Group Title: Fresh market tomato variety trial results.
Title: Fresh market tomato variety trial results. Spring 1983.
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00054243/00002
 Material Information
Title: Fresh market tomato variety trial results. Spring 1983.
Series Title: Fresh market tomato variety trial results.
Alternate Title: Research report - Bradenton Agricultural Research & Education Center ; BRA1983-20
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Creator: Howe, T. K.
Scott, J. W.
Waters, W. E.
Publisher: Agricultural Research & Education Center, IFAS, University of Florida
Publication Date: Spring 1983
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00054243
Volume ID: VID00002
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 62705139

Full Text




R 3-t O
Agricultural Research & Education Center
IFAS, University of Florida
5007-60th Street East
Bradenton, Florida 34203

Bradenton AREC Research Report BRA1983-20 August 1983

FRESH MARKET TOMATO VARIETY TRIAL RESULTS
FOR SPRING 1983

T. K. Howe, J. W. Scott and W. E. Waters1


A replicated fresh market variety trial was conducted at the Agricultural
Research and Education Center in Bradenton, Florida to evaluate the performance
of various commercial cultivars and IFAS breeding lines in the spring of
1983. Twelve of the entries in the trial, 'Siiny,' 'Duke,' 'Flora-Dade,'
'FTE12,' 'Hayslip,' 'Walter PF' and six IFAS breeding lines,.were also
a part of the state-wide IFAS variety trial. These twelve entries were
evaluated at IFAS agricultural research facilities at Ft. Pierce, Immokalee,
Homestead and Bradenton, and a cumulative report on the results from all
locations will be published separately.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One year prior to making beds the field was treated with one ton of
dolomite and 600 pounds of superphosphate (0-20-0 containing 80 pounds/ton
micronutrients as 503 oxide) per gross acre. The area was farmed in
row crops immediately following this treatment. For the spring 1983
tomato crop, raised beds of Myakka fine sand (1) were fumigated with
DowfumeO MC-33 at 3.6 pounds/100 linear bed feet. Bed fertilizer included
19.2 pounds/100 linear bed feet of 18-0-25-2 distributed in two narrow
bands on the bed surface 9 inches to each side of the plant row.
Full bed dressing included 18-0-25-2 at 3.4 pounds/100 linear bed feet and
superphosphate (0-20-0 plus 503 oxide micronutrients at 80 pounds/ton) at
6.2 pounds/100 linear bed feet. The 30 inch wide beds were mulched with
black plastic.

All entries (Table 1) were sown on December 30, 1982 in wooden flats
containing SAF-T-Blast@ (Mineral Aggregates, Inc.), a processed product of
spent coal. Seedlings were transplanted 12 days later in ToddO Planter
Flats (#150, 1l x 11 inch cell size) containing a vermiculite and Canadian
peat mix (1:1) amended with superphosphate, dolomite and minor elements.
Transplants were set in the field on February 17, 1983. Resetting occurred
until February 23, 1983. Plants were set 24 inches apart in single rows
in the center of each bed and staked. Beds.were spaced on 4.5 foot
centers with irrigation ditches every 7 rows. Four replicates of 10
plants per entry were arranged in a randomized complete block design.
Standard pesticides were applied for insect and disease control.

1Senior Biologist (Variety Trial Program), Assistant Professor (Vegetable
Breeding) and Center Director, respectively, at the AREC-Bradenton.











Fruits were harvested by hand on May 25, June 1 and June 8, 1983.
Tomatoes were graded as cull or marketable, and marketable fruit was
sized by machine. Both cull and marketable fruit were counted and
weighed. Defects of the cultivars were noted during the grading
procedure. Average fruit weight, percent culls and percent large fruit
6 x 6 or greater) were calculated in addition to yields.

Samples of mature green and red-ripe fruit were harvested on June 7,
1983 from single plots of the following entries: 'Sunny,' 'Duke,' 'FTE12,'
'Hayslip,' 'Flora-Dade,' 'Walter PF,' 7065-ESBK, 7060-ESBK, 7045-EBK,
7025-ISBK, 7061-ESBK, and 7057-TSBK. Red-ripe fruit were immediately
analyzed for pH, total titratable acidity based on percent citric
acid,' and percent soluble solids. Mature green fruit were placed in an
ethylene ripening room and exposed to 100 ppm ethylene for 36 hours.
The room was maintained at 80-100% relative humidity and 69-730F.
Fruit were removed from the ripening room and allowed to table ripen
until red-ripe. On June 17, 1983 these fruit were subjectedto the
same analysis as the red-ripe fruit were 10 days earlier., Due to
experimental design constraints, differences among cultivars and
between fruit-stage (mature greens-ethylene ripened vs. red-ripes) were
statistically analyzed separately. To test cultivar differences an
analysis of variance was performed on the data with no provision for
replication and the cultivar x stage interaction was used as the mean
square error to calculate the F value. This is the most appropriate
analysis because of design constraints of the post-harvest work, and
means were not separated, since the analysis was meant only to give
indications of differences among all varieties. Differences between
fruit stages, irrespective of cultivar, was tested with paired t-test
analysis. Data is presented for pH, titratable acidity, soluble solids
and sugar-acid ratio.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Cumulative results for spring 1983 fresh market tomato season appear in
Table 1. IFAS breeding line 7025-ISBK was the top ranked entry in marketable
yield (308.8-25 lb. boxes/1000 linear ft. of bed), although only signifi-
cantly different from eleven other entries. It also ranked lowest in
percentage of cull fruit produced (34.1%) and highest in large fruit
yield (212.6-25 Ib. boxes/1000 linear ft. of bed). Other top ranking
marketable yields were produced by 'FTE12,' 'Duke,' 'Independence,'
7045-EBK, 'Atlantic City,' 'Sunny,' 'Florida 1A,' 'Flora-Dade,' and
'Walter PF'. Average fruit weight ranged from 6.8 oz. (7060-ESBK)
to 4.2 oz. ('Corda') and 7060-ESBK produced significantly larger fruit
size than all but one other entry (7061-ESBK). The majority of the
entries produced similar large fruit yields, however on a percentage
basis 7060-ESBK, 7065-ESBK, 7061-ESBK, 'Florida 1B' and 7094 produced
a greater proportion of marketable large fruit compared to respective
marketable fruit yield of all sizes.

Data on earliness is in Table 2. 'Independence' produced the greatest early
marketable yield (115.1-25 lb. boxes/1000 linear ft. of bed) which was
significantly greater than 13 other entries. Following 'Independence'






-3-


in early marketable yield were 7045-EBK, 'FTE12,' 'Florida 1A,' 7025-ISBK,
'Duke,' 'Florida 1B,' and 7094. Percentage culls ranged from 63.6%
(7090-12) to 32.0% ('Walter PF'). Average fruit size was highest for
IFAS breeding lines 7061-ESBK (7.7 oz.) and 7060-ESBK (7.6 oz.) which
were significantly heavier than all but three other entries. Yields of
large fruit were greatest for 'Independence' and 'Florida 1A,' signifi-
cantly higher than 10 entries. IFAS breeding lines 7060-ESBK and
7065-ISBK produced the highest percentages of large fruit based on
marketable yields.

In the second harvest, 'Atlantic City,' 7025-ISBK, 'Sunny, 'Duke,'
'Florida 1A,' and 'FTE12' had the highest marketable yields but only
'Atlantic City' and 7025-ISBK were significantly different from the
lowest yields of this harvest. Average fruit weight ranged from 6.9 oz.
(7060-ESBK) to 4.4 oz. ('Walter PF'). Three IFAS breeding lines. 7060-ESBK,
7061-ESBK and 7065-ESBK along with 'Florida 1A' and 'lB' produced significantly
larger fruit than any other entries. The percentage of large fruit
production was greatest by rank for 7060-ESBK, 7061-ESBK, 'Florida 1B,'
7065-ESBK, 'Florida 1A,' 7090-12, and 7094.

At the final harvest, 'Walter PF,' 'Flora-Dade,' 'FTE12,' 'Duke,'
7025-ISBK, and 7094 were ranked highest in marketable yield. Approxi-
mately half of the production for these entries was in large fruit.
Average fruit weight declined to a range of 5.6 oz. (7060-ESBK) to 3.9
oz. ('Corda'). As in previous harvests IFAS breeding lines 7060-ESBK
and 7061-ESBK ranked as the top two entries for average fruit size,
which also produced the greatest percentage of marketable fruit as
large fruit throughout the season.

Production trends are shown in Table 5. Early varieties include:
'Independence,' 7045-EBK, 'Florida 1A,' 'Florida 1B,' 7094 and 7056-ESBK.
Varieties which produced most heavily at the mid-season harvest included:
'Atlantic City,' 'Sunny,' 7025-ISBK, 7057-TSBK and 7090-12. Late
varieties were: 'Flora-Dade,' 'Walter PF,' and D76121.

Post harvest evaluation (Table 6) of red-ripe fruit was done immediately
after harvesting on June 7. Mature-green fruit from this harvest were
analyzed after exposure to ethylene gas followed by table ripening on
June 17. Paired t-test analysis showed that significant differences existed
between red and mature-green ethylene ripened fruit in percent titratable
acidity and percent soluble solids. Red-ripe fruit on average
had higher percent titratable acidity and higher percent soluble
solids. The pH and sugar-acid ratio were not significantly different
among fruit stages. There appears to be differences among cultivars
and breeding lines in percent titratable acidity, pH and sugar-acid
ratio, but not for percent soluble solids.

LITERATURE CITED

1. Geraldson, C. M., A. J. Overman and J. P. Jones. 1965. Combination
of high analysis fertilizer, plastic mulch and fumigation for tomato
production on old agricultural land. Proc. Soil and Crop Sci.
Soc. of Fla. 28:18-24.











entire season (Harvest dates: May 25, June 1 and June 8, 1983).
Marketable Fruit
1
Total yield Average Lg. fruit yield
(25 lb. boxes/ Cull weight (25 Ib. boxes/ Large fruit
l000 lin. ft.) (5) (oz) 1000 lin. ft.) (%)


e
ef
ef
ef
fg
e-g
e
e-f
cd
e-g
fg
cd
e-g
e-g
g
ab
.a
fg
d
bc
ef


212.6 a
199.1 ab
195.8 ab
199.1 ab
151.5 a-c
149.6 a-c
183.6 ab
165.3 a-c
196.5 ab
155.7 a-c
126.7 be
189.1 ab
X33.4 a-c
133.8 a-c
95.7 c
163.9 a-c
165.1 a-c
,, 86.0 c
133.7 a-c
S142.2 a-c
88.6 c


68.8
67.1
66.6
70.1
55.3
56.3
69.2
69.3
81.6
65.0
55.4
86.4
62.8
65.2
49.1
89.2
91.0
50.9
83.4
89.5
76.8


d-f
d-g
d-g
c-e
g-i
f-i
d-f
d-f
a-c
d-g
g-i
ab
e-h
d-g
i
ab
a
hi
ab
a
b-d


level. Means followed by the
AREC-Home. is Agr..Res. & Ed.


same letters) are not significantly
Center-Homestead, FL.


different.


450.1
500.0
466.7
489.7
434.2
424.2
402.1
394.4
400.5
373.9
379.5
345.6
404.9
366.3
387.1
307.7
288.8
314.7
306.5
364.0
318.6


a-d
a
a-c
ab
a-d
a-e
a-f
a-g
a-f
c-g
b-g
d-g
a-f
c-g
b-g
fg
g
e-g
fg
c-g
e-g


31.4
41.2
38.5
42.4
40.3
39.5
38.8
39.6
40.1
36.6
41.3
36.2
48.3
45.6
48.8
40.6
37.1
46.6
48.4
56.9
64.2


h
c-g
f-h
c-g
e-g
e-g
e-h
e-g
e-g
gh
c-g
gh
cd
c-f
c
d-g
gh
c-e
c
b
a


5.1
4.9
4.9
5.0
4.4
4.6
5.1
4.9
5.7
4.5
4.4
5.8
4.5
4.7
4.2
6.4
6.8
4.4
5.7
6.2
4.9









Table 2. Yields and performance of tomato entries for first harvest (May 25, 1983).
SMarketable Fruit
Marketable Total Lg. Fruit
Yield Yield Average Yield
Cultivar/Breeding (25 lb. boxes/ (25 lb. boxes/ Cull Weight (25 lb. boxes/ Lg. Fruit
Line 1000 lin. ft.) 1000 lin. ft.) (%) (oz) 1000 lin. ft.) (%)

Independence .115.1 a2 202.3 a 42.9 c-e 5.1 d-f 89.2 a 77.5 d-i
7045-EBK 102.1 a 166.7 ab 38.9 c-e 4.8 ef 68.8 a-e 66.9 hi
FTE 12 99.4,ab 166.7 ab 40.8 c-e 5.3 d-f 79.5 a-c 80.2 c-h
Florida 1A 98.5 ab 155.9 be 37.4 de 6.6 be 86.7 a 89.3 a-e
7025-ISBK 94.0 a-c 142.5 b-g 36.4 de 5.5 d-f 78.9 a-c 81.8 a-h
Duke 89.3 a-d 147.7 b-e 39.2 c-d 5.3 d-f 68.6 a-e 78.5 d-h
Florida 1B 87.0 a-e 140.7 b-h 38.0 de 6.8 a-c 82.1 ab 94.9 a-c
7094 84.1 a-e 144.9 b-f 43.0 c-e 6.8 a-c 77.8 a-d 92.2 a-d
7060-ESBK 65.6 b-f 111.0 c-i 42.1 c-e 7.6 a 64.1 a-e 97.8 a
7065-ESBK 63.6 c-f 154.1 b-d 58.3 ab 7.2 ab 62.2 a-e 97.6 a
Sunny 62.3 c-f 92.5 hi 32.4 e' 5.6 de 52.5 b-g 86.8 a-f
Hayslip 62.2 c-f 93.6 g-i 35.1 de 4.9 d-f 44.7 d-g 75.0 e-i
Corda 60.8 c-g 102.7 e-i 40.7 c-e 4.4 f 37.7 e-g 62.9 i
7061-ESBK 59.9 c-g 108.2 c-i 46.3 cd 7.7 a 57.1 a-f 96.5 ab
Atlantic City 57.8 d-g -96.1 f-i 39.9 c-e 5.9 cd 48.1 c-g 81.7 a-h
7057-TSBK 56.4 d-g 104.8 d-i 45.1 cd 5.1 d-f 45.1 d-g 0P.9 b-h
Walter PF 56.2 d-g 82.3 i 32.0 e 5.4 d-f 45.6 d-g 82.2 a-h
7097 55.0 d-g 110.3 c-i 50.4 be 5.1,d-f 45.7 d-g 84.7 a-g
Flora-Dade 53.1 e-g 88.7 i 38.8 c-e 4.5 ef 37.5 e-g 71.2 f-i
D76121 42.2 fg 72.6 i 40.9 c-e 4.8 ef 27.5 fg 69.6 g-i
7090-12 26.8 g 73.9 i 63.6 a 5.5 de 22.9 g 83.8 a-g


1Large fruit are sizes 6 x 6 and larger.
2Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range
significantly different.


test, 5% level. Means followed by the same letters) are not










Table 3. Yields and performance of tomato entries for second harvest (June 1, 1983).
1Marketable Fruit


Cultivar/Breeding
Line


Atlantic City
7025-ISBK
Sunny
Duke
Florida 1A
FTE 12
7057-TSBK
Independence
7045-EBK
Hayslip
Florida 1B
Flora-Dade
7097
Corda
7061-ESBK
7060-ESBK
Walter PF
D76121
7065-ESBK
7090-12
7094


Marketable
Yield
(25 lb. boxes/
1000 lin. ft.)


132.5 a2
126.5 ab
113.0 a-c
109.9 a-c
103.1 a-d
97.6 a-e
96.8 a-e
96.4 a-e
96.0 a-e
87.2 a-e
87.0 a-e
82.1 a-e
80.4 a-e
78.3 b-e
74.2 b-e
72.1 c-e
69.4 c-e
55.2 de
50.5 de
49.9 de
45.7 e


Total
Yield
(25 lb. boxes/
1000 lin. ft.)


201.3
176.1
184.7
178.8
170.6
172.4
178.7
168.4
154.3
156.7
133.2
153.8
165.9
136.9
118.8
108.3
109.9
111.1
119.4
143.5
98.0


a
a-c
ab
a-c
a-c
a-c
a-c
a-d
a-d
a-d
a-d
a-d
a-d
a-d
b-d
cd
cd
cd
b-d
a-d
d


Cull
M


35.8
28.9
39.4
40.0
40.1
44.3
47.0
42.9
36.8
44.0
33.9
48.0
52.1
44.1
37.7
33.4
40.9
50.8
56.8
65.5
53.5


f-i
i
d-i
d-i
d-i
b-h
b-g
c-h
f-i
b-h
g-i
b-f
b-d
b-h
e-i
hi
c-i
b-e
ab
a
bc


Average
Weight
(oz)


5.1 c-e
5.3 c-e
5.1 c-e
5.0 c-e
5.4 b-d
5.2 c-e
4.7 c-e
5.2 c-e
4.6 d-e
4.6 c-e
5.6 be
4.5 de
4.7 c-e
4.4 e
6.5 a
6.9 a
4.4 e
4.6 de
6.1 ab a
4.7 c-e
5.1 c-e


Lg. Fruit
Yield
(25 lb. boxes/
1000 lin. ft.)


102.8
87.7
78.3
79.8
84.9
63.2
64.1
69.8
55.5
49.4
74.8
52.4


a
ab
a-d
a-d
a-c
a-e
a-e
a-e
a-e
b-e
a-e
b-e


. 53.2 b-e
/. 38.1 c-e
68.3 a-e
'67.5 a-e
53.3 b-e
28.6 e
44.4 b-e
40.0 b-e
35..5 de


Lg. Fruit
.


71.8
68.3
70.2
70.2
80.4
64.1
63.1
71.8
51.9
56.3
84.7
58.1


b-e
c-g
b-f
b-f
a-d
d-g
d-g
b-e
g
e-g
a-c
e-g


65.0 d-g
51.2 g
92.7 a
93.4 a
71.9 b-e
52.4 fg
87.0 ab
80.1 a-d
76.9 a-d


ILarge fruit are sizes 6 x 6 and larger.
Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test,
significantly different.


5% level. Means followed by the same letters) are not








Table 4. Yields and performance of tomato entries for third harvest (June 8, 1983).
Marketable Fruit
Marketable Total Lg. Fruit
yield yield Average yield
Cultivar/Breeding (25 lb. boxes/ (25 lb. boxes/ Cull Weight (25 lb. boxes/ Lg. Fruit
Line 1000 lin. ft.) 1000 lin. ft.) (%) (oz) 1000 lin. ft. ) (%)

Walter PF 116.8 a 2 189.6 a 38.6 ef 4.2 d-f 53.3 ab 46.6 c-f
Flora-Dade 112.3 ab 179.8 ab 39.1 ef 4.2 d-f 48.6 a-c 42.2 d-f
FTE 12 97.6 a-c 160.9 a-c 40.3 ef 4.4 c-f 56.4 a 56.0 b-e
Duke 90.8 a-d 140.3 a-e 36.7 ef 4.3 c-f 47.4 a-c 46.5 c-f
7025-ISBK 88.3 a-e 131.5 b-f 33.8 f 4.4 c-f 45.9 a-c 49.7 b-f
7097 75.0 a-f 128.7 b-f 43.7 c-f 3.9 f 34.6 a-c 40.8 ef
Hayslip 73.5 b-g 129.2 b-f 45.3 c-f 4.1 ef 32.6 a-c 38.0 ef
D76121 73.0 b-g 131.0 b-f 46.2 c-f 4.1 ef 29.9 a-c 37.6 ef
Independence 70.6 b-g 119.1 c-g 41.1 d-f 4.5 c-e 40.1 a-c 55.6 b-e
Sunny 65.1 c-g 117.1 c-h 44.3 c-f 4.3 c-f 34.5 a-c 53.1 b-f
Atlantic City 60.5 c-g 104.8 d-h 43.1 c-f 4.5 c-f 32.7 a-c 50.8 b-f
Corda 60.1 c-g 147.6 a-d 59.1-ab 3.9 f 20.0 c 33.0 f
7045-EBK 58.3 c-g 103.2 d-h 43.4 c-f 4.4 c-f 25.4 a-c 41.3 ef
7061-ESBK 49.8 d-g 80.8 f-h 39.4 ef 5.4 a 38.6 a-c 77.6 a
7057-TSBK 47.9 d-g 82.8 f-h 43.2 c-f 4.3 c-f, 24.7 a-c 49.0 b-f
7060-ESBK 44.6 e-g '69.6 gh 38.2 ef 5.6 a 33.6 a-c 79.3 a
Florida 1B 43.9 e-g 71.6 gh 40.0 ef 4.9 be 32.2 a-c 64.5 a-c
7065-ESBK 42.8 fg 90.6 e-h 54.5 a-c 5.3 ab 35.6 a-c 76.8 a
Florida 1A 38.4 fg 74.0 gh 48.1 b-e 4.7 cd 24.9 a-c 62.1 a-d
7090-12 38.1 fg 101.2 d-h 62.3 a 4.'F ed 25.7 a-c 62.7 a-d
7094 30.0 g 63.7 h 54.0 a-d 4.3 .c-f 20.5 bc 67.6 ab


Large fruit are size 6 x 6 and larger.
Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test,
significantly different.


5% level. Means followed by the same letters) are not







Table 5. Percent marketable yield by harvest.

Total
Cultivar/ First Second1 Third 1 marketable
Breeding. line harvest harvest harvest yield


7025-ISBK
FTE 12
Duke
Independence
Flora-Dade
7045-EBK
Atlantic City
Sunny
Florida 1A
Wlater PF
Hayslip
Florida 1B
7097
7057-TSBK
Corda
7061-ESBK
7060-ESBK
D76121
7094
7065-ESBK
7090-12


30
34
S 31-
41
20
40
23
26
41.
24
28
40
26
28
31
33
36
25
53
41
23


41
33
38
34
31
37
53
47
43
29
39
40
38
48
39
40
40
32
29
32
44


29
33.
31"
25
43
23
24
27
16
49
33
20
36
24
30
27
25
43
19
27
33


----------------- % ----..---------------


to equal 100% is


Small discrepancies in the addition of individual harvests
due to rounding error and statistical manipulation.


(#25 lb boxes/
1000 lin ft)

308.8
294.6
289.9
282.1
262.2
256.4
250.7
240.4
239.9
238.4
222.9
217.9
210.4
201.0
199.2
183.8
182.3
170.4
159.7
156.8
114.8








Table 6. Post-harvest evaluation of mature green fruit which were ethylene-ripened versus red-ripe
fruit for twelve entries and evaluation among entries Fruit harvested on June 7, 1983.

% Titratable Acidity % Soluble Solids pH Sugar-Acid
Entry (% citric acid) (Brix) Ratio
Red-ripe Green Red-Ripe Green Red-Ripe Green Red-ripe Green

Sunny 0.08 0.08 3.9 3.9 4.21 4.21 48.75 48.75
Duke 0.08 0.07 3.7 3.2 4.10 4.19 46.25 45.71
FTE 12 0.08 0.07 4.3 3.5 4.14 4.20 53.75 50.00
Hayslip 0.08 0.06 4.1 3.4 4.12 4.22 51.25 56.67
Flora-Dade 0.10 0.09 4.3 3.5 4.12 4.14 43.00 38.89
Walter PF 0.08 0.06 3.9 3.6 4.24 4.20 48.75 60.00
7065-ESBK 0.06 0.05 4.3 3.7 4.28 4.33 71.67 74.00
7060-ESBK 0.08 0.08 4.4 4.3 4.33 4.28 55.00 53.75
7045-EBK 0.09 0.08 4.4 4.0 4.25 4.26 48.89 50.00
7025-ISBK 0.08 0.06 3.9 3.3 4.24 4.28 48.75 55.00
7061-ESBK 0.08 0.08 3.6 4.3 4.28 4.21 45.00 53.75
7257-TSBK 0.08 0.05 4.1 3.3 4.20 4.32 51.25 66.00
t 4.31* 3.22* -1.57N.S. -1.94N.S.
PR /T/ 0.001 0.008 0.145 0.079
F 5.76* 1.26N.S. 3."6* 6.80*
F 6


Paired difference test to evaluate differences between mature green fruit which were ripened by ethylene
versus red-ripe fruit. = significant at 1% level or less.
Analysis of variance (using cultivar x fruit stage interaction as MSE) to evaluate differences among
entries. = significant at 5% level.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs