 297 c-f 1.1 b-d 6.2 f-h 28 a 16 a
Orobelle 278 c-f 1.0 cd 6.4 d-h 18 a-g 0 b

Table 6 (continued).

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Totaly Virus-y
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%)

PR 300-1 277 d-f 1.2 b-d 6.0 gh 9 e-g 0 b
Bell Captain 267 ef 0.8 cd 7.3 a-e 20 a-e 1 b
Mello 252 ef 0.9 cd 6.8 b-g 25 a-c 0 b
Thickwall Red 230 ef 0.9 cd 6.2 f-h 25 a-c 0 b
RNK 9138 201 ef 0.9 cd 5.6 h 19 a-f 0 b

Ssupersweet 862R 146 f 0.5 d 7.2 a-f 16 a-g 0 b

zBushel = 28 lb.
YBy weight, as a
xMean separation

Acre = 8712 linear feet of bed.
percentage of total harvested fruit.
by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.

Table 7. Marketable yield, fruit size and percentage of culls of pepper entries for the third
harvest. June 1, 1992.

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Total' Virus-Y
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%)

Mello 972 aX 4.2 a 5.4 g-j 37 c-f 0 b
PS 3187 879 ab 3.3 ab 6.2 b-f 25 f 0 b
PR 300-1 803 a-c 3.2 a-c 5.9 d-h 34 ef 0 b
RNK 9131 698 a-d 2.8 b-e 5.7 e-i 38 c-f 0 b
Memphis 688 a-d 2.5 b-h 6.3 b-e 38 c-f 0 b

Verdel 680 a-e 2.6 b-g 6.0 c-f 42 b-e 0 b
Bell King 676 a-e 2.7 b-g 5.8 e-i 34 ef 0 b
PS 55887 670 a-e 2.3 b-h 6.9 b 37 c-f 0 b
Ranger 667 a-e 3.1 b-d 5.2 h-j 38 c-f 0 b
HMX 8862 658 b-e 2.5 b-h 6.1 b-f 40 b-e 0 b O

Carlos 654 b-e 2.6 b-g 5.9 c-f 42 b-e 0 b
PR 300-7 641 b-e 2.4 b-h 6'2 b-e 45 a-e 1 a
Ssupersweet 862R 627 b-e 2.3 b-h 6.2 b-e 55 ab 0 b
XPH 5985 616 b-e 2.3 b-h 6.3 b-e 39 b-e 0 b
Crispy 616 b-e 2.8 b-f 5.1 ij 43 b-e 0 b

XPH 5989 609 b-e 2.3 b-h 6.3 b-e 52 a-c < 1 ab
Whopper Improved 608 b-e 2.3 b-h 6.1 b-f 41 b-e 0 b
King Arthur 606 b-e 2.1 b-h 6.6 b-d 52 a-d 0 b
Bell Captain 604 b-e 2.2 b-h 6.3 b-e 47 a-e 0 b
RNK 9140 592 b-e 2.6 b-g 5.2 g-j 41 b-e 0 b

RNK 9138 589 b-e 2.8.b-e 4.9 j 49 a-e 0 b
Rebell 558 b-e 2.5 b-h 5.2 g-j 50 a-e 0 b
Orobelle 544 c-e 2.3 b-h 5.6 e-j 55 ab 0 b
PR 300-4 538 c-e 1.9 c-h 6.3 be 44 b-e 0 b
PR 901-3 531 c-e 2.0 b-h 6.0 c-f 45 b-e 0 b

Table 7 (continued).

Average
Marketablez Marketable Marketable Totaly Virus-y
Yield Fruit Fruit Wt. Culls Like-Culls
Entry (bushels/A) per Plant (oz) (%) (%)

Capistrano 490 c-e 1.7 e-h 6.6 bc 52 a-c 0 b
Thickwall Red 466 de 1.9 d-h 5.9 c-h 48 a-e 0 b
Ssupersweet 860 465 de 1.9 d-h 5.8 e-i 51 a-d 0 b
Camelot 446 de 1.3 h 7.9 a 36 d-f 0 b
PR 300-6 420 de 1.6 f-h 6.1 b-f 56 ab 0 b

Jupiter 353 e 1.5 gh 5.7 e-i 61 a 0 b

ZBushel = 28 lb.
YBy weight, as a
xMean separation

Acre = 8712 linear feet of bed.
percentage of total harvested fruit.
by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.

The Gulf Coast Research and Education Center

The Gulf Coast Research and Education Center is
a unit of the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sci-
ences, University of Florida. The Research Center
originated in the fall of 1925 as the Tomato
Disease Laboratory with the primary objective of
developing control procedures for an epidemic out-
break of nailhead spot of tomato. Research was ex-
panded in subsequent years to include study of sev-
eral other tomato diseases.

In 1937, new research facilities were established
in the town of Manatee, and the Center scope was
enlarged to include horticultural, entomological, and
soil science studies of several vegetable crops. The
ornamental program was a natural addition to the
Center's responsibilities because of the emerging in-
dustry in the area in the early 1940's.

The Center's current location was established in
1965 where a comprehensive research and extension
program on vegetable crops and ornamental plants is
conducted. Three state extension specialists posi-
tions, 16 state research scientists, and two grant
supported scientists from various disciplines of
training participate in all phases of vegetable and
ornamental horticultural programs. This interdisci-
plinary team approach, combining several research
disciplines and a wide range of industry and faculty
contacts, often is more productive than could be ac-
complished with limited investments in independent
programs.

The Center's primary mission is to develop new
and expand existing knowledge and technology, and
to disseminate new scientific knowledge in Florida, so
that agriculture remains efficient and economically
sound.

The secondary mission of the Center is to assist
the Cooperative Extension Service, IFAS campus
departments, in which Center faculty hold appropri-
ate liaison appointments, and other research centers
in extension, educational training, and cooperative
research programs for the benefit of Florida's pro-
ducers, students, and citizens.

Program areas of emphasis include: (1) genetics,
breeding, and variety development and evaluation;
(2) biological, chemical, and mechanical pest manage-
ment in entomology, plant pathology, nematology,
bacteriology, virology, and weed science; (3) produc-
tion efficiency, culture, management, and counteract-
ing environmental stress; (4) water management and
natural resource protection; (5) post-harvest physiol-
ogy, harvesting, handling and food quality of horti-
cultural crops; (6) technical support and assistance to
the Florida Cooperative Extension Service; and (7)
advancement of fundamental knowledge ofdisciplines
represented by faculty and (8) directing graduate
student training and teaching special undergraduate
classes.

Location of
GCREC Bradenton

IFAS IS:
1 The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences,
University of Florida.
J A statewide organization dedicated to teaching,
research and extension.
L Faculty located in Gainesville and at 13 research
and education centers, 67 county extension
offices and four demonstration units throughout
the state.
) A partnership in food and agriculture, and natural
and renewable resource research and education,
funded by state, federal and local government,
and by gifts and grants from individuals, founda-
tions, government and industry.
i An organization whose mission is:
Educating students in the food, agricultural,
and related sciences and natural resources.
Strengthening Florida's diverse food and
agricultural industry-and its environment
through research.
Enhancing for all Floridians, the application
of research and knowledge to improve the
quality of life statewide through IFAS exten-
sion programs.