![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
UFDC Home |
myUFDC Home | Help | ![]() |
Main | |
Historic note |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Citation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table of Contents | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Main
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Historic note Historic note |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Text | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
F63(^
Central Science MitIWEST FLORIDA RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER IFAS, University of Florida F.. Y i~. 189 P.O.Drawer 5127 Immokalee, Florida University of Florida Immokal-ee-SWFREC-Research Report IMM89-1 March, 1989 STAKED TOMATO VARIETY TRIAL RESULTS-FALL 1988 Calvin E. Arnold and Karen A. Armbrester' A replicated trial was conducted at the Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Immokalee, Florida, during the fall season (August-December) of 1988 to evaluate the performance of eighteen tomato cultivars and/or breeding lines. Table 1 is a list of entries and seed sources used in this trial. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE All entries were seeded in ToddR planter trays #150 (1.5 x 1.5 x 2.5 inch cell size) on August 12,1988,and were transplanted to field plots on September 12,1988. Field plots were arranged in randomized complete blocks with four replications of each entry. Each plot consisted of 7 plants spaced 20 inches apart in the row on raised plant beds spaced on 6 foot centers. Plant beds were irrigated by open ditch seepage with lateral ditches spaced 52 feet apart. There were 6 plant beds and a drive middle between lateral ditches. On August 18,1988 all plots were fertilized with 16.5 lbs of 5-14-8-1.8 and micronutrients /100 linear bed feet (LBF) broadcast across a pre-bed and bedded over to a depth of 4-5 inches. A total of 15.2 lbs of 19-0-30/100 LBF was applied on the surface of the finished beds in narrow bands 10 inches to each side of the plant row. The beds were fumigated with methyl bromide=chloropicrin (98%:2%) at 2001b per treated acre and mulched with black plastic film which was sprayed with white paint before planting. Plants were staked but not pruned. Fungicides were applied on a 4-5 day schedule and insecticides were applied as needed. Insects and diseases were not a serious problem in this test. However, there was some bacterial wilt that occurred before first harvest. These plants were removed from the plots. Rodents and other animals caused random damage throughout the plots as fruit began to mature. Professor and Biologist, respectively, IFAS, University of Florida, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Immokalee Florida 33934 General weather conditions during this trial are shown in Table 2. Due to unusually hot, dry weather in September some plants were lost to heat stress and salt damage. On November 22nd and 23rd there was some fruit drop due to high winds' associated with tropical storm Keith. Tomatoes were harvested on December 5, 1988, and December 19, 1988. At each harvest fruit were graded as cull or marketable. Marketable fruit were machine sized as small (7 x 7), medium (6 x 7), large (6 x 6) and extra-large (5 x 6). All categories of fruit including cull were counted and weighed. Each cull fruit was subjectively placed into one of seven categories (cracks,blossom- end-scar, odd shape, zipper scar, cat face, puff, or other) according to the most predominant cull feature. These were observations only and not subject to statistical evaluation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 3 shows the marketable yields for each of the eighteen entries and the percent stand at harvest. Yields from all entries were statistically equal for both the first and second harvests and for the total. Yields are adjusted to 100% plant stand. There were large differences in yield among plots of several varietiess which were primarily caused by rodents and other animals. eeding as the fruit matured. It was impossible to determine the 'extent of damage to an entry and its affect on total yields. r- The relative maturity of a variety was determined 'by the percent color (breakers, pinks, and red ripes) at first :harvest (Table 3). Five entries were considered the earliest. They are IFAS 7211, IFAS 7209,IFAS 7206,'Solar set', and NVH 4461.' There were no significant differences in fruit weight for the first harvest (Table 4). At the second harvest nine varieties were statistically equal for the heaviest fruit;IFAS 7193 (4.9 oz), PSX 77684 (4.8 oz),'Bingo'(4.7 oz), 'Pacific (4.5oz),'Duke' (4.5 oz), PSR 9586 (4.5oz), IFAS 7182 (4.4 oz), NVH 4459 (4.4oz), ard 'Summer flavor 6000'(4.4 oz). Overall, average fruit weight ranged from 5.9 ounces per fruit for 'Bingo' to 4.9 ounces per fruit for IFAS 7211 and 'FTE 12' with seven of the entries statistically equal to 'Bingo' for heaviest fruit. Marketable yields for first and second harvests according to fruit size categories are shown in Table 5. Percent cull fruit are shown in Table 6 and categories of cull fruit are shown in Table 7 and 8. At first harvest NVH 4461 (14.2) had .the highest percentage of cull fruit along with 'FTE 12'(12.1), PSX 77684 (12.1), IFAS 7182 (12.0), 'Pacific' (11.1) and 'Duke' (10.0). Entry FTE 12' (21.6) had the highest percentage of cull fruit at the second harvest along with NVH 4459 (16.4), 'Bonita' (16.2) and 'Duke' (13.7). Overall cull production ranged from -16.6% for 'FTE 12' to 3.6% for IFAS 7211. Table 1. Tomato Entries and Seed Sources Cultivar or breeding line Seed Source IFAS 71j-2 Pacif:ica IFAS 721 Solar Set Bingo IFAS 7206 IFAS 7209. Bonita Whirlaway . NVH 4461 Sunny- NVH 4459: Duke Summer Flavor 6000 IFAS 7193 PSR 9586 FTE 12 PSX 77684 GCREC1 Asgrow GCREC GCREC Ferry Morse GCREC GCREC Northrup King Ferry Morse Northrup King Asgrow Northrup King Petoseed Abbott & Cobb GCREC Petoseed Petoseed Petoseed SGulf Coast Research and Education Center. '' ' 'Table 2>. Weather Conditions for the Fall 1988 Season, Temperature OF -, Rainfall Month Avg. Max. Avg. Min. ,(inches) September 92 72 254 October 88 62 0,07 November '84 61 c 1.60 December 79 51 0,68 r - I '. p.` Table 3. Marketable Yields Percent Color at First Harvest and Percent-Stand for 18 Tomato Cultivars or Breeding Lines Cultivar or Marketable Yield 1 % Color % Breeding Line 1st Har. 2nd Har. Total at 1st Stand Har. S-----25 lb cartons----- IFAS 7182 1513 a2 1108 a 2619 a 10.0 d-f 82 Pacific 1489 a 1060 a 2551 a 18.1 c-f 89 IFAS 7211 1359 a 1202 a 2564 a 44.5 a 82 Solar-Set 1655 a 799 a 2454 a 34.4 ab 93 Bingo 1501 a 953 a 2454 a 19.9 c-e 86 IFAS 7206 1384 a 956 a 2340 a 34.8 ab 89 IFAS 7209 1103 a 1220 a 2325 a 42.3 a 82 Bonita 1359 a 953 a 2312 a 16.4 c-f 100 Whirlaway 1324 a 981 a 2305 a 26.4 bc 93 NVH 4461 1334 a 846 a 2181 a 33.1 ab 82 Sunny 991 a 1185 a 2173 a 22.9 b-d 93 NVH 4459 1240 a 906 a 2146 a 19.0 c-f 93 Duke 1113 a 966 a 2078 a 20.0 c-e 93 Summer Flavor 6000 884 a 1152 a 2036 a 5.6 f 89 IFAS 7193 1108 a 923 a 2031 a 12.8 c-f 100 PSR 9586 1190 a 811 a 1999 a 15.2 c-f 96 FTE 12 1038 a 921 a 1961 a 14.1 c-f 96 PSX 77684 976 a 789 a 1765 a 8.1 ef 100 I Yield (red ripes, breakers, 7260 linear bed feet/acre. and mature green) per acre based on 2 Mean separation by Dunan's Multiple Range test, 5% level. Table 4. Average Fruit Weight for.18 Tomato Cultivars or Breeding Lines Cultivar or Average Fruit Weight Breeding Line 1st Har. 2nd Har. Total ------oz/fruit----- 1 - IFAS 7182 6.2 a- 4.4 a-e 5.3 b-e Pacific 6.6 a 4.5 a-d 5.5 a-d IFAS 7211 6.2 a 4.0 e'.: 4,.9 e' Solar Set ii> 6.5 a 4.3 c-e 5.6 a-d Bingo 7.1 a 4.7 a-c 5.9;a IFAS,7206 6.2 a 4.2 c-e 5.2 c-e IFAS 7209 6.1 a 4.3 c-e 5.0 de Bonita r ,6.0 a 4.4 b-e 5'.2vb\-e Whirlaway 6.4 a 4.1 del 6i.-'b be2 NVH 4461 6.9 ,4a -4.4 b-e 5.6 atc Sunny 6.7 a 4.2 c-e 5;.0 de NVH 4459 :-6.2 a 4.4 a-e 5i3',,b-e Duke -6.4 a 4.5 a-d 5.4 a-e Summer Flavor 6000 6.4 a 4.4 a-e 5,1 7lc-.e IFAS 7193 6.4 a 4.9 a 5.6 a&-d PSR 9586 6.8 a 4.5 a-d ,- ',;5:8-.ab FTE 12 5.7 a 4.2 c-e 4.9 e. PSX 77684 6.5 a 4.8 ab 5.'7~a,-c Mean separation by Duncan's Multiple Range Test, 5% level. Table 5. Marketable Yields for First and Second Harvests According to Size Catagory Cultivar or First Harvest Second Harvest Breeding Line Med. Lg. Ex-lg. Smll Med. Lg. Ex-lg. -:.-------------- 25 1b cartons/7260 LBF--------- IFAS'7182 169al 296a 1018a-c 90a 371b-d 324a 324a Pacific :-90a 281a lll8ab 95a 331b-e 276a;:358a FAS 7211 70a 329a 958a-d 117a 523a 363a 199a Solar Set 115a 314a 1222a 80a 269c-f 274a 177a Bingo 70a 197a 1235a 45a 276c-f 291a 339a IFAS~-720& 82a 261a 1038a-c 110a 299b-f 324a 224a IFAS'7 209 100af- 212a 792a-d 105a 403a-c 373a 336a Bonita;", 12aa -341a 866a-d 90a 316b-e 331a 217a Whi~rlaray 82a 289a 948a-d 134a 364b-d 284a 202a NVH 4461Q 82a 271a 981a-d 122a 289b-f 246a 189a Sunny '-, 65a 234a 687b-d 139a 378bc 373a 279a NVH-4459. 119a 274a 841a-d 72a 319b-e 276a 239a Duker, 6,i 82a 241a 787a-d 85a 289b-f 306a 279a Summrer!Flavor 60000 ".A 87a 256a 538d 75a 428ab 378a 214a IFASi 7193 75a 227a 807a-d 70a 199ef 251a 403a PSR 9586 57a 212a 914a-d 80a 227d-f 244a 259a FTE 12. 124a 311a 592cd 82a 371b-d 289a 179a PSX 77684 45a 152a 774a-d 42a 164f 234a 346a Mean separation by Duncan's Multiple Range Test, 5% level. , Table 6. Percent Cull Fruit for 18 Tomato Cultivars or Breeding Lines V I Cultivar or Breeding Line IFAS 7182 Pacific IFAS 7211 Solar Set Bingo i IFAS 7206 IFAS 7209 % Culls by Weight 1st Halr. 2nd Har. Bonita Wirlaway NVH 4461 Sunny NVH 4459 Duke Summer Flavor 6000 IFAS 7193 PSR 9586 FTE 12 PSX 77684 12.0 ab1 11.1 a-c 3.5 d 5.6 cd :-8.1 b-d S.2 cd, I -5.5 cd-.;: 7.5 b-*d ' 8.0 b-d 14.2 a 7.4 b-d 6.1 b-d 10.0 a-c 5.5 cd 2.0 d 7.5 b-d 12.1 ab 12.1 ab 12.1 b-e 13.1 b-d 3.5 e 5.9 c-e 11.2 b-e 4,. 5; d-e 6)..2. c-e 16,.~2 ab 7.0 c-e 11.9 b-e 4.3 d-e 16.4 ab 13.7 a-c 10.2 b-e 5.2 c-e 6.2 c-e 21.6 a 7.8 b-e Total . 11.9 a-c 12.0 a-c 3.6 frr 5.6 d-f 9.3 b-ge 4.8 ef. I, 6.2 d-fo i,- 7. 6 C f ' 14.0 abr i;. 5. 6 'd f i 10.8 Ib-d 11.7 a-c :-.. 8.1 cI-f 3.4 f *i7..2.ticd-ft r : 16.6 ;a 'J V 10.1 b-e' I .i. \ ' Mean separation by Duncans Multiple Range Test, 5%_level .... '"* r r 0;I- .-t ; .>ij -J - r-, " ..... Table 7.. Cutivar or ..... Breeding Line .i "j IFAS 7182 '' Pacific IFAS 7:211 C.L Solar Set, '- Bingo't i-, ` O IFAS 72966 .I1 IFAS 71209 6.\ Bonita ,n 0. ,;i Whirlavw y o. z NVH 4-6a 3. Sunny -r, '. L. NVH 44-59 " Duke ; t Summet.-Flav.or 6000 IFAS 7193 ). r PSR 958-i f.0. i FTE 12 PSX 77684 Percent Cull Fruit in Seven Categories at First Harvest. ---------Category ----- CR BES2 OS3 ZS4 CF5 PUFF 07 ----% of total number of fruit/harvest--- 3.3 8.6 0. 2..6, 0..7) .. 1.4 4.1 1.7 5.4 1.8 1.6 0.9 2.1 0.2. 6.4 1.2 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.4 0.6)- 0.9- 1.0 1.9 0.9 1.3 1.6 3.8 0.9 0.2 1.5 0.8 2.4 1.2 0..2 :.0' 3 0.6 1.1 0.6 1.3 0.7 0.6 0.4 2.2 0.4 2.7 1.9 1.4 0.4 2.2 0.8 1.1 0.8 1.5 0.3 0.8 1.1 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.2 1.9 2.7 0.7 0.4 0.5 2.2 0.6 1.1 0.8 2.1 3.9 1.8 0.8 1.5 1.8 0.4 1.1 1.2 1.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 '0.3 "*0.5 0.6 1.0 f 0.3 . 0.6 0.7 0.3 S 0.6'. 0.2 0.4 0.5 Cracks (radial and concentric) Blossom-end-scar Odd shape Zipper scar Cat face Open locules Other (decay, scars, etc..) I"r . Table 8. Percent Cull.Fruit in Seven Categories:atSecond Harvest Cultivar or Breeding LIne -----------------Category------------- CR1 BES OS ZS CF PUFF6 ----% of total number of fruit/harvest-;; IFAS 7182 Pacific IFAS 7211 Solar Set Bingo IFAS 7206 IFAS 7209 Bonita Whirlaway NVH 4461 Sunny NVH 4459 Duke Summer Flavor 6000 IFAS 7193 PSR 9586 FTE 12 PSX 77684 8.3 9.1 1.3 1.7 5.3 1.7 2.6 14.2 3.1 7.9 1.4 11.8 8.7 7.4 2.1 1.5 16.1 1.3 0,5 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.3 .0.8 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.4 0.8. 0..5 0.6 0.6 0.8 --, 0.2 0.40 0.2 0.3 0.9 1.1 0.4 1.5 0.8 0.5 -- 1.0 02 - 0.2 0.3 - 2.8. 0.4 -x-. 0.8 1.2 0. 4 ' 1.3 -- --- 0.2 0.5 -- 0.4 -- -- 0.2 2..2 2 0.3 1.4 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.7 0.3 0.9 .0.8 1.5 1.0 0.3 1.2 --- ' 0.6 0.3 1.8 0.3 . 8 0.5 0, 4 2.0 0.4 0.3 0.6 b .2 0 0. 9- 1.3 0.2 0.6. --- 1.5. ..- : 01 ..2.. O.;:; 0.6- - '- 1:~ .3 1Cracks (radial and concentric) Blossom-end-scar Odd shape 4Zipper scars Cat face Open locules Other (decay, scars, etc.) O7 0* HISTORIC NOTE The publications in this collection do not reflect current scientific knowledge or recommendations. These texts represent the historic publishing record of the Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences and should be used only to trace the historic work of the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS research may be found on the Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS) site maintained by the Florida Cooperative Extension Service. Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University of Florida |