PR-488

2003 Fruit and Vegetable Crops Research Report

VEGETABLES

All America Selections Vegetables for 2002 and 2003

Richard Durham, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Recent All America Selections (AAS) winners are promoted through a nationwide display garden program. The association of this author with the display garden program was discussed previously (Durham and Dutton, 2001). Display gardens have been grown at both the University of KentuckyLexington-Fayette County Urban Government Arboretum (hereafter, the Arboretum), the Horticultural Research Farm in Lexington, and at either the Robinson Station in Quicksand or the Research and Education Center at Princeton, in the year of these centers' biennial field days. The purpose of this report is to highlight AAS vegetable winners that were not discussed in the previous report. Descriptions of previous AAS vegetable winners, as well as seed source information can be obtained from the AAS Web site at www.all-americaselections.org.

Materials and Methods

Transplant production and garden establishment was essentially as described previously (Durham and Dutton, 2001). However, the Fayette County Master Gardeners assumed responsibility for growing several of the varieties at the arboretum and incorporated these plants into their ongoing vegetable trial garden.

Results and Discussion

2002 Winners
Basil `Magical Michael'

Both an ornamental and edible sweet basil, `Magical Michael' produces compact plants with a mounded habit reaching a height and spread of about 15 in. Size uniformity is one thing that sets this variety apart from other sweet basil plants. Plants flower about 80 to 90 days from seed. The flowers make the plants attractive as an ornamental and may also be used as a garnish or added to salads. No pest issues were noted.

Cucumber `Diva'

This cucumber combines sweet flavor, disease resistance, and high yield. The fruit are sweet and non-bitter when harvested at 4 to 5 in. long. Normally seedless, a few seeds may grow if pollinated by other cucumber plants. `Diva' produces all female flowers and will set fruit parthenocarpically (without need of pollination). High yields and season-long vigor result from this exclusive production of female flowers and lack of seed production.

Pumpkin F1 `Orange Smoothie'

`Orange Smoothie' is a medium-sized pumpkin with fruit weighing around 5 to 8 pounds. It is promoted as an ideal pumpkin for holiday crafts since it has dark orange, smooth skin (ideal for painting), and a strong, long peduncle (handle). `Orange Smoothie' pumpkins mature in about 90 days from sowing seed. The semi-determinate habit makes vine growth more compact, thus requiring less space. The meat is also sweet and can be used for cooking.

Pumpkin F1 `Sorcerer'

`Sorcerer' is a full-sized pumpkin, weighing 15 to 22 lb, produced on a compact vine reaching only 10 ft. The dark orange pumpkins are round, sporting strong, long peduncles (handles). `Sorcerer' pumpkins mature in about 100 days from sowing. The pumpkins can be used for carving and cooking.

Winter Squash `Cornell's Bush Delicata'

This squash produces very high-quality fruit. The orange flesh indicates it is rich in vitamin A. The sweet flesh is fine textured without coarse strings. The squash have a long shelf life, meaning you can store them into the winter months. This squash matures about 100 days from sowing, and plants remain compact with the mature bush sending out 4- to 6-ft. runners later in the season.

2003 Winners
Melon F1 `Angel'

An early Mediterranean-type melon, `Angel' has a mild flavor, and the crisp flesh is very sweet. The 2- to 3-lb melons have a white interior. The lightly netted skin turns creamy yellow when mature, about 60 days from transplanting to the garden. `Angel' vines will spread 6 to 7 ft.

Squash F1 `Papaya Pear'

This is the first summer squash with a shape similar to a papaya fruit. The bright yellow squash looks like a light bulb with the widest section near the blossom end. `Papaya Pear' is a very early variety, so fruit can be harvested in about 40 days from sowing. Yields per plant are not extremely high; however, the semi-bush plant requires less garden space

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Dr. Win Dunwell for transplanting and caring for the vegetable garden at the Research and Education Center at Princeton in 2002, and Dr. Terry Jones who did the same at the Robinson Station for 2003. Thanks also to April Santanek and Darrell Sloan for helping with the garden at the Horticultural Research Farm and to the Fayette County Master Gardeners who helped with the garden at the Arboretum.

References

All America Selections, 1311 Butterfield Road, Suite 310, Downers Grove, IL 60515. www.all-americaselections.org.
Durham, R. and S. Dutton. 2001 All America Selections Vegetable Display Gardens. 2002 Fruit and Vegetable Crops Research Report. Department of Horticulture, University of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Publication PR-470.

Observation of Specialty and Colored Potatoes from Early and Late Harvests

April Satanek, Brent Rowell, and Darrell Slone, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Blue, red, and yellow potatoes have been grown for many years but recently have caught the attention of gourmet chefs and consumers. Very small, or "creamer," specialty potatoes are highly demanded in larger cities but may not be sought in smaller markets. "Baby reds," or small red potatoes, are gaining popularity with restaurants. Plastic clamshell cartons of mixed color and type potatoes are sold in many stores for premium prices. The yellow potato, Yukon Gold, is an example of a specialty potato that has become mainstream and is now grown on a large scale.

This observation trial was conducted to evaluate the quality and yield characteristics of 18 potato varieties, harvested as early and late potatoes. The varieties Kennebec, Dark Red Norland, and Yukon Gold were included as checks.

Materials and Methods

Most seed potatoes were cut on 14 April into small seed pieces containing at least one eye. Small seed potatoes were planted whole. The true seeds of the variety `Catalina' were sown into 72-cell trays in the greenhouse on 3 April and transplanted into the field on 15 May. On 17 April three white, one russet, four yellow, eight red, and two blue skin varieties were planted in double rows 12 ft. long with 42 in. between rows. Each plot of two rows consisted of 16 hills per row, with 9 in. between hills. Four spacer hills consisting of Kennebec or Red Pontiac were planted to mark the end and beginning of each plot. A preplant application of nitrogen as ammonium nitrate was applied at a rate of 123 lb N/A. Admire 2F was applied to the seed potatoes as they were planted. Sprays of Quadris and Bravo were applied alternately between 22 March and 13 June. Two sprays of Pounce were applied for insect control.

One of the two rows of each variety was hand dug on 23 June. The tubers were then washed and sorted, according to diameter, into grade "A" (> 2 1/4 in.), grade "B" (1 3/4 to 2 1/4 in.), grade "C" or creamers (1 to 1 3/4 in.) and culls. "C" grade potatoes are also called "new" potatoes. The two fingerling varieties were sorted into four categories: short (< 2 in.), medium length (2 to 3 1/2 in.), long (> 3 1/2 in.), and cull. These are market grades, distinct from USDA grades. All tubers of every variety were set out on tables; color, shape, and size characteristics were rated.

Before harvesting the late potatoes, the vines, which had been dead for more than a month, were mowed. On 14 October the second of the two rows was dug with a middle buster plow mounted on a tractor. The varieties were then washed and sorted into same categories used for the 23 June harvest. As before, varieties were rated for color, shape, and size.

Visual ratings. Potatoes were rated for uniformity of shape and size using a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 indicating least uniform and 5 indicating completely uniform. Overall appearance was rated on a scale of 1 to 9, with 1 meaning least attractive and 9 meaning most attractive. Interior and exterior colors were noted, and general observations were recorded.

Results and Discussion

Yield data were calculated as lb/A, based on only one 12 ft. row of potatoes; as this trial was not replicated, these yields should only be considered as relative guides not scientific measurements.

Early harvest. Potatoes harvested before maturity are called "new" potatoes. As expected, the early harvest produced small tubers and low yields (Table 1). In this trial the potato vines were not killed before digging the early potatoes. During the harvesting and washing processes, Reddale, Dark Red Norland, and Caribe suffered extensive skin loss, exposing the potato flesh and diminishing the exterior color. All varieties had some skin loss, but loss of skin was less noticeable for the varieties with same flesh and skin color, like All Blue, Cranberry Red, and All Red. Rose Gold, All Red, and Butte scored the best in overall appearance for the early harvest (Table 2). Cultivars like Kennebec, All Red, and Red Cloud had significant growth cracks.

Late harvest. Larger and higher numbers of potatoes were expected from the later harvest and, on the whole, that is what was recorded. Butte and Russian Banana had very small percentages of the larger grades (Table 3).

Probably due to the postponed late harvest, some cultivars lost the intensity of skin color, but Dark Red Norland, Cranberry Red, Red Cloud, and All Red maintained excellent red skin. Red Gold, Rose Gold, and Caribe exhibited skin color fading and had very dark eyes. Because the vines were dead, all the late potatoes withstood the digging and washing process with skins intact. At the late harvest, Russian Banana had a lot of little knobby growths on its tubers, while Swedish Peanut had none. Butte, Dark Red Norland, and All Blue scored the highest overall appearance rating, and All Blue was rated as having a very uniform shape (Table 4).

Of the white flesh, brown skin potatoes, Butte, a russet, was very attractive and uniform in both harvests but was uncharacteristically small in the late harvest. Catalina, the potato grown from true seed, had small tubers and low yields in both harvests (Tables 1 and 3). Pontiac Red and Cranberry Red had deep eyes, which interfere with cleaning and peeling. Of the fingerling varieties, Swedish Peanut was a bit thicker than Russian Banana, which had many peanut-shaped tubers. Swedish Peanut has a much darker yellow flesh than that of Russian Banana.

When growing specialty or colored potatoes, it is prudent to grow small quantities until a profitable market is established. Specialty or niche markets can be easily oversupplied. Most of the potatoes in the trial are suitable for grower trial. For a small, white flesh, russet-like potato, Butte is an excellent variety because of its size and uniformity. Of the two fingerling varieties, Swedish Peanut was more attractive, an important trait when introducing new types of produce to consumers. Cranberry Red, a red skin and red flesh potato, and Reddale, a red skin potato, performed well in yield and appearance. Red Gold and Rose Gold combine red skin with a yellow flesh, an attractive combination. All Blue, Cranberry Red, and All Red, colored fleshed varieties, are all quality potatoes, but their flesh may be quite striking to a consumer who has eaten only white potatoes.

When an early harvest of new potatoes is planned, vines should be killed well before harvest so that processing of the potatoes does not remove the skin. Potatoes dug early will not store well and will bruise easily, and these factors should be a consideration in marketing.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the following persons for their hard work and assistance in the successful completion of this trial: Dave Lowry, Phillip Bush, Larry Blandford, Derek Law, Audrey Horrall, Barry Duncil, Courtney Bobrowski, Curtis Gregory, Justin Clark, John C. Clark, Dave Spalding, Selvaprasanna Sanjeevijulian, Ashok Swaminathon, Saravanna Kannan, Kalyan Tangirala, Teerasak Tiamdao (Oa), Tanasit Laosomboon (Koh), and Spencer Helsabeck.

Table 1. Early harvest skin color, yield distribution, and estimated yield for colored and fingerling potatoes, Lexington, Kentucky.

Cultivar Seed Source Skin Color¹ Grade C²(%) Grade B³(%) Grade A⁴(%) Lb/A (cwt)

Red Gold JS red 23 54 23 216.1

Reddale TS red 11 43 45 193.9

Cranberry Red TS red 18 75 8 181.7

Rose Gold TS pink 31 59 11 175.0

Red Pontiac SO red 22 49 30 162.2

All Red JS dk red 42 56 2 152.9

Red Cloud TS red 34 54 12 119.3

Dk. Red Norland JS red 37 49 14 68.4

Corola TS yellow 54 42 4 150.4

Yukon Gold JS yellow 16 46 38 140.8

Superior JS white 14 66 21 146.8

Butte TS russet 80 20 0 129.6

Kennebec SO white 38 58 3 84.2

Catalina PA white 92 8 0 34.0

Caribe TS dk blue 14 67 19 193.9

All Blue JS violet 78 22 0 145.0

Fingerlings % Short⁵ % Medium⁶ % Long⁷ Lb/A (cwt)

Swedish Peanut TS yellow 37 63 0 152.2

Russian Banana JS yellow 50 50 0 107.6

¹ Exterior color; dk = dark
² Grade C = potatoes with diameters between 1 in. and 1¾ in., often called “creamers.”
³ Grade B = potatoes with diameters between 1¾ in. and 2¼ in.
⁴ Grade A = potatoes with diameters larger than 2¼ in.
⁵ Short = potatoes less than 2 in. long.
⁶ Medium = potatoes between 2 in. and 3½ in. in length.
⁷ Long = potatoes longer than 3½ in.

Table 2. Flesh color and appearance ratings of the colored and fingerling potato early harvest, Lexington, Kentucky.

Cultivar Flesh Color Shape Uniformity (1-5)¹ Size Uniformity (1-5)² Overall Appearance (1-9)³

Red Gold lt yellow 4.0 4.0 7.0

Reddale white 3.0 4.0 6.0

Cranberry Red pink 4.0 3.0 7.0

Rose Gold lt yellow 4.0 4.0 8.0

Red Pontiac white 3.0 3.0 5.0

All Red pink 4.0 3.0 8.0

Red Cloud white 2.0 3.0 6.0

Dk. Red Norland white 4.0 4.0 7.0

Corola lt yellow 3.0 3.0 6.0

Yukon Gold lt yellow 3.0 4.0 5.0

Superior white 4.0 4.0 6.0

Butte white 4.0 4.0 8.0

Kennebec white 3.0 3.0 5.0

Catalina white 3.0 2.5 6.0

Caribe white 4.0 3.0 6.0

All Blue violet 4.0 3.0 7.0

Fingerlings

Swedish Peanut yellow 3.0 4.0 7.0

Russian Banana yellow 3.0 3.0 6.5

¹ Shape uniformity: 1 = least uniform, most variable, 5 = completely uniform.
²Size uniformity: 1 = least uniform, most variable, 5 = completely uniform.
³ Overall appearance: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 3. Late harvest skin color, yield distribution, and estimated yield for colored and fingerling potatoes, Lexington, Kentucky.

Cultivar Seed Source Skin Color¹ Grade C² (%) Grade B³(%) Grade A⁴(%) Lb/A (cwt)

Cranberry Red TS dk red 7 28 65 349.8

Reddale TS md red 2 11 88 302.4

Red Gold JS red 7 38 55 301.0

All Red JS lt red 14 58 28 280.6

Rose Gold TS lt pink 7 48 45 270.7

Red Pontiac SO lt red 5 24 71 268.4

Red Cloud TS md red 5 28 67 224.8

Dk. Red Norland JS md red 10 35 56 171.3

Corola TS yl/brown 15 47 37 337.6

Yukon Gold JS yl/brown 5 33 62 201.2

Butte TS russet 28 65 6 284.3

Kennebec SO wh/brown 8 56 36 209.5

Superior JS yl/brown 7 44 50 158.5

Catalina PA lt brown 26 48 26 96.2

Caribe TS lt violet 4 28 67 316.1

All Blue JS dk violet 25 63 12 226.3

Fingerlings % Short⁵ % Medium⁶ % Long⁷ Lb/A (cwt)

Swedish Peanut TS yl/brown 4 84 11 191.6

Russian Banana JS lt yellow 11 83 5 196.0

¹ Exterior color; dk = dark, lt = light, md = medium, yl = yellow, wh = white.
² US grade C = potatoes with diameters between 1 in. and 1¾ in. , sometimes called “creamers.”
³ US grade B = potatoes with diameters between 1¾ in. and 2¼ in.
⁴ US grade A = potatoes with diameters larger than 2¼ in.
⁵ Short = potatoes less than 2 in. long.
⁶ Medium = potatoes between 2 in. and 3½ in. in length.
⁷ Long = potatoes longer than 3½ in.

Table 4. Flesh color and appearance ratings of the colored and fingerling late potato harvest, Lexington, Kentucky.

Cultivar Flesh Color Shape Uniformity (1-5)¹ Size Uniformity (1-5)² Overall Appearance (1-9)³

Cranberry Red pink 3.5 3.0 7.5

Reddale white 3.0 3.0 7.5

Red Gold lt yellow 3.0 2.5 6.0

All Red pink 2.5 3.0 6.0

Rose Gold yellow 2.0 2.5 7.0

Red Pontiac white 1.5 3.0 6.5

Red Cloud white 2.5 2.5 7.0

Dk. Red Norland white 3.0 2.5 8.0

Corola lt yellow 2.0 1.5 6.5

Yukon Gold yellow 1.5 1.5 5.5

Butte white 4.0 4.5 8.0

Kennebec white 2.5 2.5 5.0

Superior white 2.5 2.0 6.0

Catalina white 2.0 1.5 4.5

Caribe white 4.0 4.0 7.5

All Blue violet 4.5 4.0 8.0

Fingerlings

Swedish Peanut yellow 3.5 3.5 7.0

Russian Banana lt yellow 2.0 3.0 6.0

¹ Shape uniformity: 1 = least uniform, most variable, 5 = completely uniform.
²Size uniformity: 1 = least uniform, most variable, 5 = completely uniform.
³ Overall appearance: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Gourmet Potato "RACE" Trial, 2003

R. Terry Jones and Charles T. Back, Department of Horticulture, Robinson Station

Introduction

Farmers' markets and roadside sales are a significant outlet for Kentucky's vegetable production. Consumers look for new or unique potatoes at these markets. Small, mixed color potato packs are now a hot item at some of Kentucky's urban farmers' markets. Growers who can offer new or novelty potatoes are able to increase their overall sales. An observation trial was established to evaluate 18 potato cultivars harvested as early and late potatoes for their potential production in Kentucky. The potato cultivars Kennebec, Dark Red Norland, and Yukon Gold were used as checks.

Materials and Methods

Based on the soil test results (Table 1), 50 lb of N and 100 lb K₂O/A were applied preplant. One sidedressing of 50 lb N/A was applied just prior to hilling when the plants were 12 to 14 in. tall.

Eighteen potato cultivars were planted (Table 2). The cultivar Cranberry Red, sometimes called All Red, was purchased from two different seed sources and tested as separate cultivars. The potatoes were planted 24-25 April. Varieties were grouped by type and color. Each plot consisted of two rows per cultivar with 42 in. between rows and 9 in. between hills. Plots and rows were 12 ft. long, with 20 hills per row (40 hills per plot). Guard rows were single rows. To separate cultivars, we used "spacer" hills (3 ft. long) between cultivars. We used Red Pontiac between plots planted with white or light skin cultivars and Kennebec between plots planted with red skin cultivars. Catalina, grown from true seed, was transplanted 10 May. Admire 2E was applied on 25 April for early season Colorado potato beetle control. Dual Magnum II at a rate of 2 pt/A was also applied for weed control at that time. Two insecticide sprays (Pounce 3.2EC) were made for Colorado potato beetle control. The potatoes were cultivated twice for weed control in May and hilled once in early June. One row in each plot was harvested early for "new" potatoes, while the other row was left for harvest at maturity. One row of each cultivar was harvested on 16 July. The tubers were then graded and sorted according to size and U.S. No. 1 standards. The late harvest was 13 September, and tubers were sorted and graded. Wet weather delayed this harvest.

Results

Each potato cultivar varies in the number of eyes produced on its tubers. Small tubers of a particular cultivar have the same number of eyes as large tubers. The number of eyes on a seed piece determines the number of stems/hill. Stem number determines the number of potatoes produced/hill. Thus, yield and tuber size in a hill are related to the eye number on the potato seed piece used to plant that hill. The ideal size of a potato seed piece is 1½ to 2½ oz. Results show that most of the 17 potato cultivars had a high percentage of B, or split seed pieces (Table 3). Red Pontiac seed was very large, with 52% of the seed requiring a 4-cut to produce 2-oz seed pieces.

For the early harvest, the highest yielding cultivars were Dark Red Norland, All Red, Red Dale, Caribe, Butte, Red Gold, and Superior (Table 4). Five of these cultivars have red skin. The seven cultivars with the highest overall appearance were Butte, Superior, Yukon Gold, Dark Red Norland, Caribe, Red Gold, and Rose Gold. Five of the cultivars tested were in both groups: Dark Red Norland, Caribe, Butte, Red Gold, and Superior.

For the late harvest, the seven highest yielding cultivars were Red Cloud, Red Pontiac, Rose Gold, Red Dale, Dark Red Norland, Red Gold, and Butte (Table 5). Those cultivars with the best overall appearance were Butte, Red Dale, Red Cloud, Rose Gold, Red Gold, Caribe, and Dark Red Norland. Cultivars that were in both the high yield and best appearance groups included Red Cloud, Rose Gold, Red Dale, Dark Red Norland, Red Gold, and Butte.

The yields of the late harvested potatoes were lower than those of the early harvest because some of the tubers decayed when left in the ground for several months after reaching maturity. The early harvest on 16 July was actually near the time of maturity. Ideally the early harvest should have been the last week of June to the first of July, but rainy weather delayed the harvest.

Yields of two fingerling potatoes were low (Table 6). They did not store well in the ground after maturity, as can be seen by the lower yields at the time of the late harvest. When harvested at maturity, Russian Banana was the better looking potato, but at the late harvest date Swedish Peanut looked nicer.

Six of the potato cultivars were evaluated for culinary characteristics by the Family and Consumer Sciences agents in the Quicksand Area (Table 7). The two highest rated baking potatoes were Russian Banana and Superior, and the best-rated boiled potatoes were Kennebec and Superior.

Potato cultivars that had good yields and appearance, regardless of harvest date, include Dark Red Norland, Butte, and Red Gold. Production of crops for specialty markets is a high risk-reward business. With any unusual or novelty item, growers should limit their production until they are sure that they have an established market.

Table 1. Results for soil tests, gourmet potato RACE trial, for Eastern and Central Kentucky, 2003.

PH Buffer pH P K Ca Mg Zn

5.26 6.5 98 302 2113 179 9.5

Table 2. Potato varieties evaluated in the 2003 "Gourmet" and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky and their skin and flesh colors, reported maturities and disease resistances, sources, tuber characteristics, and storability.

Cultivar Skin Color Flesh Color Maturity (days) Maturity Class Disease Resistance¹ Source² Tuber Size or Type Storability

Superior White White NA³ NA³ NA³ WCF NA³ NA³

Kennebec White White NA NA NA WCF NA NA

Butte Russet White 110-135 Late none listed TR NA NA

XP707 Corola Gold Gold 90-110 Mid none listed TR Good

Yukon Gold Yellowish Lt. Yellow 70-90 Early R-leaf roll, potato virus JS Med-Lg Excellent

Swedish Peanut Gold/Brown Gold 105-135 Late none listed TR Fingerling Excellent

Russian Banana Yellow Lt. Yellow NA Late R-scab, T-late blight JS Fingerling Good

Dark Red Norland Red White NA Early R-scab, PVA, PVY, PLRV JS NA Good

Red Dale Red White 70-90 Early R-verticillium wilt TR Large Good

Red Cloud Red White 90-110 Mid none listed TR NA Excellent

Red Pontiac Red White NA NA WCF NA NA

Red Gold
Red Yellow NA Early R- scab, virus JS Medium Fair-poor

Rose Gold Red Yellow 90-110 Mid none listed TR NA Fair

All Red (Cranberry Rd) Red Pink NA Mid none listed JS NA NA

Cranberry Red (All Red) Red Red 70-90 Early none listed TR NA Good

All Blue Blue Blue NA Mid-Late none listed JS Medium Good

Caribe Blue White 70-90 V.Early none listed TR Good

Catalina Brown white 70-90 Early NA Bejo Flat NA

¹R = resistant; T = tolerant; PVA = Potato Virus A; PVY = Potato virus Y; PLRV = Potato leaf roll virus.
²Sources listed at the end of the 2003 Research Report.
³NA = not available or not reported.

Table 3. Quantity and percentage of seed in each size class for the 2003 "Gourmet" and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.

Cultivar Seed Planted (lb) Percentage of:

B-size 2-cut 4-cut

Superior 7.3 51 50 0

Kennebec 17.4 32 38 31

Butte 7.0 29 71 0

XP707 Corola 7.1 13 75 11

Yukon Gold 16.0 36 64 0

Swedish Peanut 7.1 100 0 0

Russian Banana 9.9 81 20 0

Dark Red Norland 8.1 42 55 4

Red Dale 7.2 52 49 0

Red Cloud 6.9 35 66 0

Red Pontiac 27.1 16 33 51

Red Gold 7.4 54 46 0

Rose Gold 7.2 52 48 0

All Red (Cranberry Red) 7.1 29 15 52

Cranberry Red (All Red) 7.0 38 62 0

All Blue 7.3 51 45 4

Caribe 7.3 61 40 0

Table 4. Yield of small medium, large, US #1 and cull potatoes, and ratings of tuber appearance for the first new potato harvest (16 July), 2003 "Gourmet," and new potato race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.

Variety Small <1 7/8 in. Medium >1 7/8 in. Large >2 1/4 in. US # 1¹ Potatoes
(cwt/A)
Culls (lb) Tuber Appearance

(no./A) (lb/A) (no./A) (lb/A) (no./A) (lb/A) Skin Color² Flesh
Color²
Shape³ Size³ Appearance⁴ Comments/Taste

Superior 8297 415 2489 3008 5704 18357 214 0.4 W W 4 4 8 nice white potato

Kennebec 33188 830 4667 4356 52894 13275 176 5.4 W W 2 2 4 very variable in size, poor shape with a lot of knobs

Butte 49783 3008 50820 7156 50820 14624 218 0.0 W/R W 4 3 ½ 8-9 very attractive long white

XP707 Corola 40448 1763 44597 4667 52894 12238 169 0.0 W Y 4 3 7 ½ fairly attractive, nice looking potato

Yukon Gold 9334 415 21780 2697 36300 1823 145 0.0 W Y/W 4 4 8 nice looking potato

Dark Red Norland 8297 207 33188 3630 7260 23751 274 0.2 R W 4 4 8 some growth cracks or splits; deep eyes, nice looking

Red Dale 6223 103 16594 1141 59117 22506 236 0.6 R W 4 2 7 some huge potatoes, nice looking but size variable

Red Cloud 23854 726 352634 3319 52894 13483 176 0.5 R W 3 2 6 a lot of growth cracks & knobs, fair

Red Pontiac 4667 1763 46671 7053 36300 13068 201 0.0 R W 4 3 7 fairly nice

Red Gold 4149 104 38374 2178 81934 19290 215 0.0 R Y/W 4 3 8 attractive, could be redder

Rose Gold 29034 1348 45634 5912 44597 14001 199 0.7 R/W Y 4 4 8 white skin with pink especially near eyes, nice

All Red (Cranberry Red) 62228 2593 52894 5393 84008 21987 274 1.1 R W/R 2 2 5 fair shape and size quite variable

Cranberry Red (All Red) 41486 933 30077 2074 41486 7675 97 0.0 R W 4 2 ½ 8 dark red attractive potato

All Blue 4149 103 84008 7364 45634 8297 157 0.3 P P/W 4 3 6 rough skin, Rhizoctonia infection(?), alligator skin, poor

Caribe 17631 830 33188 4045 64303 18150 222 0.1 P/R W 4 3 8 purplish red skin color, fairly attractive potato, nice

Catalina 21780 519 18669 1141 12446 1763 29 0.0 W W 2 2 2 poor yield, very uneven size distribution, no good

¹Marketable yield is all medium and large tubers free from defects.
²W = White; R = Red; P = Pink; Y = Yellow.
³Scale of 1 to 5: 1 = least uniform, most variable; 5 = completely uniform.
⁴Scale of 1 to 9: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 5. Yield of small medium, large, US #1, and cull potatoes and ratings of tuber appearance for the second new potato harvest (13 September), 2003 "Gourmet," and new potato race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.

Variety Small <1 7/8 in. Medium >1 7/8 in. Large >2 1/4 in. US # 1¹ Potatoes (cwt/A) Culls
(lb)
Tuber Appearance

Comments/Taste

(no./A) (lb/A) (no./A) (lb/A) (no./A) (lb/A) Skin Color² Flesh Color² Shape³ Size³ Appearance⁴

Superior 22817 1867 16594 2800 28003 9438 122 0.1 W W 3 2 6.5

Kennebec 23854 2282 33188 7364 9334 3526 109 2.3 W W 3 4 6-7 some growth cracks

Butte 56006 6741 44597 10371 10371 4875 152 0.4 W W 5 4 9 attractive potato

XP707 Corola 65340 7364 20743 6119 10371 4563 107 0.4 W Y/W 2 2.5 7

Yukon Gold 12446 933 22817 4252 26966 8919 132 0.3 W W 4 3 7.5 nice potato

Dark Red Norland 18669 1867 15557 2904 32151 12653 156] 0.3 R W/Y 4 3 8 nice potato

Red Dale 9334 622 20743 3734 30077 15246 190 0.2 R W 5 4 9

Red Cloud 23854 3008 35263 8919 23854 11409 203 2.5 R W 4 3.5 8.5 nice looking smooth skin

Red Pontiac 22817 3423 17631 6119 21780 13379 195 0.9 R W 3 3 7.5 secondary growth knob on some tubers

Red Gold 28003 1452 32151 4149 37337 11409 156 0 R W 4 3 8

Rose Gold 21780 1348 35263 6534 32151 12861 194 2.7 R Y/W 3.5 3.5 8.5 not a bad potato

All Red (Cranberry Red) 53931 5912 43560 9645 4149 1452 111 0.8 Purple W/P 3 3 6.5 small size, elongated flesh w/purple tint

Cranberry Red (All Red) 22817 1556 13483 1659 13483 3008 47 2.1 R W/R 2.5 2.5 4 poor yield, lots of growth cracks

All Blue 40448 3734 39411 6534 22817 7156 137 2.1 R W/R 4 4 7.5 nice white with red tint

Caribe 17631 1556 32151 5289 21780 7571 129 0.7 R/P W 4 4 8 nice

Catalina 7260 207 20743 1763 0 0 18 0 W W 3 3 5 poor yield and size

¹Marketable yield is all medium and large tubers free from defects.
²W = White; R = Red; P = Pink; Y = Yellow.
³Scale of 1 to 5: 1 = least uniform, most variable; 5 = completely uniform.
⁴Scale of 1 to 9: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 6. Yield by length size classes, total yield, and cull weight and ratings of tuber appearance for the first (16 July) and second harvest of fingerling potatoes, 2003 "Gourmet," and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.

Cultivar Tuber Size Class Total Yield¹(cwt/A) Culls
(lb)
Tuber Appearance Comments/taste

< 2 in. long 2 - 3½ in. long >3½ in. long

(no./A) (lb/A) (no./A) (lb/A) (no./A) (lb/A) Skin Color² Flesh Color² Shape³ Size³ Appearance⁴

Harvested 16 July 2003

Swedish Peanut 80897 1452 100603 6430 4149 830 87 0 W Y 2 2 5 variable, curved shape

Russian Banana 91268 1867 71563 4252 53931 6845 130 0 W W 3 2 7 or 6.5

Harvested 13 September 2003

Swedish Peanut 68451 3111 52894 4460 35263 4771 123 622 W Y/W 2 2 7

Russian Banana 32151 1245 39411 2385 30077 3630 73 104 W Y/W 1 1 5.5

¹Marketable yield is all tubers free from defects.
²W = White; Y = Yellow.
³Scale of 1 to 5: 1 = least uniform, most variable; 5 = completely uniform.
⁴Scale of 1 to 9: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 7. Culinary evaluation of six selected cultivars grown in the 2003 "Gourmet" and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.

Cultivar Method of Preparation

Baked Boiled

Rating Comments Rating Comments

Russian Banana 4 Yellow flesh, good flavor when baked, a little mealy 3 Skin is bitter, flesh is OK, good texture, better baked

Dark Red Norland 2 Good potato flavor, poor texture (too firm) 3.5 Good texture boiled, firm bite, bitter skin

Superior 4.5 Buttery yellow flesh, good baked potato 4 Good flavor, good texture

Yukon Gold 3.5 Yellow flesh, great visual color 3 Buttery yellow flesh, good flavor

Red Dale 1.5 Mushy texture, watery flavor 2.5 Watery flavor, sticky

Kennebec 3 Firm texture 4.5 Very good boiled, good potato flavor

Potatoes tested 4 August 2003. Evaluations were conducted by Martha Yount and Sarah Brandl, Family and Consumer Sciences Agents. Evaluation panel was composed of Family and Consumer Sciences Agents from the Quicksand Area.

Yields and Gross Returns from New Slicing Cucumber Varieties

April Satanek, Brent Rowell, Darrell Slone, and John C. Snyder, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Early cucumbers bring the best prices, and every grower plans for the best returns, but weather usually dictates field activities. The 2003 growing season clearly demonstrated the importance of timing in planting spring slicing cucumber crops. Early slicing cucumbers continue to be profitable for growers in Central and Western Kentucky especially early in the season, when the market price is high. This is the second year of a fresh market slicing cucumber trial that compares new slicing cucumber varieties' yields and visual characteristics.

Methods and Materials

Fifteen slicing cucumber varieties were compared for yield, potential returns, and overall appearance in the spring of 2003 at the Horticultural Research Farm in Lexington. Dasher II was included as a standard (check) variety, as it is one of the most popular hybrids in the region. All the varieties were gynoecious F1 hybrids with approximately 12% pollinators. All varieties are reported to have disease resistance, although our trial did not evaluate disease.

Cucumbers were seeded in 72-cell flats in the greenhouse on 7 May 2003 and transplanted to the field on 10 June. Most cultural practices followed current commercial recommendations for Kentucky. A total of 60 lb N/A was applied prior to transplanting; an additional 10 lb N/A from ammonium nitrate was fertigated in four weekly doses. All P and K was applied preplant according to recommendations based on soil tests. The insecticide Capture 2 EC was used for cucumber beetles on the seedlings while they were hardening off. For insect control, Platinum was applied as a post-transplant drench one day after transplanting. Two applications of Pounce were applied after 24 June for cucumber beetle control. A fungicide regiment of Bravo, Quadris, and Nu Cop was applied throughout harvest.

Plots consisted of 8 ft. long beds with black plastic and drip irrigation. Bed centers were 8 ft. apart. Single plants were spaced 12 in. apart within double rows (two rows/bed) with approximately 15 in. between double rows (16 plants/plot). Plots were replicated four times in a randomized complete block design. Cucumbers were harvested three times a week between 11 July and 1 August for a total of 10 harvests. After grading into either marketable fruit or culls, fruits were counted and weighed. Marketable fruits were sorted according to USDA grades U.S. Fancy, U.S. No. 1, U.S. No. 1 Large, U.S. No. 1 Small, and U.S. No. 2.

Yields and gross returns. Average yields of each USDA grade were compared using Waller-Duncan's LSD (k-ratio t-tests, P = 0.05) following an analysis of variance. Although yields for these grades are important, we have presented the data in a way that we think is practical for the grower. Making planting decisions based on total yield data alone is not recommended and could lead to disastrous results. Raw data were converted by multiplying the yield of each grade by that grade's actual price for that harvest date. Yields in lb/acre were first converted to boxes/acre by dividing yield by the average weight of one 1 1/9 bushel box of slicing cucumbers (55 lb). Box yields were multiplied by actual average weekly wholesale prices received by a Kentucky cooperative, less box costs, packing charges, and commissions. The resulting single variable "gross return" provides a better indicator of a variety's overall performance, taking into account yields of the different grades and their price differentials

Trellising. All plots were trained on a simple trellis consisting of tomato stakes placed every 4 ft. of row, and tomato twine was wrapped around each stake to create a "fence" on both sides of the bed. Plants were then hung over the strings. The trellis consisted of four or five strings placed about 6 to 8 in. apart.

Fruit appearance ratings. All fruits of each variety harvested from all four replications were graded and laid out on tables for careful examination and appearance ratings on 28 July. Fruits were visually assessed for shape, extent of yellow color, and overall appearance. Appearance ratings took into account, in order of importance, overall attractiveness, shape, shape uniformity, and color.

Results and Discussion

Yields and returns. Varieties are ranked from highest to lowest yield of a combination grade of U.S. Fancy plus U.S. No. 1 fruits in Table 1. This combination corresponds to the trade designation `Superselect'. The U.S. No. 2 grade corresponds to the `Select' category, while fruits of the U.S. No. 1 large grade are usually packed as "24 count" (24 fruits/box). Like last year's study, Daytona, Dasher II, SRQ 2983, and Indy were in the seven highest cultivars in this trial, along with General Lee, Greensleeves, and Turbo (Table 1). None of the yields were significantly different from the others. Daytona, Greensleeves, General Lee, Turbo, Indy, and Stonewall all had average percentages of Superselect (Fancy and No. 1) equal to or higher than 80, although all the varieties had average percentages above 70 (Table 1). Incomes for all varieties were not significantly different except that Daytona earned significantly more than Stonewall, the lowest earning variety.

Dasher II, General Lee, SRQ 2983, SXQ 2387, Speedway, and Slice More received the best ratings for uniformity of shape. Daytona, Dasher II, General Lee Thunder, and Panther received the best ratings for degree of yellowing on fruit. The best overall appearance ratings were given to Dasher II, General Lee, Turbo, Indy, and Thunder. Dasher II and General Lee were attractive fruit, receiving some of the best scores in all three appearance rating categories (Table 2).

Although no one variety significantly outperformed the others, this trial illustrates the importance of planning a crop for optimal return. In this case, rain delayed the planting, thus delaying the first harvest until July 11, after the prices started to decrease (Table 3). Daytona, Dasher II, General Lee, Turbo, Indy, Speedway, and Panther remain on the list of suggested slicing cucumber varieties for Kentucky growers. SRQ 2983, Greensleeves, Cobra, and SXQ 2387 are good for grower trial.

Acknowledgments

Table 1. Marketable yields and gross returns of slicing cucumber varieties and advanced breeding lines; data are averages from four replications at Lexington, Kentucky, 2003. Entries ranked from highest to lowest yield of US Fancy plus US No. 1 grade fruits.

Entry Seed Source US Fancy+ US No. 1 (tons/acre) Marketable Yields¹ Gross Returns² ($/acre) Overall Appear.

% Fancy+ No. 1 (%) US No. 2 US No. 1 large

tons/acre

Daytona SW 20.7 83 2.4 1.8 8864 5.0

Dasher II SW 20.4 79 4.0 1.5 7619 7.5

General Lee SW 20.1 80 3.3 1.6 7463 7.5

SRQ 2983 SS 19.4 79 3.7 1.4 7166 4.5

Greensleeves HM 19.1 81 3.1 1.4 6877 6.0

Turbo RU 18.8 82 3.1 1.0 6663 7.5

Indy SW 18.8 82 2.8 1.3 6700 7.5

Cobra UA 18.5 78 3.4 1.7 6959 5.5

SXQ 2387 SS 18.5 73 3.8 3.1 7639 7.0

Speedway RU 18.4 79 3.3 1.7 6907 5.0

Stonewall SW 18.0 82 2.6 1.3 6353 7.0

Thunder SW 17.9 75 3.9 2.2 6999 8.0

Panther SW 17.8 76 2.7 2.9 7097 5.5

Slice More SW 17.4 75 3.9 2.0 6852 5.5

SXQ 2389 SS 16.3 71 4.5 2.1 6852 4.5

Waller-Duncan LSD (P = 0.05) 5.9 7.9 1.7 1.2 2327 ---

¹The combined yields of USDA grades Fancy and US No. 1 are equivalent to the Superselect marketing category, while US No. 2 grade is equivalent to Select; yields of US No. 1 Large are equivalent to yields of cucumbers used in 24-count packs.
²Gross returns are calculated for each entry by multiplying yields of each marketing category (Superselect, Select, and 24-count) by its appropriate price for a given harvest date (nine harvests). Prices used were actual average weekly prices received by a Kentucky cooperative from June 22–August 10, 2003. Higher returns may reflect earlier yields and/or higher yields of Superselect cucumbers. Prices are shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Fruit shape, color, and overall appearance assessments for slicing cucumber varieties; scores are averages for all fruits of each variety from four replications harvested on 28 July 2003; varieties are listed from highest to lowest US Fancy + US No. 1 yields.

Entry Shape¹ Fruit Yellowing² Appear. Rating³

Daytona 2.0 3.5 5.0

Dasher II 4.5 3.5 7.5

General Lee 4.0 3.5 7.5

SRQ 2983 4.0 2.0 4.5

Greensleeves 3.5 2.0 6.0

Turbo 3.5 3.0 7.5

Indy 3.5 3.0 7.5

Cobra 3.0 2.5 5.5

SXQ 2387 4.5 2.5 7.0

Speedway 4.0 2.0 5.0

Stonewall 3.0 2.0 7.0

Thunder 2.5 4.0 8.0

Panther 2.5 4.0 5.5

Slice More 4.5 2.5 5.5

SXQ 2389 3.0 3.0 4.5

¹Shape ratings: 1 = worst (large percentage of misshapen fruits) to 5 = best (most fruits uniform, long, straight, cylindrical).
²Extent of yellowing: 1 = worst (large percentage of fruit surface yellow on most fruits), 5 = best (no yellow color on most fruits).
³Appearance ratings: 1 = worst; 9 = best, taking into account, in order of importance, shape, shape uniformity, and color.

Table 3. Average weekly wholesale prices received for slicing cucumbers during the period from 29 June-27 July 2003. The first trial harvest was July 11. Prices are before packing charge and marketing commissions are subtracted. Prices are dollars per standard 1 1/9 bu (55 lb) carton.

Week Ending Market Grade¹

Superselect+ Select Small

June 29 14.65 11.25

July 6 10.25 8.60

July 13 7.30 5.25

July 20 7.20 5.25

July 27 7.05 5.00

¹Market grades correspond to the following USDA grades: Superselect = US Fancy + US No. 1; Select = US No. 2; Small = US No. 1 Small.

Trellised Slicing Cucumbers in Western Kentucky

Nathan Howard, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Fresh market slicing cucumbers have been grown in Western Kentucky for the West Kentucky Growers Cooperative for the last four years. Growers want varieties that produce many long, straight, dark green cucumbers with very little yellowing because they are most profitable. This trial repeats the 2002 study. The objective of the two-year study was to determine if trellising would produce better quality, higher yielding fruit that would pay for the cost of trellising.

Materials and Methods

The cucumber variety chosen for this trial was Speedway, a reliable variety for the cooperative. The trial plots were set up in the field of one of the cooperators/growers in McLean County. The grower assisted with this trial by irrigating the plot and controlling pests and diseases. Plants were started in 242-cell trays and transplanted to the field on 5 May into raised beds set up with black plastic mulch and drip irrigation. The trial was arranged as a randomized complete block design with four replications. Each plot had 50 plants in 18-in. wide double rows with 15 in. between plants within the rows. A pre-plant phosphorus and potassium fertilizer was added according to soil test results. One-half of the 100 lb N/A was applied prior to planting with the remainder applied weekly through drip irrigation at 15 lb N/A per application.

The herbicide Devrinol was used for preemergence weed control. Plots were scouted twice weekly to monitor pests and diseases. The insecticide Pounce was used as needed. Bravo, Kocide, and Maneb fungicides were used alternately throughout the season. An outbreak of anthracnose occurred the last week of June, but the disease was controlled with Quadris, which allowed continued cucumber harvesting.

The treatments used in this trial were 1) no trellis, 2) single-stranded trellis, and 3) double-stranded trellis. The trellis treatments were wrapped in five stringings. Plots were harvested 10 times between 20 June and 22 July.

Single- and double-stranded trellises. In either trellis system, tobacco sticks (52 in.) were driven 9 in. into the raised beds directly in the plant row. One stake was placed every five plants (about 6 ft. apart). Since there were two rows of cucumbers per bed, there were also two rows of stakes on each bed. Two stakes were also set every 25 plants on each row to serve as support for the trellis structure and to allow for a gap to pass harvest buckets across rows. Staked tomato twine was used in stringing. The twine was wrapped around a stake once and then moved to the next stake. Stringing the twine was repeated five times at different positions, beginning at 6 in. above the plastic and ending at the top of the stick. When finished, the trellis looked similar to a five-strand fence. The double-strand trellis type was set up exactly the same as the single-strand trellis but with two strings. Twice before the first harvest, vines were manually trained onto the twine in order to ensure the trellises were fully supporting them.

New tobacco sticks cost $0.15 each. This cost can be amortized over two years resulting in an annual cost of $0.07/stick. Approximately 2,070 sticks are required per acre, so stake cost was about $145 per acre. The estimated labor cost for trellising and removal at the end of the season was estimated at $400 per acre. Total material and labor costs for trellising cucumbers were about $600/acre. Cucumber sale prices are FOB less $1.40 box/packing charge and less 16% marketing commissions. Prices are dollars per standard 1 1/9 bu (55 lb) carton.

Results and Discussion

The growing season was wet with cool temperatures, which slowed cucumber growth. Yields were somewhat lower than those of 2002, but higher prices generally offset this difference. Table 1 lists the prices per box for super-select, select, and 24-count sizes at various harvest dates.

Several trends are important. Generally, yield differences were minimal among the three treatments in each cucumber grade (Table 2). The trellised treatment seemed to yield a few more super-select boxes per acre than the non-trellised treatment. The double-strand treatment did not support the fruit load any better than the single-strand treatment. In addition, its yield was lower overall than that for the single-strand treatment. Therefore, using a double strand was not justified according to this experiment. Cucumbers from trellised vines were more uniform in color due to their better exposure to sunlight, compared to cucumbers from untrellised vines. The trellised cucumbers could have been picked for one more week, but the yields at that point were low, which would not justify the cost of picking.

Costs and returns. Single-strand trellised cucumbers returned the highest yield per acre. When adjusted to an acre basis, the gross dollar return obtained with this treatment was $11,627/acre. When cost of labor and materials were factored in, net return for the single-strand trellis was $11,025/acre. Yields of the non-trellised plot were lower overall than the trellised treatments. Because there were no trellising costs, net returns were $11,078/acre.

In this experiment the additional cost of trellising cucumbers was justified but not by a lot. The 2002 research showed more of a difference in profit. An important factor to consider when trellising cucumber is spray coverage. Spray coverage is generally better with less dense foliage, and cucumbers raised on the ground had fewer disease symptoms during the period when anthracnose was a problem. This would result in fewer culled fruits and increase the grower's net profit. The grower was very pleased with his trellised cucumbers because of the ease of harvest when compared to non-trellised cucumbers.

In conclusion, considering the overall yield and materials cost, this experiment demonstrated that trellising was slightly more profitable than not trellising. The main advantage of trellising was associated with ease of harvest.

Table 1. Average weekly wholesale prices for slicing cucumbers from 20 June-22 July 2003.

Week Ending on Price per Box

Super-select¹ Select¹ 24-Count¹

28 Jun $13.32 $8.01 $4.35

5 Jul $15.16 $9.27 $5.63

12 Jul $14.46 $5.44 $5.93

19 Jul $ 3.30 $5.35 $5.00

26 Jul $10.19 $1.63 $4.84

¹Market grades correspond to the following USDA grades: Superselect = U.S. Fancy
+ U.S.No.1; Select = U.S. No.2; Small = U.S. No.1 Small; 24-count = U.S. No. 1 Large.

Table 2. Yields of market grades of Speedway slicing cucumbers from trellised and non-trellised plots in McLean County, Kentucky, 2003.

Market Grade Number of Boxes

No Trellis Single-Strand Trellis Double-Strand Trellis

Superselect 523 536 550

Select 427 378 371

24-count 375 470 393

Culls 130 113 135

Total boxes 1,455 1,497 1,449

Income/acre¹ $11,078 $11,025 $10,387

¹$ Income/acre is minus cost of trellising.

Yield and Powdery Mildew Resistance of Fall-Harvested Summer Squash

April Satanek, Brent Rowell, William Nesmith, Darrell Slone, and John C. Snyder, Departments of Horticulture and Plant Pathology

Introduction

Fungal and virus diseases are primary concerns in successfully producing and marketing a fall summer squash crop in Kentucky. Under certain conditions, virus can render a squash crop unmarketable by discoloring fruit and affecting plant growth. Infections of more than one virus commonly occur in fall-harvested summer squash in Kentucky. Watermelon mosaic virus (WMV, formerly WMV-2), zucchini yellow mosaic virus (ZYMV), squash mosaic virus (SqMV), cucumber mosaic virus (CMV), and papaya ringspot virus (PRSV, formerly WMV-1) have all occurred in Kentucky at one time or another and in most other southeastern states.

Many straight neck yellow squash have the precocious yellow (Py) gene that masks the greening effect in summer squash fruits produced on plants infected by CMV or WMV. Unfortunately, precocious yellow summer squash will show the greening effect when PRSV or ZYMV is present. Transgenic squash resistant to PRSV and ZYMV (TG-3+) are supposed to be resistant to all four viruses.

This trial was planned to evaluate 34 squash cultivars in response to virus pressure in a fall planting. The low occurrence of virus disease in this year's trial allowed only one rating of virus damage. The cultivars were evaluated for powdery mildew (PM) resistance, yield, and appearance.

Materials and Methods

Thirty-four summer squash cultivars or advanced breeding lines (15 zucchini, 11 straight neck summer squash, and eight crook or semi-crook neck) were evaluated at the University of Kentucky Horticultural Research Farm in Lexington in the late summer and fall of 2003. These included some of the best performing cultivars from the 2002 trial. Most cultural practices were according to current commercial recommendations for Kentucky. Seeds were sown in the greenhouse on 16 July in 72-cell plastic trays and transplanted to the field on 11 August. Each plot consisted of eight plants spaced 18 in. apart in a single row on 6-in. high raised beds with black plastic mulch and drip irrigation. Beds were 8 ft. apart from center to center. All 34 entries were planted together in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Cultivars of each type (zucchinis, yellow straightneck, or yellow crookneck) were grouped together within each block. Blocks consisted of two long rows with 17 entries per row. Single rows of the disease-susceptible cultivar Dixie were planted on both sides of each block to enhance natural disease buildup and uniform spread throughout the trial.

One hundred pounds N/A were applied prior to planting while an additional 27 lb N/A were applied in four applications for a total of 128 lb N/A. All P and K were applied preplant according to soil test recommendations. When cucumber beetle populations were high, Pounce was applied, and for disease control, Bravo and Nova were applied. The preemergent herbicide Curbit was applied between rows for weed control.

Plots were harvested three days a week (MWF) from 29 August to 1 October for a total of 13 harvests. A hard frost on 3 October damaged plants, preventing further harvests. After harvesting, fruits were counted and weighed after grading into either marketable fruit or culls. Marketable yield is expressed as the number of half-bushel boxes per acre by dividing the total weight of marketable fruit per acre by 21 lb. Following an analysis of variance, average yields and disease ratings were compared using Waller-Duncan's K-ratio T-test (P = 0.05).

Fruit quality ratings All fruits of each trial entry harvested from all four replications were graded and laid out on tables for careful examination and quality rating on 15 September. Both the yellow squash and the zucchini squash color were evaluated for uniformity with a score of 1 = highly variable to 5 = uniform, and scores were lowered for green tinted fruit. Appearance was rated on a 1 to 9 scale with 1 = worst and 9 = best, taking into account, in order of importance, overall attractiveness, shape, uniformity of shape, and color.

Disease assessments. Because of a lack of virus symptoms and virus transmitting aphids early in the season, a few plants in all four replications were inoculated with leaves containing virus symptoms and aphids on 19 August. These insect and disease-infested leaves were taken from an infected field of cucurbits. Plants were visually assessed for the extent of PM symptoms on 18 September and assessed for virus symptoms on 13 October. In both cases, a subjective rating of 0 to 5 was used, 0 meaning no disease present and 5 indicating the highest level of disease.

Results and Discussion

The beginning of the fall growing season was marked by a low occurrence of virus diseases in the squash plots but with a significant occurrence of powdery mildew. The season was rainy, and an early frost severely injured most plants.

Yellow straightnecks. Of the yellow straightneck varieties, Conqueror III, a transgenic variety, yielded significantly more than the other straightneck varieties and also received a very low virus score (Table 1). In last year's trial, Conqueror III was one of the lowest yielding under very low virus pressure. Precious II, Cougar, Lioness, and Multipick were the next highest yielding varieties, although not significantly lower than Conqueror III. They earned low virus scores. Lioness received the lowest PM rating among straightneck squash, as well as low rating for virus symptoms. Conqueror III and Precious II had low virus scores but had average PM scores. XPT 1832, a transgenic variety with the precocious gene, along with Superpik, were lowest yielding in our trial. Cougar and Superpik had the most PM symptoms, and Seneca Supreme and Daisy had the most virus symptoms. Despite marginal to bad disease ratings, Multipick, Seneca Supreme, and Daisy received the highest appearance ratings, while Precious II received a low appearance rating because of the highly variable fruit color and shape (Table 2).

Yellow crooknecks. Medallion yielded significantly more than other yellow crooknecks, although it received rather high PM and virus ratings (Table 1). The next highest yielding crooknecks, Gentry, Destiny III, Dixie, Prelude II, and Sunglo all rated low for virus symptoms. As in last year's study, Prelude II and Sunglo had lower PM ratings than the other crooknecks. Prelude II, Sunglo, and Supersette rated highest in appearance, with the other cultivars having acceptable appearances (Table 2).

Zucchini. Of the top five yielding varieties, Radiant yielded the highest but not significantly higher than Payroll, Wildcat, Tigress, and Zucchini Elite (Table 1). Of the top yielders, Payroll, Wildcat, and Zucchini Elite exhibited relatively good PM resistance, along with the lower yielding Senator. All the zucchini in the trial had low virus ratings. In last year's trial, Cashflow, Sensor (9523), and ACX 45a were some of the hardest hit by PM, and these, along with Radiant, Spineless Beauty, Independence II, and EXP718, again received high PM scores this year. All the zucchini varieties received acceptable appearance ratings, but Payroll, Wildcat, Tigress, and Robuster received the highest scores (Table 2).

Marketable yields in late plantings can be expected to vary considerably among cultivars from year to year. Differences depend on the resistance package in the cultivar, diseases present in the field, and the growth stage at which the crop becomes infected. Precocious yellow straightneck cultivars still remain an excellent choice for high yields and masking of green fruit symptoms caused by WMV and CMV.

When virus diseases are a serious risk, transgenic virus-resistant cultivars should perform considerably better in most late summer plantings. Conqueror III, Cougar, Lioness, and Sunray are recommended for small-scale trial. Multipik and Fortune will remain on our list of suggested cultivars for Kentucky growers in spite of their susceptibility to PM. Precious II has performed well for the second year in a row, but it is not recommended for trial because of the varied appearance observed in this year's trial.

Of the crookneck varieties, Destiny III and Prelude II are recommended for growers. Although not yielding the highest in this trial, they both did well under low virus pressure. Medallion, Gentry, and Sunglo are recommended for trial. Among zucchini, Tigress, Zucchini Elite, and Spineless Beauty continue to be recommended. Radiant, Payroll, Cashflow, and Senator are recommended for grower trial, as well as Wildcat for its stunning black appearance. Disease resistance in any type of summer squash should be considered when choosing a variety since productivity often relies on the severity of disease occurring in any particular season.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the following persons for their hard work and assistance in the successful completion of this trial: Dave Lowry, Phillip Bush, Larry Blandford, Kirk Ranta, Derek Law, Audrey Horrall, Barry Duncil, Courtney Bobrowski, Curtis Gregory, Justin Clark, Dave Spalding, Selvaprasanna Sanjeevijulian, Kalyan Tangirala, Teerasak Tiamdao (Oa), Tanasit Laosomboon (Koh), Spencer Helsabeck, and John C. Clark.

Table 1. Yields and powdery mildew assessments for yellow straightneck, crookneck, and zucchini squash cultivars and breeding lines. Data are means of four replications.

Entry Source Type¹ Mkt. Yield (boxes/acre)² Disease Rating³ Appear. Rating⁴

PM Virus

I. Yellow straightneck and slight semi-crookneck: 18 Sept 13 Oct

Conqueror III SW SN, Tg-3+ 1027 2.4 0.3 6.5

Precious II AC SN-Py 806 2.6 0.3 4.5

Cougar SW SN-Py 732 3.8 1.5 6.5

Lioness SW SN 713 1.8 1.0 6.0

Multipik HM SN-Py 672 3.3 1.5 8.0

Sunray SW SN-Py 643 2.8 2.0 7.0

Fortune RG SN-Py 629 3.5 2.3 7.0

Seneca Supreme SM SN-Py 626 3.5 2.8 8.0

Daisy SM SN- 566 3.1 2.5 7.5

Superpik HM SN-Py 544 3.9 2.3 6.5

XPT 1832 SM SN-Py, Tg-3 384 3.1 1.5 6.0

II. Yellow semi-crookneck or crookneck:

Medallion AC SCN 906 3.3 3.5 6.5

Gentry RG sCN 704 3.4 1.5 6.5

Destiny III SW sCN, Tg-3 668 3.6 0.0 6.0

Dixie SM CN 595 3.5 2.0 6.5

Prelude II SW CN, Tg-3 567 1.0 0.3 7.0

Sunglo RG sCN 505 1.4 0.8 7.0

Supersette HM CN-Py 500 2.5 3.0 7.0

Pic-N-Pic SW CN 400 3.5 0.3 6.0

Waller-Duncan LSD (all yellow squash, P = 0.05). 150 .77 .89 ---

III. Zucchini:

Radiant SM Z 1099 3.4 0.3 6.5

Payroll RG Z 1080 2.4 0.0 8.0

Wildcat (HMX0710) SW Z 1011 1.8 0.0 8.5

Tigress SW Z 951 2.9 0.3 7.5

Zucchini Elite HM Z 918 2.1 0.5 7.0

Cashflow RG Z 899 3.5 0.5 7.0

Spineless Beauty RG Z 874 3.4 0.3 6.0

Independence II SW Z,Tg-2 849 3.9 0.0 5.5

ACX 45a AC Z 822 3.8 0.0 5.5

Senator SW Z 763 1.9 1.3 7.0

Sensor (9523) SS Z 763 3.6 0.0 5.0

Dividend RG Z 758 3.0 0.0 7.0

Robuster SS Z 751 3.0 0.8 7.5

EXP 718 SW Z 708 3.7 0.3 6.5

Revenue RG Z 614 3.0 0.0 6.5

Waller-Duncan LSD (zucchinis, P = 0.05) 181 1.1 1.4 --

¹All entries from conventional breeding programs except for: Tg = transgenic for resistance to two (Tg-2) or three (Tg-3) viruses; Tg-3+ = transgenic for three viruses with resistance to the fourth (PRSV) obtained through conventional breeding. Type descriptions based on our observations on 15 Sept.: SN = straightneck, CN = crookneck, sCN = semi-crookneck; some cultivars that we considered semi-crookneck are considered straightneck by the seed company and are included in the straightneck grouping; Py = has precocious yellow gene to mask virus symptoms.
²Number of half-bushel (21lb = 9.52 kg) boxes per acre.
³ Visual rating scale from 0 = no symptoms to 5 = extensive symptoms on entire plants; ratings took into account the percentage of upper and lower leaf and stem surfaces that were covered by powdery mildew and virus symptoms; assessed by W. Nesmith on 18 Sept and 13 Oct.
⁴Appearance ratings: 1 = worst, 9 = best, taking into account, in order of importance, overall attractiveness, shape, and color.

Table 2. Fruit color, appearance, and other observations for yellow straightneck, crookneck, and zucchini squash cultivars and breeding lines. All fruits bulked from four replications of the harvest.

Entry Type¹ Color Uniform² Appear Rating³ Shape/Comments/Suitability

Conqueror III SN-Py Tg-3+ 2.5 6.5 Light yellow, long fruit with faint longitudinal yellow lines

Medallion sCN 3.5 6.5 Light yellow, medium sized bulb

Precious II SN-Py 1.5 4.5 Medium yellow to light green, variable shape and color

Cougar SN-Py 4.0 6.5 Medium yellow

Lioness SN 3.0 6.0 Pale yellow, long cylindrical fruit with thick neck

Multipik SN-Py 5.0 8.0 Medium yellow, thick, short fruit

Sunray SN-Py 3.5 7.0 Medium yellow

Fortune SN-Py 4.0 7.0 Medium yellow

Seneca Supreme SN-Py 4.0 8.0 Medium yellow, thick, short fruit

Daisy SN 1.5 7.5 Light yellow to slight green

Superpik SN-Py 4.5 6.5 Medium yellow

XPT 1832 SN-Py, Tg-3 4.0 6.0 Medium yellow

Gentry sCN 3.0 6.5 Medium yellow, large bulb

Destiny III sCN, Tg-3 2.0 6.0 Medium yellow, large bulb

Dixie CN 2.0 6.5 Pale yellow

Prelude II CN, Tg-3 1.5 7.0 Medium yellow

Sunglo sCN 3.0 7.0 Light yellow, smooth fruit

Supersette sCN-Py 5.0 7.0 Medium yellow

Pic-N-Pic CN 4.0 6.0 Yellow to light green, bulbous blossom end

Radiant Z 3.5 6.5 Dark green

Payroll Z 5.0 8.0 Medium green

Wildcat (HMX0710) Z 5.0 8.5 Very dark green mottled with light. green

Tigress Z 4.5 7.5 Medium green, nice appearance, uniform size and color

Zucchini Elite Z 3.5 7.0 Medium green, all a bit curved

Cashflow Z 3.0 7.0 Dark green, all slightly curved

Spineless Beauty Z 3.5 6.0 Medium green, stem extends onto the top of the fruit

Independence II Z, Tg-2 4.5 5.5 Medium green, slightly curved

ACX 45a Z 4.0 5.5 Black, attractive

Senator Z 4.5 7.0 Light green

Sensor (9523) Z 4.5 5.0 Dark green, small at top, larger at blossom end

Dividend Z 4.0 7.0 Very dark green, slightly curved

Robuster Z 4.0 7.5 Medium green, attractive

EXP 718 Z 3.0 6.5 Medium green, slightly curved

Revenue Z 4.0 6.5 Medium green, slightly curved

¹Type descriptions based on our observations on 15 Sept.: SN = straightneck, SN-Py = straightneck with precocious yellow gene, CN = crookneck, sCN = semi-crookneck. Some cultivars that we considered semi-crookneck may be considered straightneck by the seed company.
²Color ratings for yellow squash: 1 = variable color, light green; 5 = bright golden yellow, uniform color; for zucchini, 1 = variable color;
5 = uniform color.
³Appearance ratings: 1 = worst; 9 = best, taking into account, in order of importance, overall attractiveness, shape, and color.

Bell Pepper Cultivar Trial, Western Kentucky

Nathan Howard, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Bell pepper has become a major commercial vegetable crop in Western Kentucky. Demand for pepper has increased in this area due to the strong marketing potential established through the West Kentucky Grower Cooperative, based in Owensboro, Kentucky. In the continuing search for new and improved varieties best suited for our region, we conducted a variety trial to determine if the cultivars currently used are the best fit for our area and to evaluate new cultivars not grown in this area before.

Materials and Methods

The trial was conducted in cooperation with a pepper grower in Daviess County. Seed of 10 bell pepper varieties was obtained from Seedway Company. On 22 May, 10 varieties were transplanted onto raised beds set up with black plastic mulch and drip irrigation. The trial was arranged as a randomized complete block design with four replications. Each plot had 20 plants in 18-in.-wide double rows, with 15 in. between plants within the rows. A pre-plant phosphorus and potassium fertilizer was applied according to soil test results. In addition, a broadcast application of 75 lb N/A was applied pre-plant, with the remaining 235 lb N/A applied at a rate of 15 to 25 lb/week with the last application on 18 August. Disease and insects were controlled by weekly applications of Manex and Copper fungicides, and by Mustang Max insecticide, applied as needed. Income per acre was calculated based on the price and number of boxes of each pepper size. Prices are per standard 1 1/9 bu (55 lb) carton. Prices are FOB less $1.40 per box for packing charge and by 16% for marketing commission.

Results and Discussion

The growing season was very good with abundant rain in spring and summer, and lush growth was noticeable throughout the growing season. The trial plots were harvested six times between 23 July and 5 September. Yields were very good with the top yielder, Olympus, producing 1,600 boxes/A (Table 1). Olympus also yielded the most extra-large peppers and the fewest culls in the trial. Brigadier and Revolution also yielded well, producing more than 1,500 boxes/A. Although Brigadier had a high yield, fruits were not as uniform as for other varieties. In addition, more culls and choppers were graded out of Brigadier than any other variety in the trial. Although Brigadier and Defiance had more total yield than Crusader and Red Knight, the latter outperformed Brigadier and Defiance in their proportion of extra-large fruits. Aristotle X3R produced the most uniform amounts of extra-large, large, and medium fruits. Aristotle X3R was also very profitable, as it was rated the third highest for income/A. Orion was the lowest yielding pepper variety in the trial (~1,000 boxes/A) and had the lowest income. Prices started high in July but fell off later in the month and did not recover. Still, the average price was determined to be profitable (Table 2).

In conclusion, we were able to better determine which varieties performed best for our region. Olympus was rated the best new variety, as it held up well and was found most profitable. Other promising varieties include Brigadier and Aristotle X3R. This trial will be repeated in 2004 to confirm these results and to compare the overall performance of the top varieties.

Table 1. Maturity, yields (boxes/A), and income ($/A) for a bell pepper variety trial conducted at West Kentucky Grower Cooperative in Daviess County, Kentucky, 2003.

Variety¹ Maturity (days) Extra Large Boxes/A Total Yield Income ($/A)

Large Medium Chopper Culls

Olympus 71 535 618 379 99 2 1633 12,922

Revolution 74 493 562 391 68 15 1529 12,048

Brigadier 71 249 569 422 229 39 1508 10,618

Crusader 74 356 531 415 44 10 1356 10,519

Defiance 72 219 482 421 220 11 1353 9,653

Red Knight 64 319 524 407 90 5 1345 10,253

Heritage 74 251 524 429 106 15 1325 9,808

Aristotle X3R 72 489 478 258 75 2 1302 10,481

X3R Wizard 73 279 514 369 26 15 1203 8,382

Orion 74 293 357 382 27 8 1067 7,473

¹Sorted by total yield.

Table 2. Average wholesale prices for bell peppers in 2003.

Grade Price

X-Large $10.02

Large $7.03

Medium $7.27

Chopper $4.61

Sweet Corn Variety Trial, Western Kentucky, 2003

Joseph G. Masabni, Shane Bogle, and Dwight Wolf, UK Research and Education Center, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

New varieties of sweet corn are always being developed. The newest trend in sweet corn is the combination of high sugar content of enhanced sugar varieties and the crunchy kernel of older varieties. The West Kentucky Grower Cooperative, based in Owensboro, Kentucky, seeks new varieties that would appeal to the market or the consumer. These varieties would help the cooperative and its members, the growers, stay in business. Toward that goal, a sweet corn variety trial was conducted in 2003 to evaluate 10 new and improved sh2 varieties.

Materials and Methods

Ten supersweet sweet corn varieties were provided by the West Kentucky Growers Cooperative for evaluation at the University of Kentucky Research and Education Center at Princeton, Kentucky. The trial consisted of four bicolor, three white, and three yellow sweet corn varieties as shown in Table 1.

The experimental design was a randomized complete block design with three replications and 10 treatments, with sweet corn varieties as treatments. Plots were 35 ft. long and 80 in. wide. Each plot was seeded with a plate seeder calibrated to seed two rows of corn 40 in. apart at 9-in. spacing within rows. A 10-ft. alley was left between replications 1 and 2 and between replications 2 and 3, to facilitate spraying, harvesting, and other maintenance. Prior to seeding, fertilizer and lime were amended according to the soil test results. A drip irrigation system was set up with one line of drip tape per variety across the whole plot. Soluble N was added through the drip irrigation every two weeks after germination. The trial was seeded on 22 April.

On 14 May Atrazine (1 qt/A) was broadcast over the whole plot to control emerged and emerging weeds. On 18 June Poast (1 qt/A) and COC 1% (v/v) were sprayed with a backpack sprayer and a 2-nozzle shielded boom, for control of emerged grasses growing between the treatments. No fungicides were applied, and only one application of Sevin was applied at tassel stage for insect control.

Results and Discussion

Table 2 lists the variables measured for each sweet corn variety. 6800 Y and 6802R BC, the first varieties harvested, had the highest number of ears/plant, total number of ears per plot, and the highest germination percentage. Ear weight did not differ significantly among the 10 varieties, even though ear weight ranged from 6.5 to 7.8 oz.

8102R BC had the longest marketable ears, followed closely by Camas BC. In turn, Camas BC, Saturn Y, and 8102R BC had the widest ears.

Table 3 lists the 10 varieties in descending order for each variable. This allows quick comparison of the rankings. Camas BC is in the top third for all variables except plant height. 8102R BC and two varieties of Saturn were also in the top three varieties for ear length, width, and weight. AC945 Y was in the lowest third for all measured varieties except for ear width.

No taste study was conducted on these varieties. However, comments were solicited from those who tasted them. Most liked the bicolor look of the sweet corn but mentioned that they usually buy what is available in the store. If given a choice, they will buy a familiar brand name. The white kernel varieties received the most extreme opinions, either totally loved or hated for their sweetness and crunch and for their pale color.

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to acknowledge the excellent technical support provided by June Johnston and Hilda Rogers.

Table 1. Variety, colors, and sources of supersweet corn, UKREC, Princeton, Kentucky, 2003.

Variety Color Source

6802R Bicolor AC

8102R Bicolor AC

Camas or BSS9686 Bicolor SW

Saturn Bicolor SW

8101R White AC

Boreal White SW

Saturn White SW

AC945 Yellow AC

6800 Yellow AC

Saturn Yellow SW

Table 2. Germination and plant and ear characteristics of sweet corn in the 2003 variety trial at UKREC, Princeton, Kentucky.

Variety Germination Percent 28 May Plant Height (in.) Ear Length (in.) Ear Width (in.) Ear Weight (oz) Number Ears/ Plant Total Ear Number Harvest Date(s) (July)

6802R BC 100 58 7.6 1.7 6.8 1.2 61 9, 14

6800 Y 100 61 7.5 1.7 7.1 1.0 58 9, 14

Camas BC 100 62 7.9 1.8 7.8 1.0 56 21

Saturn Y 89 62 7.4 1.9 7.4 1.1 45 21

Boreal W 68 65 7.4 1.8 7.3 1.3 41 21

8102R BC 79 64 8.3 1.8 7.8 1.1 39 21

Saturn BC 96 64 7.4 1.8 7.5 1.1 51 16, 21

8101 W 72 58 7.7 1.6 6.7 1.4 46 16, 21

Saturn W 85 62 7.4 1.8 6.5 1.3 50 14, 16

AC 945 Y 81 61 7.3 1.8 6.6 1.0 37 14, 16

LSD 5% 20 3 4.4 1.2 NS 0.3 15

CV 14 3 1.3 1.6 13.5 13.6 18

Table 3. Sweet corn varieties listed in descending order for each measured variable.

Germination Percent 28 May Plant Height (in.) Ear Length (mm) Ear Width (mm) Ear Weight (g) Number Ear/Plant Total Ear Number

6800 Y Boreal W 8102R BC Saturn Y 8102R BC 6802R BC 8101 W

6802R BC Saturn BC Camas BC 8102R BC Saturn BC 6800 Y Boreal W

Camas BC 8102R BC 8101 W Camas BC Camas BC Camas BC Saturn W

Saturn BC Camas BC 6802R BC Boreal W Saturn Y Saturn BC 6802R BC

Saturn Y Saturn Y 6800 Y AC 945 Y Boreal W Saturn W Saturn BC

Saturn W Saturn W Boreal W Saturn BC 6800 Y 8101 W Saturn Y

AC 945 Y 6800 Y Saturn BC Saturn W 6802R BC Saturn Y 8102R BC

8102R BC AC 945 Y Saturn Y 6802R BC 8101 W Boreal W 6800 Y

8101 W 6802R BC Saturn W 6800 Y AC 945 Y 8102R BC AC 945 Y

Boreal W 8101 W AC 945 Y 8101 W Saturn W AC 945 Y Camas BC

Supersweet Corn Evaluations in Central Kentucky, 2003

John Strang, April Satanek, Terry Jones, Chris Smigell, Darrell Slone, and John Snyder, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Locally produced sweet corn is a high demand item at Kentucky retail markets. This trial was designed to evaluate newer supersweet corn varieties under Central Kentucky conditions.

Materials and Methods

Forty-eight supersweet corn varieties were planted by hand on 14 May 2003. Plots consisted of a 20-ft. long row of each cultivar, replicated four times. Rows were spaced 3.5 ft. apart, and 100 seeds were planted in each 20-ft. row. Plants were thinned to a distance of 8 in. apart on June 10.

Prior to planting 100 lb of actual N per acre was applied as ammonium nitrate and tilled in. Plants were sidedressed with 50 lb of actual N per acre as ammonium nitrate.

Bicep at the rate of 1.8 qt per acre was applied on 14 May for weed control. Pounce, Sevin, Asana, and Warrior were used for insect control.

Results and Discussion

Variety evaluation results can be found in Tables 1 through 3.

Attribute WSS 0966, Morning Star, Max, and Bandit were the best performing yellow varieties.

Attribute WSS 0987, Tahoe, Summer Sweet 8101R, Extra Tender 275A, Gourmet Brand 378A, and 382A Xtra Tender Brand were the best performing white varieties. Variety 372A Xtra Tender Brand was the best early maturing white corn.

Attribute BSS 0977, Polaris, Candy Corner, and Shooting Star were the best bicolor varieties. Gourmet Brand 272A was the best early maturing bicolor variety.

The wet season reduced problems with husk coverage and tip fill. Consequently, most varieties performed very well.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the following persons for their hard work and assistance in the successful completion of this trial: Dave Lowry, Phillip Bush, Larry Blandford, Derek Law, Audrey Horrall, Barry Duncil, Courtney Bobrowski, Curtis Gregory, Justin Clark, Selvaprasanna Sanjeevijulian, Ashok Swaminathon, Saravanna Kannan, Kalyan Tangirala, Teerasak Tiamdao (Oa), Tanasit Laosomboon (Koh), Spencer Helsabeck, and John C. Clark.

Table 1. Plant characteristics and yield of supersweet corn cultivars, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar Seed Source¹ Days to Maturity Plant Stand² (%) Height to First Harvested Ear Ease of Ear Harvest³ (1-5) Yield (dozen ears per acre)

Attribute WSS 0987 SY 81 80 19 2.3 2645

Tahoe SW/SY 81 94 23 3 2593

Attribute BSS 0977 SY 78 96 24 3.4 2256

Attribute WSS 0966 SY 79 91 24 2.8 2217

Morning Star HR/HM 83 76 27 3.3 2139

Polaris HM 81 90 22 2.4 2061

Rustler HM 84 92 24 2.9 2048

Max (HMX 8392s) HM 85 92 23 2.8 2022

Gourmet Brand 276A ST 76 88 17 3.5 1997

Candy Corner HM 76 92 23 3.6 1984

Shooting Star HM 83 95 24 3.4 1945

Bandit HM 80 86 26 3.5 1893

Gourmet Brand 272A ST 72 95 10 3.5 1884

Summer Sweet 7631 AC 84 84 24 3.8 1841

Summer Sweet 8101R AC 81 86 23 3.9 1815

Zenith HM 81 91 28 2.4 1802

Extra Tender 275A SI 75 95 17 3.9 1789

Gourmet Brand 378A ST 78 94 17 3.5 1789

382A Xtra Tender Brand SW 82 78 23 2.8 1776

WSS 9870 SY 78 95 18 3.4 1776

Summer Sweet 7650 AC 95 26 3.9 1737

Summer Sweet 8102R AC 88 23 3.8 1724

Winstar SY 82 94 26 3.4 1724

Boreal SY 78 93 19 2.9 1698

Snowstorm ST 82 94 23 3.1 1647

White Saturn SW 75 91 19 3.2 1647

278A Extra Tender Brand SI/SW 78 82 23 3.9 1634

372A Xtra Tender Brand HR 72 92 12 2.7 1634

Camas SY 84 96 26 3.1 1621

Tethys SY/RU 77 97 19 3.6 1595

Mirai SI 75 23 3.2 1530

Gourmet Brand 175A ST 75 94 22 3 1517

Obsession RU/ST 79 88 23 3.8 1517

Abco Brand Var. 946BC AC 93 18 4.2 1491

First Class SW 69 91 17 3.5 1452

Ice Queen HR/HM 77 94 16 3.4 1452

Gourmet Brand 182A ST 82 98 20 3.1 1439

6800R Hybrid Sweet AC 97 16 4 1413

ACX 738W Hybrid AC 81 13 4 1348

Gourmet Brand 277A ST/RU/HR 76 87 19 1.8 1335

Millenium SW 82 67 20 4 1335

First Snow SW 72 88 16 3.5 1322

Eagle RU 76 79 21 3.9 1296

Abco Brand Var. 945Y AC 95 18 3.9 1284

282A Xtra Tender Brand RU 82 84 21 4 1245

178A Xtra Tender Brand RU 78 88 19 3.6 1206

GSS 9525 SY 77 87 15 3.3 1115

Gourmet Brand 177A ST 77 90 17 3.3 1037

Waller-Duncan LSD (P = 0.05) 419

¹See Appendix for seed company addresses.
²Plant stand is percentage emergence based on planting 100 seeds.
³ Ease of harvest: 1 = hard, 5 = easy.

Table 2. Ear characteristics of supersweet corn, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar Husk Coverage¹(1-10) Ear Length (in.) Ear Width (in.) Tip Fill²(1-10) Kernel Color³ Row Straightness⁴(1-10)

Attribute WSS 0987 8.8 7.3 1.8 9.3 W 7.5

Tahoe 8.8 7.9 1.9 8.5 W 7.5

Attribute BSS 0977 9.8 7.3 1.8 9.3 BC 6.8

Attribute WSS 0966 9.3 7.3 1.8 10.0 Y 8.1

Morning Star 10.0 7.6 1.9 9.8 Y 6.5

Polaris 8.5 7.8 1.8 9.8 BC 7.5

Rustler 6.5 7.8 1.9 7.7 Y 8.1

Max (HMX 8392S) 10.0 7.5 1.8 8.9 Y 7.1

Gourmet Brand 276A 9.8 7.7 1.8 10.0 BC 8.8

Candy Corner 8.5 7.4 1.7 10.0 BC 8.3

Shooting Star 9.3 8.3 1.9 9.3 BC 8.8

Bandit 8.0 7.3 2.0 10.0 Y 8.0

Gourmet Brand 272A 7.8 7.6 1.8 8.3 BC 7.5

Summer Sweet 7631 9.5 8.0 1.8 6.5 W 5.8

Summer Sweet 8101R 9.0 8.0 1.8 10.0 W 7.3

Zenith 9.7 7.2 1.8 10.0 Y 7.8

Extra Tender 275A 10.0 7.7 1.8 9.3 W 8.3

Gourmet Brand 378A 9.3 7.7 1.9 8.7 W 7.6

382A Xtra Tender Brand 9.0 7.4 1.9 9.7 W 7.8

WSS 9870 8.5 7.6 1.8 9.8 W 7.0

Summer Sweet 7650 8.3 8.2 1.8 9.0 Y 6.3

Summer Sweet 8102R 8.0 8.4 1.8 8.9 BC 7.8

Winstar 10.0 7.5 1.9 9.5 Y 7.0

Boreal 6.5 7.7 1.8 9.5 W 6.8

Snowstorm 3.5 7.5 1.9 8.8 W 6.0

White Saturn 9.5 7.5 1.8 10.0 W 9.0

278A Extra Tender Brand 8.6 7.8 1.8 9.7 BC 8.5

372A Xtra Tender Brand 7.8 7.7 1.8 9.5 W 8.3

Camas 9.5 7.9 1.8 8.0 BC 6.5

Tethys 5.0 7.9 1.8 8.5 BC 7.8

Mirai 8.7 7.6 1.9 8.3 Y 8.7

Gourmet Brand 175A 5.8 8.2 1.7 10.0 Y 7.0

Obsession 8.0 8.4 1.9 10.0 BC 7.9

Abco Brand Var. 946BC 6.3 6.1 1.8 8.0 BC 8.3

First Class 9.0 7.9 1.7 10.0 W 8.0

Ice Queen 8.5 8.0 1.8 8.3 W 7.3

Gourmet Brand 182A 8.4 7.9 1.9 9.5 Y 8.1

6800R Hybrid Sweet Corn 9.7 7.4 1.7 9.0 Y 8.0

ACX 738W Hybrid 9.3 7.7 1.9 9.3 W 8.3

Gourmet Brand 277A 8.8 7.4 1.7 9.8 BC 7.0

Millenium 9.5 7.9 1.9 6.0 W 8.0

First Snow 7.8 7.7 1.7 10.0 W 6.8

Eagle 5.0 8.3 1.9 3.0 BC 8.5

Abco Brand Var. 945Y 7.8 8.1 1.8 7.3 Y 9.0

282A Xtra Tender Brand 10.0 7.4 1.9 10.0 BC 7.3

178A Xtra Tender Brand 9.0 7.5 1.8 8.8 Y 8.0

GSS 9525 6.0 9.4 2.0 1.8 Y 5.3

Gourmet Brand 177A 5.5 7.5 1.8 8.0 Y 7.5

¹Number of ears out of 10 that had tight husk coverage over the ear tip.
²Number of ears out of 10 that had good tip fill.
³Y = yellow; W = white; BC = bicolor.
⁴Number of ears out of 10 that had straight rows of kernels.

Table 3. Ear quality characteristics of supersweet corn varieties, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar Cooked Corn Comments

Pericarp Tenderness¹ (1-4) Kernel Tenderness²(1-4) Sweetness³ (1-4)

Attribute WSS 0987 2.5 2.0 3.0 Attractive husk, short tassels in ears, deep kernels

Tahoe 2.5 2.0 3.5 Attractive husk and ear, small kernel, tassels in ear tip

Attribute BSS 0977 1.5 2.0 2.5 Attractive husk, some ears with tassels in the ends

Attribute WSS 0966 2.0 2.0 3.3 Dark green husk, attractive ear

Morning Star 3.0 2.5 3.0 Attractive dark green husk, few tassels in the ends

Polaris 2.3 2.1 3.3 Attractive ear and husk

Rustler 3.0 2.0 2.0

Max (HMX 8392S) 3.5 2.0 3.0 Small kernels, nice flavor

Gourmet Brand 276A 3.0 2.0 2.8 A lot of secondary ears

Candy Corner 1.0 1.5 2.5

Shooting Star 2.0 2.0 2.5 Attractive ear and husk, short flags

Bandit 1.5 2.5 3.0 Large ears, dark green attractive husk

Gourmet Brand 272A 3.1 2.0 3.3 Attractive ear, difficult to husk

Summer Sweet 7631 3.0 2.0 3.0 Attractive husk

Summer Sweet 8101R 3.0 2.0 2.5 Attractive husk, some tassels in ends

Zenith 2.8 2.5 3.3

Extra Tender 275A 2.5 2.3 2.8 Attractive husk and ear

Gourmet Brand 378A 2.5 2.5 3.2 Attractive husk and ear, deep kernels

382A Xtra Tender Brand 4.0 4.0 3.2

WSS 9870 2.0 2.0 3.4 Attractive husk, long flags, short tassels in ear ends

Summer Sweet 7650 2.0 2.0 3.0 Attractive ear, small kernels

Summer Sweet 8102R 3.0 3.0 3.2

Winstar 2.0 2.0 2.9 Attractive husk and ear, good corn flavor

Boreal 3.0 3.0 3.0 Some have short tassels in ears

Snowstorm 2.0 2.0 3.5 All ears slightly bent, unattractive husk

White Saturn 2.5 2.5 3.0 Attractive husk, tight shucks, short flags, some tassels

278A Extra Tender Brand 2.5 2.5 3.2 Nice shuck, some tassels in the ends

372A Xtra Tender Brand 2.5 2.2 3.0 Many lost to raccoons

Camas 3.0 2.5 3.0 Ears are crooked

Tethys 3.3 2.0 3.0

Mirai 2.0 3.0 3.0

Gourmet Brand 175A 3.8 2.0 3.3 Attractive, has long flags, some with tassels in ends

Obsession 3.0 2.5 3.5 Attractive husk and ears

Abco Brand Var. 946BC 3.0 2.5 2.0 Attractive husk

First Class 2.8 2.5 3.0 Nice green husk, easy to husk, heavy raccoon damage

Ice Queen 2.0 1.5 2.9 Easy to shuck

Gourmet Brand 182A 3.0 2.0 3.0 Attractive, dark green husks

6800R Hybrid Sweet Corn 2.8 2.5 3.5 Small ear, big shucks, attractive ear

ACX 738W Hybrid 2.5 2.3 3.1 Attractive husk and ear

Gourmet Brand 277A 3.0 2.8 3.4 Attractive ear and husk, tight shuck

Millenium 2.0 2.5 3.6 Husk not attractive

First Snow 3.0 3.0 3.3 Attractive ear

Eagle 2.8 2.3 2.8 Nice corn flavor

Abco Brand Var. 945Y 2.5 2.0 3.5 Attractive husk

282A Xtra Tender Brand 2.0 2.5 3.0

178A Xtra Tender Brand 3.3 2.3 2.9 Some ears flattened, very attractive when cooked

GSS 9525 3.0 4.0 3.5 Very large ear

Gourmet Brand 177A 3.8 2.3 3.0 Attractive, small kernels, nice flavor

¹1 = tough, 4 = tender.
²1 = crisp, 4 = creamy and tender.
³1 = starchy, 4 = very sweet; ratings are based on one microwaved ear.

Supersweet Corn Evaluations in Eastern Kentucky, 2003

Terry Jones and Charles T. Back, Department of Horticulture, Robinson Station

Introduction

Sweet corn remains a very popular item at roadside markets. This research was undertaken to evaluate supersweet corn varieties that may be suitable for production in Eastern Kentucky.

Methods

Forty-eight supersweet (sh₂) corn cultivars were planted by hand on 28 May (early planting) and 24 June (late planting) 2003. Plots consisted of a row 20-ft. long of each cultivar replicated four times in a randomized block design. Rows were spaced 3 ft. apart, and 100 seeds were planted for each plot of a cultivar. One day after planting, 2 pt of Dual Magnum was applied preemergence to control weeds. Each replication received two applications of ammonium nitrate for a total of 424 lb/A (140 pounds actual nitrogen). Soil test results (Table 1) showed that additional lime, phosphorus, and potassium were needed. Therefore, 3 T lime, 40 lb N, 38 lb P₂O_5, and 32 lb K₂O (all rates per acre) were applied prior to planting.

The plots were side dressed (50 lb N) when plants were approximately 14 in. tall and when plants were 30 in. tall. Supplemental overhead irrigation was applied once. Pounce 3.2 EC was applied every five days during silking to reduce worm problems.

In evaluating and ranking cultivars, points were awarded based on plant stand, husk coverage, tip fill, commercial acceptability, and yield.

Results

This was a good year to evaluate sweet corn cultivars for pollination and ear fill under extremely humid and wet weather. We experienced wet weather during most of the 2003 growing season. Quicksand was among the wettest locations in the state, having 25.8 in. of rain between April and mid-August.

Despite wet conditions, the 2003 sweet corn crop did very well. The cool, wet weather of late summer encouraged fungal leafspot and virus problems. We were able to determine which cultivars were tolerant and thus suitable for late season production. Excessive rain occurred shortly after planting, and some supersweet cultivars had poor germination and reduced stands (Table 2). Viruses, Northern Corn Leaf Blight, Southern Corn Leaf Blight, and Gray Leaf Spot were severe during 2003. Because wet weather prevailed during most of the growing season, only one irrigation was required on the late-planted corn. Some supersweet corn cultivars performed very well in both the early and late plantings (Tables 2, 3, and 4).

Max (HMX83925), Attribute WSS0966, Rustler, and Gourmet Brand 182A were rated as the four top yielding, best quality, early-planted yellow sweet corn cultivars (Table 2). The four best yielding late-planted cultivars were Rustler, Max (HMX8392S), Bandit, and Morning Star (Table 3).

Attribute BSS0977, Shooting Star, Obsession, and 282 Extra Tender Brand were the best early bicolor sweet corns (Table 2). The four best late-planted bicolor sweet corns were Attribute BSS0977, Obsession, Candy Corner, and Shooting Star (Table 3).

Ice Queen, WSS9870, Tahoe, and Gourmet Brand 378A were the four best early-planted, white cultivars giving commercially acceptable yields of attractive, high-quality ears (Table 2). The best late-planted white cultivars were WSS9870, Gourmet Brand 378A, Ice Queen, and Summer Sweet 8101R. (Table 3).

Based on total points earned from performance in the early and late planting (Table 4), the top 11 cultivars were Attribute BSS0977 (bicolor, BC), Rustler (yellow, Y), WSS9870 (white, W), Max (Y), Ice Queen (W), Shooting Star (BC), Gourmet Brand 378A (W), Obsession (BC), Summer Sweet 7650 (Y), Candy Corner (BC), and Attribute WSS0966 (Y). Sweet corn cultivar selection should take into consideration the cultivar's ability to produce over an extended planting season where weather and changes in disease pressure may drastically change performance.

Table 1. 2003 Sweet corn cultivar trial soil test results.

pH Buffer pH P K Ca Mg Zn

5.65 6.48 50 393 2793 195 7.4

Table 2. 2003 Early sweet corn plant characteristics and yield components, Robinson Station, Quicksand, Kentucky.

Cultivar Name¹ Seed Source Plant Stand² Husk Coverage³ Tip Fill^4,6 Disease Rating Commercial Acceptability^5,6 Dozen Ears/acre Early Points⁷ Rank Based on Points

Attribute BSS 0977 (BC) SY 90 10.0 10.0 0.00 5.0 2511 3646 1

Ice Queen (W) HR/HM 82 10.0 9.3 0.00 5.0 2360 3486 2

MAX (HMX 83925) (Y) HM 85 9.8 9.0 0.00 5.0 2360 3466 3

Shooting Star (BC) HM 84 10.0 9.0 0.00 5.0 2208 3461 4

WSS 9870 (W) SY 82 10.0 10.0 0.00 4.0 2118 3427 5

Attribute WSS 0966 (Y) SY 78 9.8 10.0 0.00 4.5 2118 3412 6

Rustler (Y) HM 76 10.0 9.5 0.00 5.0 2027 3408 7

Gourmet Brand 182 A (Y) ST 96 8.8 10.0 0.00 3.0 2057 3336 8

Tahoe (W) SW/SY 84 10.0 9.5 0.00 3.0 2420 3327 9

Gourmet Brand 378 A (W) ST 90 8.5 9.5 0.00 4.0 2178 3313 10

Summer Sweet 7650 (Y) AC 89 10.0 8.5 0.00 3.0 2118 3252 11

Zenith (Y) HM 84 9.5 9.5 0.00 3.0 1966 3242 12

Boreal (Y) SY 85 8.8 10.0 0.00 3.0 2148 3240 13

Obsession (BC) RU/ST 84 9.5 9.0 0.00 3.0 2148 3205 14

Winstar (Y) SY 91 10.0 8.0 0.00 2.5 1997 3160 15

282A Extra Tender Brand (BC) RU 74 9.5 9.5 0.00 3.0 1966 3142 16

Abco Brand Var. 945Y (Y) AC 83 9.0 9.5 0.00 3.0 1603 3140 17

Candy Corner (BC) HM 59 9.0 9.5 0.00 5.0 1755 3115 18

278A Extra Tender Brand (BC) SI/SW 84 9.0 8.5 0.00 3.0 1997 3095 19

Polaris (BC) HM 73 9.0 9.3 0.00 3.0 2178 3078 20

Bandit (Y) HM 56 10.0 8.8 0.00 5.0 1240 3064 21

Morning Star (Y) HR/HM 58 10.0 9.5 0.00 4.0 1331 3063 22

Tethys (BC) SY/RU 89 8.5 8.5 0.00 3.0 1543 3044 23

Abco Brand Var. 946 BC (BC) AC 73 9.5 9.0 0.00 3.0 1634 3043 24

Summer Sweet 8102 R (BC) AC 71 9.0 8.8 0.00 3.5 1997 3035 25

382A Extra Tender Brand (W) SW 68 9.0 8.8 0.00 3.0 1724 2922 26

Camas (BC) SY 70 9.5 8.0 0.00 3.0 1664 2911 27

ACX 738W (W) AC 66 9.5 9.0 0.00 2.0 1966 2907 28

White Saturn (W) SW 58 9.5 9.5 0.00 3.0 1210 2896 29

Gourmet Brand 175 A (Y) ST 93 6.5 9.3 0.00 1.3 2239 2854 30

Attribute WSS 0987 (W) HM 69 8.5 8.5 0.00 3.0 1573 2847 31

Summer Sweet 7631 (W) AC 64 9.5 8.3 0.00 3.0 1301 2845 32

Extra Tender Brand-275A (BC) SI 78 8.0 8.5 0.00 2.0 2087 2834 33

Summer Sweet 8101 R (W) AC 69 8.0 9.0 0.00 2.8 1361 2796 34

Gourmet Brand 277 A (BC) ST/RU/HR 70 7.0 9.5 0.00 2.0 1876 2733 35

Gourmet Brand 276 A (BC) ST 59 9.0 8.0 0.00 2.5 1603 2700 36

Gourmet Brand 272 A (BC) ? 79 6.5 9.0 0.00 1.0 2178 2653 37

Gourmet Brand 177 A (Y) ST 67 7.0 8.5 0.00 2.5 1392 2604 38

First Class (W) SW 52 8.5 9.0 0.00 2.0 1301 2600 39

GSS 9525 (Y) SY 61 9.5 6.5 0.00 2.0 1361 2541 40

Millenium (W) SW 44 10.0 8.0 0.00 2.0 908 2526 41

178A Xtra Tender Brand (Y) RU 73 7.3 8.3 0.00 1.0 1361 2516 42

372 A Xtra Tender Brand (W) HR 65 7.5 8.8 0.00 1.0 1271 2502 43

6800 R (Y) AC 85 6.0 7.5 0.00 1.0 1513 2451 44

Mirai (Y) SI 35 10.0 8.5 0.00 1.0 787 2374 45

Eagle (BC) RU 51 8.0 7.3 0.00 1.0 1059 2236 46

Snowstorm (W) ST 64 6.0 6.0 0.00 2.0 1482 2188 47

First Snow (W) SW 37 5.0 7.5 0.00 1.0 696 1790 48

¹BC = bicolor, W = White, Y = Yellow.
²Plant stand is percent emergence of 100 seeds.
³ Husk coverage: 1 = poor, 10 = excellent.
⁴ Number of ears out of 10 that had good tip fill.
⁵ Commercial acceptability: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent.
⁶ Based on 10 ears of corn.
⁷ Points obtained (rank) = (10 x stand) + (100 x husk coverage) + (100 x tip fill) + (100 x commercial acceptability) + (yield/10).

Table 3. 2003 Late sweet corn plant characteristics and yield components, Robinson Station, Quicksand, Kentucky.

Cultivar Name¹ Seed Source Plant Stand² Husk Coverage³ Tip Fill^4,6 Disease Rating Commercial Acceptability^5,6 Dozen Ears/acre Early Points⁷ Rank Based on Points

Rustler (Y) HM 75 10.0 10.0 0.0 5.0 2178 3468 1

Attribute BSS 0977 (BC) SY 75 10.0 10.0 1.3 5.0 1664 3416 2

WSS 9870 (W) SY 77 10.0 10.0 2.3 4.5 1392 3354 3

Max (HMX 83925) (Y) HM 63 10.0 9.5 1.0 5.0 1785 3253 4

Obsession (BC) RU/ST 62 9.5 10.0 0.0 5.0 1694 3239 5

Candy Corner (BC) HM 74 10.0 8.5 0.6 5.0 1513 3236 6

Gourmet Brand 378 A (W) ST 75 9.0 9.0 0.0 4.0 2420 3192 7

Shooting Star (BC) HM 67 10.0 9.0 1.0 4.5 1482 3163 8

Bandit (Y) HM 55 10.0 9.5 1.8 5.0 1543 3154 9

Morning Star (Y) HR/HM 61 10.0 9.5 1.0 4.0 1603 3120 10

Summer Sweet 7650 (Y) AC 84 10.0 8.3 0.5 3.0 1361 3101 11

Ice Queen (W) HR/HM 71 9.0 8.5 1.0 5.0 1331 3093 12

Polaris (BC) HM 57 10.0 9.5 1.5 4.0 1482 3068 13

Winstar (Y) SY 83 10.0 8.3 2.5 2.5 1422 3042 14

Camas (BC) SY 77 9.3 9.0 2.8 3.0 1392 3029 15

Summer Sweet 8102 R (BC) AC 73 8.5 9.3 0.8 3.5 1664 3021 16

282A Extra Tender Brand (BC) RU 61 9.5 9.3 1.0 3.0 1755 2955 17

278A Extra Tender Brand (BC) SI/SW 68 9.5 8.5 1.5 3.0 1664 2946 18

Tethys (BC) SY/RU 72 8.3 9.0 1.3 3.0 1361 2876 19

Attribute WSS 0966 (Y) SY 54 9.3 9.0 2.5 4.0 968 2857 20

Summer Sweet 8101R (W) AC 66 8.0 9.5 0.8 3.0 1180 2823 21

Gourmet Brand 182 A (Y) ST 83 7.5 9.5 1.0 2.0 726 2803 22

Gourmet Brand 276 A (BC) ST 62 9.0 9.0 2.3 2.3 1422 2787 23

Attribute WSS 0987 (W) SY 68 8.0 9.0 1.5 3.0 1029 2783 24

GSS 9525 (Y) SY 79 9.0 8.0 2.0 2.0 817 2772 25

Millenium (W) SW 53 10.0 9.0 1.0 2.0 1029 2733 26

Abco Brand Var. 946BC (BC) AC 77 9.0 9.0 3.0 1.0 605 2731 27

Boreal (W) SY 49 9.0 10.0 2.0 3.0 363 2726 28

White Saturn (W) SW 49 9.0 9.0 2.0 3.0 1150 2705 29

Extra Tender Brand 275A (BC) SI 87 8.5 8.0 3.0 1.0 877 2703 30

Zenith (Y) HM 63 10.0 7.5 2.0 2.5 726 2703 31

Tahoe (W) SW/SY 55 9.0 9.0 1.0 3.0 303 2680 32

Gourmet Brand 272A (BC) ? 78 8.0 8.3 2.0 1.5 1059 2656 33

Abco Brand Var. 945Y (Y) AC 78 6.0 9.0 2.3 1.3 1271 2527 34

First Snow (W) SW 65 8.0 9.0 0.0 1.0 545 2504 35

382A Xtra Tender Brand (W) SW 34 9.0 9.5 2.5 2.0 726 2463 36

ACX 738W (W) AC 68 8.8 7.0 2.0 1.0 1059 2456 37

Summer Sweet 7631 (W) AC 48 8.0 8.0 1.5 3.0 545 2434 38

First Class (W) SW 57 8.5 8.5 2.0 1.0 454 2415 39

Mirai (Y) SI 48 8.0 8.5 1.8 2.0 605 2386 40

6800R (Y) AC 74 7.5 7.5 2.0 1.0 363 2371 41

Snowstorm (W) ST 75 6.0 7.0 1.0 2.0 666 2317 42

Gourmet Brand 175A (Y) ST 67 6.0 9.0 3.0 1.0 424 2307 43

178 Xtra Tender Brand (Y) RU 83 5.5 7.8 3.0 1.0 363 2291 44

Eagle (BC) RU 59 7.0 7.0 2.0 1.0 242 2114 45

Gourmet Brand 177A (Y) ST 63 6.0 7.0 1.8 1.0 575 2087 46

Gourmet Brand 277A (BC) ST/RU/HR 68 7.0 5.0 2.0 1.0 605 2041 47

372A Xtra Tender Brand (W) HR 50 5.0 7.0 3.0 1.0 182 1818 48

¹BC = bicolor, W = White, Y = Yellow.
²Plant stand is percent emergence of 100 seeds.
³ Husk coverage: 1 = poor, 10 = excellent.
⁴ Number of ears out of 10 that had good tip fill.
⁵ Commercial acceptability: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent.
⁶ Based on 10 ears of corn.
⁷ Points obtained (rank) = (10 x stand) + (100 x husk coverage) + (100 x tip fill) + (100 x commercial acceptability) + (yield/10).

Table 4. 2003 average sweet corn plant characteristics and yield components, Robinson Station, Quicksand, Kentucky.

Cultivar Name¹ Seed Source Plant Stand² Husk Coverage³ Tip Fill^4,6 Disease Rating Commercial Acceptability^5,6 Dozen Ears/acre Points⁷ Rank Based on Points

Attribute BSS 0977 (BC) SY 82 10.0 10.0 0.6 5.0 2087 3531 1

Rustler (Y) HM 75 10.0 9.8 0.0 5.0 2102 3438 2

WSS 9870 (W) SY 79 10.0 10.0 1.1 4.3 1755 3390 3

MAX (HMX 83925) (Y) HM 74 9.9 9.3 0.5 5.0 2072 3360 4

Ice Queen (W) HR/HM 79 9.7 9.0 0.3 5.0 2017 3355 5

Shooting Star (BC) HM 75 10.0 9.0 0.5 4.8 1845 3312 6

Gourmet Brand 378 A (W) ST 85 8.7 9.3 0.0 4.0 2259 3273 7

Obsession (BC) RU/ST 77 9.5 9.3 0.0 3.7 1997 3216 8

Summer Sweet 7650 (Y) AC 87 10.0 8.4 0.3 3.0 1739 3176 9

Candy Corner (BC) HM 66 9.5 9.0 0.3 5.0 1634 3176 10

Attribute WSS 0966 (Y) SY 66 9.5 9.5 1.3 4.3 1543 3134 11

Tahoe (W) SW/SY 74 9.7 9.3 0.3 3.0 1714 3111 12

Bandit (Y) HM 56 10.0 9.1 0.9 5.0 1392 3109 13

Winstar (Y) SY 87 10.0 8.1 1.3 2.5 1709 3101 14

Morning Star (Y) HR/HM 60 10.0 9.5 0.5 4.0 1467 3092 15

Polaris (BC) HM 65 9.5 9.4 0.8 3.5 1830 3073 16

Gourmet Brand 182A (Y) ST 89 8.1 9.8 0.5 2.5 1392 3069 17

Boreal (W) SY 73 8.8 10.0 0.7 3.0 1553 3069 18

282A Extra Tender Brand (BC) RU 68 9.5 9.4 0.5 3.0 1860 3049 19

Summer Sweet 8102R (BC) AC 72 8.8 9.0 0.4 3.5 1830 3028 20

278A Extra Tender Brand (BC) SI/SW 76 9.3 8.5 0.8 3.0 1830 3021 21

Zenith (Y) HM 74 9.8 8.5 1.0 2.8 1346 2972 22

Camas (BC) SY 73 9.4 8.5 1.4 3.0 1528 2970 23

Tethys (BC) SY/RU 80 8.4 8.8 0.6 3.0 1452 2960 24

Abco Brand Var. 946 BC (BC) AC 74 9.3 9.0 1.0 2.3 1291 2939 25

Abco brand Var. 945Y (Y) AC 80 7.5 9.3 1.1 2.1 1437 2834 26

White Saturn (W) SW 55 9.3 9.3 0.7 3.0 1190 2832 27

Attribute WSS 0987 (W) SY 69 8.3 8.7 0.5 3.0 1392 2826 28

Summer Sweet 8101R (W) AC 67 8.0 9.3 0.4 2.9 1271 2810 29

382A Extra Tender Brand (W) SW 56 9.0 9.0 0.8 2.7 1392 2769 30

Extra Tender Brand 275 A (BC) SI 82 8.3 8.3 1.5 1.5 1482 2768 31

Gourmet Brand 276A (BC) ST 61 9.0 8.5 1.1 2.4 1513 2744 32

Summer Sweet 7631 (W) AC 59 9.0 8.2 0.5 3.0 1049 2708 33

ACX 738W (W) AC 67 9.1 8.0 1.0 1.5 1513 2681 34

GSS 9525 (Y) SY 70 9.3 7.3 1.0 2.0 1089 2656 35

Gourmet Brand 272A (BC) ? 78 7.3 8.6 1.0 1.3 1618 2654 36

Millenium (W) SW 47 10.0 8.5 0.3 2.0 968 2613 37

Gourmet Brand 175A (Y) ST 80 6.3 9.1 1.5 1.1 1331 2581 38

First Class (W) SW 55 8.5 8.8 1.0 1.5 877 2508 39

Gourmet Brand 277A (BC) ST/RU/HR 69 7.0 8.0 0.7 1.7 1452 2502 40

6800R (Y) AC 79 6.8 7.5 1.0 1.0 938 2411 41

178A Xtra Tender Brand (Y) RU 78 6.4 8.0 1.5 1.0 862 2404 42

Mirai (Y) SI 41 9.0 8.5 0.9 1.5 696 2380 43

Gourmet Brand 177A (Y) ST 65 6.5 8.0 0.9 1.8 983 2371 44

372A Xtra Tender Brand (W) HR 60 6.7 8.2 1.0 1.0 908 2274 45

Snowstorm (W) ST 68 6.0 6.3 0.3 2.0 1210 2231 46

Eagle (BC) RU 53 7.7 7.2 0.7 1.0 787 2195 47

First Snow (W) SW 46 6.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 645 2028 48

¹BC = bicolor, W = White, Y = Yellow.
²Plant stand is percent emergence of 100 seeds.
³ Husk Coverage: 1 = poor, 10 = excellent.
⁴ Number of ears out of 10 that had good tip fill.
⁵ Commercial acceptability: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent.
⁶ Based on 10 ears of corn.
⁷ Points obtained (rank) = (10 x stand) + (100 x husk coverage) + (100 x tip fill) + (100 x commercial acceptability) + (yield/10).

Yields and Net Returns for New Muskmelon Cultivars Grown on Green and Black Plastic Mulch for Commercial Markets in Central Kentucky

Nathan N. Howell, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Athena has been the muskmelon cultivar of choice for nearly 75% of the commercial producers in the eastern portion of the United States. However, producers in Central Kentucky are looking for a new cultivar that produces more marketable melons yet maintains Athena's characteristics of high quality, disease resistance, and increased shelf life. This cultivar trial compared Athena with two similar cultivars. The cultivars were grown on black and green plastic mulch to compare yields, sugar percentage, shelf life, and pack out.

Materials and Methods

Seeds were planted in 48-count plug trays and grown in the greenhouse for 3½ weeks before transplanting on 23 May. The plastic mulch was put down 20 April, at which time annual ryegrass (70 lb/A) was sown for vegetative mulch between rows. The cultivars were planted so they were alternated within and between rows. Every other row had the same color of plastic mulch. The plot had three replications, each 60 ft. long with a plant spacing of 2 ft. in the row. Rows were 7 ft. on center. Three days before transplanting the melons, the annual ryegrass was sprayed with Roundup Ultra Max 5L (2pt/A); the plastic mulch was not sprayed. Gramaxone Extra (2 pt/A) and Curbit 3E (1 qt/A) were applied prior to vines running off the plastic. For insect control, weekly applications of Endosulfan 3EC (1 1/3 pt/A), Pounce 3.2EC (8oz/A) or Sevin 80S (1 lb/A) were alternated. For disease prevention, weekly applications of Chlorothalonil 6F (3 pt/A) or Maneb 75DF (2 lb/A) were alternated.

Preplant fertilizer was 15-30-15 (500 lb/A). On a weekly basis, 33-11-11 (25 lb/A) was applied by drip irrigation after vines began to run. In addition, 8-16-8 (10 oz/A) was applied as a foliar application eight times after vines ran. To increase sugar content, magnesium sulfate (Epsom salts_2.5 lb/A) was applied four times to the foliage. Melons were irrigated weekly at a rate of 13,500 gallons per week, equivalent to 1 acre-inch per week. Sprays and irrigation were stopped the day harvest began.

Harvest began 30 July and ran through 16 August. Muskmelons were harvested daily, and the size grade, weight, and sugar content of each muskmelon were recorded. The basis for the grading criteria was provided by a USDA grader/inspector, a representative of a large East Coast broker, and the Green River Produce Marketing Cooperative manager.

Results and Discussion

The ryegrass was a satisfactory mulch, considerably reducing weed competition. However, a high seeding rate is needed, and a second spot spray of herbicide will be needed in most situations. Installing plastic mulch at least three weeks before transplanting melons is important to kill, by solarization, any weeds that may germinate under the mulch before holes are made for transplanting, if chemical fumigation is not used. This is especially critical for the green mulch, which transmits more light, allowing greater germination of weed seed.

The three cultivars were all excellent muskmelons for local and shipping purposes (Table 1). Aphrodite was the earliest of the three and averaged nearly 1 lb larger than Athena. Aphrodite also had the highest number of marketable fruit per acre, with fewer culls than the other two varieties. The sugar percentage was also very high in Aphrodite. However, the cavity of its fruit was the largest of the three, and Aphrodite produced an oval melon that was flat on both the top and belly side, unlike Athena. Aphrodite also had an unusual stem scar after it slipped from the vine. All of these characteristics make Aphrodite less desirable as a shipping melon, compared to Athena. Nevertheless, its large size and attractive appearance would make it an excellent melon for farmers' markets or direct markets. Aphrodite could also be mixed with Athena for commercial markets, where higher yield and larger fruit are preferred.

In terms of size and shape, PXC221 was most like Athena; PXC221 was more heavily netted and was more spherical than Athena. Its seed cavity was smaller than that of Athena and, along with a tough rind, these are characteristics that would make it an excellent shipping melon. Like Aphrodite, PXC221 was more uniform in size than Athena. Sugar percentage was also excellent in PXC221 (Table 1). The problem with this cultivar was lower marketable yields due to a high cull percentage; most culls were due to cosmetic defects like odd netting. PXC221 was also the latest to be harvested. This cultivar would make an excellent local market melon with its good flavor and an excellent shipping melon with long shelf life. However, the seed will be discontinued in 2004.

Athena performed as in the past. Fruit were not as uniform and as large as desired. Athena produced many fruit that graded medium, a lower return melon in most commercial markets. Athena also had the poorest netting of the three cultivars and the highest incidence of blossom end rot. However, due to its excellent shipability and sweetness, produce buyers still demand Athena, making it the cultivar of choice for commercial producers.

There seemed to be no significant difference between yields of Aphrodite and PXC221 grown on green and black plastic mulches (Table 1). On the other hand, Athena yielded nearly 3,500 more marketable melons when grown on the green mulch compared to the black. Every cultivar had higher yield and a larger percentage of high-grade fruit on the green mulch. However, it seemed harvest was more uniform on black mulch. For example, on green mulch, the majority of the melons were harvested during the first five days. Also, all cultivars had lower sugar and weights on green mulch, but these responses may not be significant.

Projected returns for each cultivar and mulch color are presented in Table 2. The higher yield of marketable melons (a 7% yield increase in Aphrodite and PXC221) on green mulch would pay for the cost difference between green and black mulch. For Athena the 39% yield improvement would more than pay for the higher-priced green mulch. However, this cultivar-specific response to the green mulch remains unexplained, and sufficient evidence to allow recommendation of green mulch over black mulch has not as yet been obtained. Large-scale studies of the effects of green and black plastic mulch on Athena will be conducted next year.

Table 2 includes expenses, yields, and returns based on plot yields, input costs, and marketing expenses for a local marketing cooperative. Aphrodite, with high yield and percentage of large melons was the most profitable cultivar. A marketable yield of at least 6,500 melons per acre is needed to cover commercial production and marketing costs. Many growers have been unable to obtain this yield with Athena. While the potential of green plastic mulch to increase marketable yields of Athena looks promising, testing on a larger scale needs to be accomplished. In the meantime, for commercial markets that require high yields and large fruit, mixing the two cultivars Aphrodite and Athena may provide better returns.

Acknowledgment

Special thanks are extended to the Western Kentucky University, Department of Agriculture, for their cooperation in providing land and equipment resources for this research.

Yields and Net Returns for New Muskmelon Cultivars Grown on Green and Black Plastic Mulch for Commercial Markets in Central Kentucky

Table 1. Muskmelon cultivar trial yields and fruit characteristics, Bowling Green, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar
Plastic Mulch Seed Source Days to Maturity¹ Fruit Shape Net Type² Cavity Avg. Wt. (lb/fruit) Avg. Sugar (%) Large Marketable Fruit/A³ Medium Marketable Fruit/A⁴ Cull (%) Yield (cwt/A)

Aphrodite/Green SW 66 Oval md/lt large 6.5 10.9 9720 360 12.5 655

Aphrodite/Black SW 66 Oval md/lt large 7.1 11.8 8400 960 7.1 664

Athena/Green SW 68 oval/round md medium 6.1 11.7 6960 1560 10.1 520

Athena/Black SW 68 oval/round md medium 5.9 12.2 4320 840 12.2 304

PXC221/Green SW 69 round/oval md/hv small 5.9 11.6 5640 840 16.9 382

PXC221/Black SW 69 round/oval md/hv small 6.2 11.9 5400 600 21.9 372

¹ Days from transplanting to first fruit harvested.
² Net type: lt = light netting, md = medium netting, hv = heavy netting.
³ Commercially marketable melons greater than 4 lb.
⁴ Commercially marketable melons that were 4 lb.

Table 2. Projected costs and returns for three commercially marketed muskmelon cultivars grown on green and black plastic mulch.

Inputs Aphrodite
Green Mulch Aphrodite
Black Mulch Athena
Green Mulch Athena
Black Mulch PXC221
Green Mulch PXC221
Black Mulch

Plants/Transplants¹ $367 $367 $360 $360 $331 $331

Fertilizer/Lime 110 110 110 110 110 110

Plastic mulch 207 135 207 135 207 135

Drip lines 130 130 130 130 130 130

Ryegrass 20 20 20 20 20 20

Herbicides 70 70 70 70 70 70

Insecticides 230 230 230 230 230 230

Fungicides 180 180 180 180 180 180

Pollination rental 50 50 50 50 50 50

Machine² 150 150 150 150 150 150

Municipal water³ 400 400 400 400 400 400

Irrigation⁴ 180 180 180 180 180 180

Labor⁵ 1008 936 852 516 648 600

Field production cost $3102 $2958 $2939 $2531 $2706 $2586

Freight to co-op⁶ 403 374 341 206 259 240

Co-op 15% commission⁸ 1139 1040 927 564 715 667

Box/Pallet fee⁷ 996 911 811 494 626 583

Co-op labor expense⁸ 587 514 483 300 398 392

Co-op membership 50 50 50 50 50 50

Harvest bin rental 100 100 100 100 100 100

Marketing cost $3275 $2989 $2712 $1714 $2148 $2032

Total expenses 6377 5947 5651 4245 4854 4618

Yield 10,080 9360 8520 5160 6480 6000

Income co-op sales⁸ 7592 6931 6179 3762 4765 4446

Net income (loss) $1215 $984 $528 ($483) ($89) ($172)

Dollar return/Dollar input 1.19 1.17 1.09 .89 .98 .96

¹ Differences due to seed cost; production costs are the same.
² Machine rental, fuel and lube, repairs and depreciation.
³ Based on 13,500 gallons @3 cents for 10 weeks.
⁴ Includes cost of fertilizer and five-year amortization of irrigation system.
⁵ Based on yield @10 cents per muskmelon; includes unpaid family labor.
⁶ Based on yield @4 cents per muskmelon.
⁷ Based on 110 large count and 150 medium count @$11.00 box/pallet.
⁸ Based on 2002 yearly averages of a local marketing cooperative’s per muskmelon cost/returns: 5.1 cents per melon labor cost including culls; returns of 76 cents per large melon; returns of 57 cents per medium melon.

Specialty Melon Variety Evaluation, 2003

John Strang, April Satanek, John Snyder, Phillip Bush, and Chris Smigell, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Fifteen specialty melon varieties were evaluated in this trial. These included honeydew, canary, Sicilian, Piel de Sapo, and specialty hybrid types of melons. This trial was designed to evaluate a number of different specialty melons under Kentucky conditions.

Materials and Methods

All varieties were seeded on 25 April into cell packs (72 cells per tray) at the Horticulture Research Farm in Lexington. Cell packs were set on a mist bench with bottom heat until seeds germinated, then moved to a drier, cooler bench in the greenhouse where the seedlings were thinned to one per cell. Plants were set into black plastic-mulched, raised beds using a waterwheel setter on 27 May. Each plot was 21 ft. long, with seven plants set 3 ft. apart within the row and 6 ft. between rows. Each plot was replicated four times in a randomized complete block design with 6 ft. between replications. Drip irrigation was used to provide water and fertilizer as needed.

One hundred pounds N/A as ammonium nitrate were applied and incorporated into the field prior to bed shaping and planting. The plot was fertigated with a total of 9 lb N/A as ammonium nitrate divided into eight applications over the season. The systemic insecticide Platinum 2 SC was applied with a hand sprayer as a drench to the base of each plant after planting, using the maximum rate of 8 fl oz/A. Foliar insecticide applications during the season included Sevin, Capture, and Pounce. Fungicide applications included foliar applications of Bravo, fixed copper, and Quadris. Curbit preemergent herbicide was applied and incorporated between the rows, just as the vines began to grow off the plastic mulch. One fruit from each replication was measured and evaluated for flavor, soluble solids, interior color, rind color, and net type.

Results

The growing season was cool, and there were many rainy periods providing intense disease pressure. Even though the melons were on raised beds, the early season rain and cool temperatures produced a nutritional deficiency that turned the edges of older leaves chlorotic with some necrosis. This was evident in many cucurbit fields in Kentucky this season. Very little virus was observed in the plot. Vine cover was thick, with little plant death. Fruit were generally harvested twice a week. Despite the rain, melon sugar contents were high, probably due to the cool weather. Harvest and evaluation data for these melons are in Tables 1 and 2.

Honeydew. All but the White Skinned HD No. 6 performed very well, and all had excellent flavor and sugar contents. Sundew had the highest yield of this group, closely followed by Honey Brew, as occurred in last season's trial. This is the third year in a row that Sundew and Honey Brew have been the top yielding honeydew melons in these trials. Both of these varieties have large fruit in the 6 to 7 lb range. Sundew was rated as having the most attractive rind and had a low number of culls. Honey Pearl and San Juan have smaller fruit, in the 3 to 4 lb range. Honey Pearl and Orange Blossom have creamy white and orange flesh, respectively. All other varieties have light green flesh. Both Honey Pearl and Orange Blossom had low cull numbers. Orange Blossom also looked good in this trial, although it was a little lower yielding than several of the other varieties. The orange-fleshed honeydews were very popular at the local farmers' market. The Honey Orange variety in the observation trial (see report in this publication) had a higher flavor rating, sugar content, and yield than Orange Blossom in this trial; however, both will need to be grown side by side and evaluated. Honeydews were harvested when the exterior exhibited a cream blush and the ground spot was a cream color.

Canary. Golden Beauty and Dorado again performed very well this season. Golden Beauty had no culls, while Dorado had 6% culls. However, Dorado was rated, as it was last season, as having a slightly better flavor. Both varieties were very attractive and uniform in size. Sugar Nut was evaluated for the first time. It had an excellent yield, very uniform fruit size, low cull percentage and was roughly half the size of Dorado and Golden Beauty. However, Sugar Nut showed some longitudinal checking on its surface as it ripened, making it slightly less attractive.

Sicilian. Branco Perfecto was the only Sicilian melon evaluated this season. This melon has a wrinkled rind, which makes it stand out. Fruit quality and sugar content were very good. This season this variety showed some surface checking at maturity and a higher number of culls.

Piel de Sapo. Sancho was judged the best-tasting melon in this trial and was very highly rated in informal taste tests. It sold very well at the Lexington Farmers' Market and was requested by returning customers. The fruit has a dark green exterior, which was very attractive. This variety had 14% culls, primarily due to rind cracking.

Specialty hybrid. Sprite and Angel were the two specialty hybrid varieties evaluated. Sprite had outstanding flavor, quality, appearance, and fruit uniformity. The 6% cull rate was due to cracking and some decay at the blossom end of the fruit. Sprite was very acceptable to consumers in retail markets and is highly recommended. Angel was a very attractive melon, with high sugar content, but it had a grainy, objectionable flesh texture.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the following persons for their hard work and assistance in the successful completion of this trial: Dave Lowry, Larry Blandford, Derek Law, Audrey Horrall, Barry Duncil, Courtney Bobrowski, Curtis Gregory, Justin Clark, Selvaprasanna Sanjeevijulian, Ashok Swaminathon, Saravanna Kannan, Kalyan Tangirala, Teerasak Tiamdao (Oa), Tanasit Laosomboon (Koh), Spencer Helsabeck, and John C. Clark.

Table 1. Specialty melon variety trial yield and fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Variety Melon Type¹ Seed Source Days to Harvest Yield (cwt/A)² Avg. No. Melons/A Avg Wt./Fruit (lb) Culls (%) Outside Measurements Flesh Thickness (in.) Seed Cavity

Length (in.) Width (in.) Length (in.) Width (in.)

Sundew HD SS 85 697 a 11236 6.2 2 7.9 7.2 1.9 5.1 3.6

Honey Brew HD AC/RU 90 532 bcd 7779 6.9 9 8.9 7.7 1.8 5.9 4.0

Honey Pearl HD JS 80 408 cde 9766 4.2 3 7.7 6.6 1.6 5.1 3.3

San Juan HD RU 85 407 cde 13224 3.1 6 6.3 6.0 1.9 4.0 2.6

Honeydew Green Fleshed HD RU 110 406 cde 7519 5.4 6 8.3 7.6 1.7 5.4 4.6

Sweet Delight HD RU 90 391 de 5531 7.2 5 8.4 7.9 1.8 5.6 4.7

White Skinned HD SI 85 376 e 5964 6.2 28 8.3 7.8 2.2 5.2 3.8

Orange Blossom HD HR 82 351 e 8556 4.1 2 7.4 6.1 1.9 4.6 2.4

Sugar Nut CA JS 77 654 ab 24373 3.0 0 6.4 5.6 1.8 3.8 2.4

Golden Beauty CA JS 80 533 bcd 8384 6.4 0 9.6 6.7 2.0 6..5 3.2

Dorado CA HR/SW 85 492 cde 8470 5.8 6 9.2 6.9 1.8 6.2 3.4

Branco Perfecto SC SW 92 544 bc 6655 8.2 15 9.7 7.8 1.9 6.5 4.1

Sancho PD RG/SY 90 460 cde 6050 7.5 14 11.5 6.9 2.0 8.1 3.2

Angel SH HR 80 416 cde 13224 3.1 3 6.3 5.8 1.8 3.8 2.6

Sprite SH CF 90 381 e 27744 1.3 6 5.1 4.2 1.0 3.4 2.2

¹ Melon type: HD = honeydew, CA = Canary, SC = Sicilian, PD = Piel de Sapo, SH = specialty hybrid.
² Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Duncan Waller LSD P = 0.05). Cwt = hundred weights (100 lb units) per acre.

Table 2. Specialty melon trial fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Variety Flavor
(1-5)¹ Sugar (%) Interior Color² Rind Color³ Fruit Shape Cracking
(1-4)⁴ Net Type⁵ Comments

Sundew 3.8 12.0 cr-lg lg/cr round 1.5 na Doesn't slip, very attractive rind

Honey Brew 3.7 13.8 cr-lg lg/cr oval 1 na Doesn't slip

Honey Pearl 3.8 14.7 cr-wh lg/cr oblong 1 na Doesn't slip, has small brown spots

San Juan 3.8 14.6 cr-lg lg/cr oval 1 na Doesn't slip, some checking when ripe

Honeydew Green Fleshed 4.3 13.8 cr-lg lg/cr oval 1 na Doesn't slip, some checking when ripe

Sweet Delight 4.1 13.2 cr-lg lg/cr oval 1 na Doesn't slip, rind is slightly wrinkled

White Skinned HD #6 3.3 14.0 cr-lg lg/cr oval 3.8 na Doesn't slip, good taste, many fruit

Orange Blossom 3.7 12.9 or lg/cr oval 1.2 na Doesn't slip, very firm flesh, small cavity, very orange flesh, ripe when ground spot slightly orange

Sugar Nut 3.5 13.8 cr dy almond 1 na Doesn't slip, some longitudinal checking when ripe, uniform fruit size, harvest when rind is golden yellow

Golden Beauty 3.9 13.1 cr dy almond 1 na Doesn't slip, good taste, very attractive

Dorado 4.1 14.5 cr dy almond 1 na Doesn't slip, excellent taste, very attractive rind, uniform fruit size, harvest

Branco Perfecto 3.8 15.2 cr-lg lg/cr round 1.4 na Doesn't slip, some checking at maturity, wrinkled rind, uniform fruit size, ripe

Sancho 4.4 13.1 cr-wh gr w/dg streaks almond 1.5 na Doesn't slip, excellent taste, wrinkled rind, dark yellow groundspot when ripe

Angel 2.8 17.8 wh yl round 1 md Doesn't slip, nice melon taste but unpleasant grainy flesh, attractive rind, ripe when rind is light yellow

Sprite 3.9 16.2 wh cr oval 1 na Doesn't slip, yellow spots on exterior at maturity, very attractive rind, very uniform fruit size, ripe when small checks appear around blossom end

¹Flavor: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent, sweet taste, pleasant texture.
²Interior color: lo = light orange, cr = cream, lg = light green, wh = white.
³Rind color: lg = light green, gr = green, dg = dark green, yl = yellow, dy = dark yellow, tn = tan.
⁴Cracking: 1 = little or no cracking, 4 = severe cracking and fruit splitting.
⁵Net type: lt = light netting, md = medium netting, na = none.

Specialty Melon Variety Observation Trial

John Strang, April Satanek, and Chris Smigell, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

This trial was designed to screen 24 different specialty melon varieties under Kentucky growing conditions. Honeydew, galia, charentais, canary, and Christmas melons were evaluated in this trial.

Materials and Methods

All varieties were seeded on 25 April into cell packs (72 cells per tray) at the Horticulture Research Farm in Lexington. Cell packs were set on a mist bench with bottom heat until seeds germinated, then moved to a drier, cooler bench in the greenhouse where the seedlings were thinned to one per cell. Plants were set into black plastic-mulched, raised beds using a waterwheel setter on 27 May. A single plot of each variety was planted. Each was 36 ft. long, with 12 plants set 3 ft. apart within the row and 6 ft. between rows. Drip irrigation provided water and fertilizer as needed.

One hundred pounds N/A as ammonium nitrate were applied and incorporated into the field prior to bed shaping and planting. The plot was fertigated with a total of 9 lb N/A as ammonium nitrate divided into five applications. The systemic insecticide Platinum 2 SC was applied with a hand sprayer as a drench to the base of each plant after planting, using the maximum rate of 8 fl oz/A. Foliar insecticide applications during the season included Sevin, Capture, and Pounce. Fungicide applications included foliar applications of Bravo, fixed copper, and Quadris. Curbit preemergent herbicide was applied and incorporated between the rows just as the vines began to grow off the plastic mulch. Two average-sized fruit of each variety were measured and evaluated for flavor, soluble solids, interior color, and rind color as each variety reached harvest maturity.

Results and Discussion

The growing season was cool, and there were many rainy periods providing intense disease pressure. Early in the season the edges of older leaves turned chlorotic with some necrosis. This was evident in many cucurbit fields in Kentucky this season. These symptoms were probably nutritional deficiencies resulting from the many early season rains and cool temperatures. Very little virus was observed in the plot. Vine cover was thick, with little plant death. Fruit were generally harvested twice a week. Despite the rain, melon sugar contents were high, probably due to the cool weather. Variety evaluation results can be found in Tables 1 and 2.

Galia melons. Creme de la Creme, Galileo, Vicar, Arava, HSR 4238, and Sweet Dreams were the best galia melons. All had excellent eating quality. Creme de la Creme, Galileo, and Vicar had very low cull rates. Galileo had a slightly stronger but pleasant musk flavor.

All of these varieties were very attractive for galia melons, with the exception of Sweet Dream, our standard for quality. Galia melons must be harvested as soon as the rind starts to turn yellow. Otherwise, the melons rapidly become overripe and unmarketable. Galia melons do not have a long shelf life. After the initial melon set was harvested, most varieties continued producing fruit, although the number and quality harvested decreased.

Honeydews. Fantasma, a green-fleshed honeydew, and Honey Orange, an orange-fleshed honeydew, were the best of the four varieties evaluated. Both had excellent flavor, very high sugar contents, attractive rinds, and minimal cracking. Fantasma was a large melon averaging 6.9 lb. Honey Orange did not have any culls. The orange-fleshed honeydews were top sellers at the local farmers' market.

Ananas. Three of the ananas melons, HSR 4208, HSR 2528, and HSR 4220 looked very promising. All had excellent eating quality, were uniform in size, and were fairly large, averaging around 6 to 7 lb. They were all very attractive and had a light to medium netting. Ananas melons ripen rapidly in the field, necessitating frequent harvests. These should be harvested at the first sign of exterior yellowing. Like galia melons, storage life is fairly short.

Canary. One canary melon was evaluated in this trial, HMX 1602. The yield was very high, and there were no cull fruit. This variety was very attractive and was very uniform in size, although it had a little surface checking. The sugar content and flavor, while good, were below those of the canary melons in the replicated trial.

Charentais. Two charentais melon varieties were evaluated. The Serenade variety performed very well. It had excellent eating quality, was uniform in size, and produced no culls. Fruit cracking was minimal. Severe fruit cracking is a characteristic of charentais melons, and our past experience has almost convinced us that these could not be grown profitably in Kentucky. The rind on Serenade was not as attractive as that on some other varieties, and it developed a creamy exterior with dark green spots at maturity.

Christmas. The St. Nick Christmas melon, which we have tested in the past, again produced high-quality melons. However, fruit cracking was considerably more severe than in the past. This variety has a very crunchy flesh that a number of consumers find objectionable because they do not expect this in a melon. Others find this crunchiness delightful.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the following for their hard work and assistance in the successful completion of this trial: Dave Lowry, Phillip Bush, Larry Blandford, Derek Law, Audrey Horrall, Barry Duncil, Courtney Bobrowski, Curtis Gregory, Justin Clark, Selvaprasanna Sanjeevijulian, Ashok Swaminathon, Saravanna Kannan, Kalyan Tangirala, Teerasak Tiamdao (Oa), Tanasit Laosomboon (Koh), Spencer Helsabeck, and John C. Clark.

Table 1. Specialty melon fruit characteristics from single plots, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Variety Melon Type¹ Seed Source Days to Harvest Yield (cwt/A)² Avg. No. Melons/A Avg. Wt./Fruit (lb) Culls³ (%) Exterior Fruit Flesh Thickness
(in.)
Seed Cavity

Length (in.) Width (in.) Length (in.) Width (in.)

HSR 4036 GA HL 75 928.2 15557 6.0 15 6.9 6.5 2.0 4.0 5.6

HSR 4022 GA HL 85 835.7 16939 5.1 21 7.5 6.5 2.0 4.1 3.1

Vanilla Ice GA BU 80 818.4 21088 3.9 0 6.6 6.8 2.0 4.0 3.1

Creme de la Creme GA BU 75 783.0 20051 3.9 2 5.9 6.5 2.0 3.9 3.0

Galileo GA RG/SY 87 769.2 23508 3.3 0 5.4 5.8 1.6 3.0 2.8

Arava GA JS 77 758.8 18668 4.1 10 6.3 6.5 2.1 3.5 2.9

Sweet Dream GA SW 79 752.9 12445 6.1 10 7.3 6.9 2.3 3.9 2.9

Vicar GA RG/SY 86 700.0 16939 4.1 2 7.3 6.6 2.0 4.4 3.3

HSR 4238 GA HL 75 652.5 13137 4.8 11 6.9 6.2 1.9 3.8 2.4

HSR 4261 GA HL 85 567.8 14519 3.9 0 6.4 6.2 1.8 3.8 2.7

HSR 4278 GA HL 85 505.6 13828 3.7 15 7.2 6.6 2.0 4.1 2.5

Fantasma HD HM 85 758.8 11062 6.9 14 8.9 7.6 2.0 5.4 3.9

Honey Orange HD JS 80 733.7 15211 4.8 0 7.5 6.5 1.5 5.0 3.3

Morning Ice HD HM 85 552.3 7260 7.6 32 10.0 8.2 1.9 6.7 4.3

Super Dew Hybrid HD BU 80 427.8 9334 4.6 18 7.5 6.8 1.5 5.0 3.8

HSR 4208 AN HL 100 682.8 11408 6.0 3 9.5 7.2 1.6 6.2 4.1

HSR 2528 AN HL 95 582.5 10025 5.8 15 9.6 7.1 1.6 6.9 4.0

HSR 4220 AN HL 100 575.6 7951 7.2 18 8.0 7.0 2.0 5.1 3.4

HSR 4038 AN HL 100 517.7 11062 4.7 26 9.9 7.0 1.8 7.2 3.8

HSR 4018 AN HL 95 347.4 4840 7.2 52 9.1 7.4 1.9 6.3 3.7

HMX 1602 CA HM 85 740.7 20051 3.7 0 8.8 5.4 1.5 5.2 2.4

Serenade CH JS 78 701.1 37336 1.9 0 4.4 5.0 1.5 2.5 2.1

Sweetie #6 CH JS 75 -³ -³ -³ -³ 4.7 4.4 1.0 3.4 2.8

St. Nick CR HR 84 484.0 10717 4.5 18 11.0 7.4 2.2 7.5 3.3

¹Melon type: GA = galia, HD = honeydew, AN = ananas, CA = canary, CH = charentais, CR = Christmas.
²cwt = hundred weight per acre.
³The number of cull fruit due to fruit cracking and decay was so great that plots were not harvested for yield.

Table 2. Specialty melon fruit and vine characteristics from single plots, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Flavor¹ (1-5) Sugar (%) Interior Color² Rind Color³ Fruit Shape Cracking⁴ (1-4) Net Type⁵ Comments

HSR 4036 3.3 10.8 lt gr yl round 1.0 med Nice aroma, 2nd set had no netting on melons, harvest when just turning yellow

HSR 4022 4.0 12.3 cr be/yl oblong 2.5 lt Harvest when just turning yellow

Vanilla Ice 2.9 14.5 cr yl round 1.5 lt Very short shelf life, variable fruit quality

Creme de la Creme 4.5 15.8 lt gr med/yl round 1.5 med Outstanding quality, harvest when just turning yellow

Galileo 4.0 13.3 lt gr yl/gr round 1.0 hv Nice balance of sweet and musky flavor, harvest when just turning yellow

Arava 3.5 12.5 cr med/yl round 1.0 lt Attractive, harvest when just turning yellow

Sweet Dream 3.8 13.3 lt gr yl/gr round 2.0 lt Exterior not attractive

Vicar 3.8 10.3 cr med/yl oblong 1.5 lt Attractive, harvest when just turning yellow

HSR 4238 5.0 13.9 cr med/yl round 1.5 med Attractive exterior, excellent quality

HSR 4261 2.8 10.3 lt gr med/yl round 1.5 lt Harvest when just turning yellow

HSR 4278 4.1 15.0 lt gr med/yl round 1.0 med Harvest when just turning yellow

Fantasma 3.7 14.1 lt gr lt gr/cr round 1.5 na Firm flesh, develops cream blush and ground spot when ripe

Honey Orange 4.0 14.1 or cr/gr oval 1.5 na Develops light orange ground spot when ripe

Morning Ice 3.9 15.1 lt gr gr/cr oval 1.5 na Harvest when just turning yellowish

Super Dew Hybrid 3.3 12.6 lt gr cr/gr oval 1.0 na Harvest when just turning yellowish

HSR 4208 4.4 11.1 cr/lt or cr/yl oval 1.8 lt Harvest when just turning yellowish

HSR 2528 3.7 11.5 cr yl/or oblong 1.5 lt Harvest when just turning yellowish

HSR 4220 4.2 10.0 cr/lt or med/yl round 1.8 med Harvest when just turning yellowish

HSR 4038 3.0 9.5 cr/or yl oblong 1.3 med Sunburns and breaks down easily

HSR 4018 3.3 10.8 cr or/yl oblong 1.8 lt Bottoms rot if fruit sits on the ground

HMX 1602 3.4 11.9 cr gd/yl almond 1.3 na Pick when rind is golden yellow

Serenade 3.9 16.5 dk or cr/gr w/spots round 1.5 na Nice aroma and flavor, pick when fruit has cream blush

Sweetie #6 2 14.3 or or/lt gr round 2.5 na Fruit cracked, rind still green when over ripe

St. Nick 3.4 11.3 wh dk gr almond 2.3 na Crunchy white flesh, harvest when longitudinal checks appear

¹Flavor: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent, sweet taste, pleasant texture.
²Interior color: lt = light, gr = green, cr = cream, or = orange, dk = dark, wh = white.
³Rind color: yl = yellow, be = beige, gd = golden, gr = green, or = orange, cr = cream, lt = light, med = medium, dk = dark.
⁴Cracking: l = little or no cracking, 4 = severe cracking and fruit splitting.
⁵ Net type: lt = light netting, med = medium netting, hv = heavy raised netting, na = no netting.

Triploid Mini-Watermelon Variety Trial, 2003

John Strang, April Satanek, John Snyder, Darrell Slone, Phillip Bush, and Chris Smigell, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Growers have considerable interest in triploid or seedless mini-watermelons. Seven triploid and two seeded mini-watermelon varieties were evaluated for performance under Kentucky conditions.

Materials and Methods

All varieties were sown in cell packs (72 cells/tray) on 25 April. Trays were placed on a bench with bottom heat in a warm greenhouse. The seedlings were counted to obtain a germination percentage. The seedlings were then thinned to one per cell, and the trays moved to a slightly cooler house. On 10 June, the plants were set into plastic-mulched beds using a waterwheel setter. Each plot was 16 ft. long, containing nine plants, with 2 ft. between plants within the row. Between row spacing was 10 ft. Each plot was replicated three times in a randomized complete block. Drip irrigation was used to irrigate and fertigate as needed.

Forty-five pounds N/A as ammonium nitrate were applied preplant. A total of 42 lb N/A as ammonium nitrate were fertigated over seven applications throughout the season. A systemic insecticide, Platinum 2 SC, was applied with a sprayer as a drench to the base of each plant soon after planting, at the maximum rate of 8 fl oz/A. The foliar insecticides Sevin, Capture, and Pounce were also used. Fungicide sprays included foliar applications of fixed copper, Quadris, and Bravo. The leaves on the transplants had some unidentified bacterial lesions that were associated with cool, wet weather. Fixed copper sprays and slightly drier weather cleared this problem up very quickly after the plants were set. The preemergent herbicide Curbit was applied between rows before vine coverage. One fruit from each replication was measured and evaluated for soluble solids, flavor, hollow heart, average seed number per fruit, and interior color.

Results and Discussion

Seed companies recommend planting mini-watermelons at half the spacing of normal watermelons to reduce fruit size and increase yield. Thus, plants were set 2 ft. apart in the row with10 ft. between rows, or at 20 sq. ft. per plant. Despite this higher density, watermelon size was larger than expected. A recent research report (Maynard and Sidoti, 2003) indicated that a more appropriate density may be 12.5 sq. ft. per plant. Thus, next year's trial will be planted at a higher density.

Overall, watermelon quality was very good. However, the first harvest followed a rainy period, and fruit flavor and sugar contents were reduced. Consequently, flavor was evaluated only in subsequent harvests.

Seedless Watermelons

The best performing mini-watermelons in this trial were Valdoria, Demi Sweet, Mini Seedless 618, and Liliput, which averaged 9.9, 10.8, 12.5 and 8.9 lb, respectively (Table 1). All had high soluble solids and flavor ratings and had similar yields (Table 2). Liliput tended to have the lowest yield but produced the smallest melons. These were very uniform in size. If the acceptable weight for a mini-watermelon is between 3 and 9 lb, this variety had the most acceptable weight. Demi Sweet had a Jubilee-type rind, which made it more eye appealing than the other varieties, which had black rinds.

Sunday Special was a very good melon but at 15.3 lb was a little large to be considered a mini-melon (Table 1). Extazy also performed well, but it had an extremely firm flesh, similar to an apple in crispness (Table 2). Vanessa melons were mostly seeded, due to a bad seed lot.

Seeded Watermelons

Manilla and Situla were very similar (Table 1). Both had a large number of small black seeds and thin rinds (Table 2). Manilla was judged to be the better variety of the two because of its tougher rind and trend toward higher yield.

Literature Cited

D. N. Maynard and B. J. Sidoti. 2003. Florida Agricultural Expt. Sta. J. Series No. T-00637. Web site <http://gcrec.ifas.ufl.edu>.

Acknowledgments

Table 1. Seeded and seedless mini-watermelon variety trial yield and fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar Seed Source¹ Germ. Rate (%) Melon Type² Melon Shape Days to Harvest Yield (cwt/A)³ Avg. No. Mkt. Fruit/ A Avg. Wt/Fruit (lb) Outside Measurements

Length (in.) Width (in.)

Sunday Special SI 81 T round -- 1242 a 8067 15.3 9.9 9.5

Extazy SI 100 T oval 80-85 1193 a 13229 9.1 9.1 8.0

Valdoria SS 68 T round -- 980 ab 9922 9.9 8.4 8.1

Demi Sweet SI 86 T round 85-90 948 ab 8793 10.8 9.0 8.6

Mini Seedless 618 SI 85 T round -- 941 ab 7502 12.5 10.4 9.9

Liliput SI 85 T round 70 875 b 10003 8.9 8.1 8.1

Vanessa SS 99 T round -- 816 bc 7744 10.4 8.2 7.6

Manilla EW -- S oval 55-60 504 cd 6211 8.1 9 7.1

Situla EW -- S oval 55-60 448 d 6453 6.9 8.5 6.6

¹See Appendix for seed company addresses.
²Melon type: S = Seeded, T = Triploid (seedless).
³ Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Duncan Waller LSD P = 0.05).

Table 2. Seeded and seedless mini-watermelon variety trial fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.

Variety Soluble Solids (%) Flavor
(1-5)¹ Hollow Heart (1-2)² Rind Thickness (in.) Avg. Seed No./Fruit Interior Color³ Rind Type⁴ Fruit Size Uniformity⁵(1-5) Comments

Sunday Special 12.7 4.4 2.0 0.7 0.7 dk pnk BK 3.2 Rind with black stripes

Extazy 11.3 4.2 2.0 0.6 4.7 red JU 3.7 Very tough rind, very firm flesh, some internal fiber

Valdoria 11.8 4.0 2.0 0.5 0.7 red BK 3.5 Has a few small seed traces

Demi Sweet 12.8 4.6 1.7 0.6 3.0 red DK JU 2.8 Attractive rind, has a few small seed traces

Miniseedless 618 12.8 4.9 2.0 0.5 2.0 red BK 3.2 Attractive rind

Lilliput 11.8 4.5 2.0 0.5 1.3 red BK 3.5 Firm flesh, some fiber throughout, some tough seed traces

Vanessa 11.1 3.0 2.0 0.4 na⁶ dk pnk BK 2.8 Seeded, slight sour taste

Manilla 11.3 3.8 2.0 0.4 na red/or BK 4.0 Many small seeds, quick maturing

Situla 11.6 3.8 2.0 0.4 na red/or DK JU 3.5 Many small seeds

¹ Taste rating: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent.
² Hollow heart rating: 1 = hollow heart, 2 = no hollow heart.
³ Flesh color: dk = dark, pnk = pink, or = orange.
⁴ Rind type: JU = Jubilee, light green rind w/distinct, narrow, dark green stripes; BK = Black, solid dark green rind; DK = Dark green
⁵Fruit size uniformity: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent.
⁶na = not applicable.

2003 Quicksand Pumpkin Cultivar Trial

R. Terry Jones, Charles T. Back, and John C. Snyder, Department of Horticulture, Robinson Station

Introduction

As a fall crop, pumpkins allow Kentucky growers to extend their marketing season and take advantage of labor used to cut and house tobacco. Both wholesale and direct market pumpkin acreage has increased dramatically during the past five years. Howden has been the predominant cultivar grown for jack-o'-lantern sales. However, problems with fruit set during high temperatures and Fusarium fruit rot have created a need for better cultivars.

A pumpkin cultivar trial was conducted at the University of Kentucky Robinson Substation, Quicksand, Kentucky. Ten cultivars, two of which were small or miniature pumpkins, were evaluated in replicated plots. Thirteen other cultivars were planted as observational plots.

Materials and Methods

The soil was tested before planting; results are shown in Table 1. Seeds were planted directly in the field on June 6. Each cultivar was replicated four times in a randomized complete block design. Each replication was a single row 16 ft. long containing eight plants (two/hill). Each plot was separated by 4 ft. Four seeds/hill were planted and thinned after emergence to two plants/hill. Seeds were hand-sown 4 ft. apart in the row with 14 ft. between rows. The seed was planted about 1 in. deep. The total plot area was 0.37 acres (185 x 80 ft.).

Soil was amended with two tons of lime, 50 lb N, 120 lb P₂O₅, and 200 K₂O (all per-acre rates). One hundred pounds/acre of N as ammonium nitrate were applied as two sidedressings three weeks after planting and when the vines began to run. Command 4EC (1 pt/A) was applied pre-plant and incorporated. Curbit 3EC at 2 pt/A was applied on June 9. Disease and insect control sprays were applied during the growing season as conditions warranted. Trickle irrigation was used as needed. Growing conditions during the season were cooler than normal with early periods of excess rain.

Discussion

Despite a very wet summer, pumpkin yield and quality were good. Results of the replicated and observation trials are shown in Tables 2 and 3. In the replicated trial, only the small-fruited cultivar (RPX 03103) produced significantly more fruit/acre than other varieties. Differences between the large-fruited (14 to 24 lb) pumpkins were not significant (Table 2). Autumn King yielded more than Magic Lantern and RPX03102. However, it was not significantly different from the other cultivars. Autumn King fruit size was similar to Gold Medal but was significantly larger than the other cultivars (Table 2).

In the observation trial, Gold Standard, Howdy Doody, and Appalachian were high-yielding, attractive varieties for the jack-o'-lantern market. Grower choice might depend on whether they were paid by the pound or the fruit.

Wee-B-Little did not produce very well. Little October and Wee-B-Little also had 100% of their plants infected with virus. Hybrid Pam was a productive small (5 to 6 lb) pumpkin. Autumn Buckskin produced high-yielding, attractive, light brown, oblate fruit that looked nice in fall displays.

Table 1. Soil test results, 2003 pumpkin cultivar evaluation, Quicksand, Kentucky.

pH Buffer-pH P K Ca Mg Zn

5.97 6.68 45 233 2960 195 8.1

Table 2. Pumpkin cultivar trial, Quicksand, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar Seed Source¹ Number/A Lb/A Avg. Wt. (Lb) Shape² Smoothness³ Ribbing⁴ Color⁵ Stem Quality⁶ Stem Color⁷ Comments

Magic Lantern HS 2917 B 42,820 B 14.8 F 3 4 3.1 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin

Sorcerer HS, SW, Ru 3063 B 47,074 AB 15.5 FE 3 4 3.75 DO 3 M-DG Attractive pumpkin, 1 green fruit/rep

Gold Medal Ru, SW 1993 B 44,974 AB 22.4 AB 2.5 4 3.5 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin, massive stem, 1 green fruit/rep

Gold Bullion Ru, SW 2771 B 46,836 AB 17 DEF 2.3 4 3.75 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin, 3 green fruit/rep

Phantom SW 2479 B 48,469 AB 19.5 CD 2 4 2.9 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin, 1 green fruit/rep

Trojan SW 2139 B 44,347 AB 20.4 BC 2.6 3.5 3 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin 1 plot had fruit rot, 2green fruit/rep

Gold Gem Ru, SW 2674 B 53,530 AB 20.4 BC 2.1 3.8 2.5 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin, 1 green fruit/rep

RPX 03102 Ru 7292 A 8,595 C 1.2 G 1.8 1 4.5 MO 2.8 DG Attractive little pumpkin, 1 plot with stem decay

RPX 03511 Ru 3160 B 56,418 AB 17.8 CD 2.3 3.9 3.1 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin, massive stem

Autumn King RU, SW 2820 B 68,615 A 24.0 A 2 4 3.6 DO 3 DG Very attractive pumpkin, 2 green fruit/rep

LSD (5%)⁸ 1523 25,669 2.75

¹Seed sources listed in the Appendix.
²1 = oblate or flat, 2 = blocky, 3 = round.
³1 = rough warty skin, 5 = very smooth.
⁴1 = heavy ribbed, 5 = no ribbing smooth.
⁵DO = dark orange.
⁶1 = weak, small breaks off; 3 = strong and large.
⁷M-DG = medium dark green, DG = dark green.
⁸Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.

Table 3. Pumpkin cultivar observation trial, Quicksand, Kentucky, 2003.

Cultivar Seed Source¹ Number/A Lb/A Avg. Wt. (Lb) Shape² Smoothness³ Ribbing⁴ Color⁵ Stem Quality⁶ Stem Color⁷ Comments

Merlin HS 2,820 37,949 14.o 3 4 3.3 DO 3 DG Avg. of 2 reps, 2.5 green fruit/rep

Mystic Plus HS 2,528 12,741 5.0 3 4 3 DO 3+ MG

Autumn Buckskin SW, Ru 3,111 53,712 17.5 1 5 3.3 BR 3 LG-T Avg. of 2 reps, nice for displays

Appalachian SW, Ru, HS 2,722 57,988 21.3 2 4 3.5 DO 3 MG

Lil Ironsides SW 8,556 17,588 2.1 3 5 4 DO 3 MG Very attractive, 3 reps

Little October SW 6,417 6,717 0.9 1 5 3 DO 3 M-DG Avg. of 2 reps, lots of virus

Pik-A-Pie Ru 3,696 14,409 3.9 3 4.5 4 DO 3 MG

Jarrahdale SW, Ru 3,306 43,967 13.3 5 5 2 BL/GR 3 GR-T

Gold Rush SW, Ru 1,556 39,359 25.3 2 4 3.5 DO 3+ DG 3 green fruit in rep

Hybrid Pam SW, Ru 5,834 35,703 6.1 3 4 2.5 DO 3 DG attractive small pumpkin

Wee-B-Little Ru 1,750 1,330 0.76 1 4.5 4 MO 2 DG Poor yield, virus infected

Howdy Doody Ru, SW 3,111 67,517 21.7 2.5 4 2.5 DO 3 DG Attractive pumpkin

Gold Standard Ru, SW 3,500 47,254 13.5 3 4 3.5 DO 3 DG Attractive mid-size pumpkin

¹Seed source listed in the Appendix.
²1 = oblate or flat, 2 = blocky, 3 = round.
³1 = rough warty skin, 5 = very smooth.
⁴1 = heavy ribbed, 5 = no ribbing, smooth.
⁵MO = medium orange, DO = dark orange, BR = brown, BL/GR = blue green.
⁶1 = weak, small breaks off, 3 = strong and large.
⁷LG = light green, MG = medium green, DG = dark green, T = tan, G = green.

Tomato Cultivar Trial, Bill Gehring Farm, Wayne County, Kentucky, 2003

Danny Adams, Glen Roberts, Bill Gehring, and John Snyder, Wayne County Extension and Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Fresh market tomato production in Wayne County, Kentucky, brings in significant revenue to area farmers through sales to Cumberland Farm Products and at the farm. During the last 10 to 12 years, the cultivar Mountain Spring has represented 70 to 80% of tomato production in Wayne County. Due to more disease pressure in the area, a tomato cultivar with greater disease resistance is needed. Therefore, six tomato cultivars were evaluated for yield and income along with Mountain Spring.

Materials and Methods

Each of the seven varieties was replicated four times, eight plants per replication. Plants were grown on 6-in. raised beds with black plastic mulch and drip lines beneath the plastic. Plants were spaced 18 in. in-row, and rows were 6 ft. apart.

Seeds were sown in a local greenhouse on 4 March and grown in 32-cell trays. Plants were transplanted to the field on 14 April by hand. Admire insecticide was applied as a drench after transplanting. Plants were staked and tied using the Florida weave system and pruned to one sucker below first flower cluster. Drip irrigation was applied as needed. Fifty pounds of nitrogen per acre, no phosphorus, and no potassium were applied prior to bed formation. An additional 25 lb/A of N (calcium and potassium nitrate) were fertigated at three different times during the growing season. Plants were sprayed every seven to 10 days with protectant fungicides (Dithane, Kocide and Quadris), alternated as recommended. Insecticide, Asana, was added as needed to the fungicide sprays. All pesticides were applied with a high-pressure backpack sprayer.

Harvest started on 24 June and continued through 1 August. A total of 12 harvests were made, twice per week on Tuesdays and Fridays. Fruit was graded into four categories: No. 1 large, No. 1 small, No. 2s, and culls according to USDA and Cumberland Farm Products' standards.

In addition to yield/acre, cultivars were evaluated for income per acre, based on Cumberland Farm Products' prices (Table 1) and estimated prices before Cumberland Farm Products started receiving tomatoes. The yield and income per acre were based on 4,800 plants/acre.

Results and Discussion

Amelia produced the most income and amount of fruit per acre marketable through Cumberland Farm Products (Table 2). This cultivar also produced the most No. 1 large fruit and the fewest culls. Sun Start produced the most fruit and income during the first two weeks of harvest, but yields dropped significantly during weeks 4 and 5 (Table 3). Sunguard produced very smooth fruit during most of the season, and yields were better later in the season. Big Beef, an indeterminate variety, yielded the most total lb/A (total marketable fruit plus culls) but had the highest pounds of culls/A that could not have been marketed through Cumberland Farm Products (Table 2). However, most of these culls could have been marketed through on-farm sales and farmers' markets.

Based on the results of this study, Amelia and Sun Guard, both reported to have good disease-resistant packages, should be considered for additional testing, especially by farmers who market through Cumberland Farm Products. Big Beef may have potential for farmers who market through on-farm sales and farmers' markets. Sun Start has the potential of producing tomatoes at least a week earlier than Mountain Spring, a characteristic especially useful to growers having a market at that time.

Table 1. Prices paid by Cumberland Farm Products, 2003.

Week Ending Grade¹

#1 Large #1 Small #2s

($/lb)

4 July (week 1&2)² .40 .25 .30

11 July (week 3) .34 .21 .21

18 July (week 4) .34 .21 .22

25 July (week 5) .30 .17 .22

1 August (week 6) .29 .15 .19

¹Fruit was graded into four categories: #1 large, #1 small, #2s, and culls according to USDA and Cumberland Farm Products’ standards.
²Weeks 1 and 2 are estimated prices.

Table 2. Yields of staked tomatoes.

Entry (Seed Co.) lb/A % Mkt thru CFP² Culls¹(lb/A) Total Mkt (lb¹) Avg. #1 Fruit Wt. (oz) Income ($/A)

#1 Large¹ #1 Small¹ #2s¹

Mt. Spring (RU/RP/RUP) 31,371 3,546 15,168 77 15,234 50,085 11.8 $14,501

Big Beef (RU/RP/RUP) 32,799 3,564 21,240 64 33,099 57,603 12.2 $16,257

Amelia (SW) 41,322 2,553 14,361 87 8,919 58,236 11.8 $17,784

Israel 440 (LSL) 25,719 3,798 15,819 65 24,720 45,336 11.6 $12,785

Israel 440-N (LSL) 25,419 4,101 14,118 64 24,222 43,638 12.0 $12,353

Sun Start (RU/RP/RUP) 25,293 4,458 16,581 75 15,354 46,332 10.8 $14,431

Sun Guard (RU/RP/RUP) 36,852 6,270 10,809 84 10,155 53,931 11.3 $15,821

Waller-Duncan LSD 7,041 1,806 3,538 6 6,370 8,166 0.9 2216

¹ Based on 4,800 plants/A.
² Cumberland Farm Products.

Table 3. Weekly income from staked tomatoes.

Entry Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Total

Mt. Spring $65 $2,131 $3,919 $3,743 $3,557 $1,085 $14,502

Big Beef $31 $1,786 $3,283 $6,003 $3,937 $1,217 $16,258

Amelia $41 $2,072 $4,938 $8,177 $2,077 $480 $17,785

Israel 440 $98 $1,317 $2,913 $4,505 $3,125 $828 $12,785

Israel 440-N $47 $971 $3,126 $4,740 $2,755 $715 $12,353

Sun Start $2,607 $4,816 $4,050 $2,570 $389 -0- $14,431

Sun Guard -0- $1,532 $4,009 $5,732 $3,128 $1,421 $15,822

Waller-Duncan LSD (0.05) 571 587 1103 1218 1529 860 2216

2003 Tomato Cultivar Trial, Quicksand, Kentucky

R. Terry Jones, Charles T. Back, and John C. Snyder, Department of Horticulture, Robinson Station

Introduction

Kentucky growers produce approximately 1,200 acres of staked, vine-ripe tomatoes for local and national sales. Kentucky tomatoes have an excellent reputation for quality among produce buyers. This trial evaluated new and existing cultivars to identify those that might produce a premium tomato with resistance to a potentially serious virus problem (Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus, TSWV). Cultivars were evaluated for yield, appearance, earliness, and potential return to growers. We wanted to see if the new tomato cultivars with resistance to TSWV would produce attractive fruit acceptable to the industry.

Materials and Methods

Eighteen tomato cultivars were evaluated at Quicksand, Kentucky (Table 1). Fourteen cultivars had large red fruit. One cultivar had large yellow fruit; another was a plum tomato, and two were grape tomatoes.

According to soil test results (Table 2), the plot received 60 lb P₂O₅, 60 lb of K₂O, and 50 lb N/A preplant. An additional 100 lb of N/A was applied through the drip irrigation lines during the growing season. Pest control was based on recommendations from ID-36, Vegetable Production Guide for Commercial Growers. Fungicides were applied weekly and insecticides, as needed.

Trays were seeded in the greenhouse at Quicksand on 26 March. Black plastic mulch and drip tape were laid on 12 May, and the tomatoes were planted on 13 May. Cultivars were replicated four times with eight plants/block. Plants were spaced 18 in. apart so that each plot was15 ft. long. Three feet separated each cultivar in a block. The rows were 7 ft. apart on center to allow the sprayer to be driven between rows.

Tomatoes were harvested at the breaker stage. Nine harvests were made during this trial. The two grape tomato cultivars were harvested when they were red; other cultivars were harvested at the breaker stage. Data collected included grade, weight, and count for extra-large (> 3.5 in.), large (> 2.5, < 3.5 in.), No. 2, small < 2.5, > 2.0 in.), and cull tomatoes. Reasons for culling included catfacing, concentric or radial cracks, disease, scars, blossom end rot, and uneven ripening. Incomes were calculated based on the prices received by growers for stake tomatoes or on prices at the Atlanta terminal market for plum/roma and grape tomatoes (Table 3).

Results and Discussion

The 2003 growing season was wetter and slightly cooler than normal. Rainfall totals for May through August were 5.8, 6.5, 4.2, and 3.6 in. Heavy rains and high humidity in June led to poor initial fruit set in the first cluster and catfacing (open locule) on early fruit in many cultivars. As a result, there were more cull fruit at harvest than usual. The skin on most tomato cultivars was thinner than usual and lacked the usual waxy feel and smooth appearance. The appearance of fruit harvested during August was normal.

Compared to the early yields of other stake tomato cultivars, Sunshine produced considerably more jumbo, extra-large, and large fruit as well as total marketable yield (Table 4). Early income was also considerably higher than those for Amelia and Mt. Spring. Amelia produced more large fruit than did Mt. Spring. However, early income for Amelia was not significantly different from that of Mt. Spring. Sunchief, BHN 591, Sungard, Sunleaper, BHN641, and Mt. Fresh produced early jumbo-large yields equal to that of Mt. Spring (Table 4).

For the entire season, BHN444 had the highest total marketable yield, but it was not significantly different from the yields of 10 other large-fruited cultivars (Table 5). Cash return for Sunshine was significantly higher than those of the other standard cultivars. The BHN cultivar group produced a higher percentage of culls than most of the other cultivars (Table 5). Thirty-eight percent of the total marketable fruit of the five BHN cultivars were discarded as culls, whereas only 14% of Mt. Spring were culls. These culls were produced throughout the growing season. The largest average tomato fruit size was 13.9 oz for the Florida 47 cultivar (Table 5).

The grape tomato Navidad generated significantly higher early and total incomes than any of the other cultivars tested (Tables 4 and 5). The appearance and uniformity of Navidad was better than Tami G, the other grape tomato in this trial. The labor cost of picking the small grape tomatoes is much higher than that of the traditional cultivars. The Plum Crimson cultivar produced good yields of attractive plum tomatoes and is worthy of trial planting by growers having a market for this type of fruit. The highest total cash returns to the grower were from the two grape and the plum tomato cultivars.

As stated previously, Sunshine did give significantly higher total season returns than the industry standard Mt. Spring (Table 5). The cultivar Sunshine was first tested at Quicksand and Lexington in 1999 (1999 Fruit and Vegetable Crops Research Report, PR-423, pp. 33-37). In these trials, Sunshine was the lowest yielding and return cultivar. In 1999, the growing season was extremely hot and dry. Under these conditions the fruit of Sunshine had yellow shoulders. The plants of Sunshine are small, and fruit are exposed. (In commercial seed catalogs, Sunshine is recommended for use in northern areas.) The summer of 2003 at the Robinson Station was cooler than normal with excessive rain and cloudy days. Cultivars like Sunshine that look exceptional one year may perform poorly in another year when weather conditions are different. Growers should use caution when selecting any vegetable cultivar based on one year's results.

Table 1. Tomato cultivars, their descriptions and reported disease resistance, planted at Quicksand, Kentucky, in 2003.

Variety Name (Company) Comments/Description¹

Amelia VR (SW,HM) Determinate, red, 80 days, resistant to 1,2,3,12

Sunshine (SW) Determinate, red, 66 days, resistant to 1, 2,3,6,7

BHN444 (SW) Determinate, red, 80 days, resistant to 1,2,3,12

BHN555 (SW) Determinate, red, 72 days, resistant to 1,2,3,12

Sunchief (SW) Determinate, red, 68 days, resistant to 1,2,3,6,7

BHN591 (SW) Determinate, red, 71 days, resistant to 1,2,3,4

Florida 47 (SW) Determinate, red, 75 days, resistant to 1,2,3,6,7

Sunguard (SW) Determinate, red, 77 days, resistant to 1,2,3,6,7,9

Red Pride (SW) Determinate, red, 75 days, resistant to 1,2,3,6,7

BHN 543 (SW) Determinate, red, 72 days, resistant to 1,2,3,4

Navidad (SW) Determinate, red grape, 65 days, resistant to 3

Tami G (SW) Indeterminate, red grape tomato, 60 days

Mt. Spring (SW) Determinate, red, 72 days, resistant to 1,2,3

Sunleaper (Rogers Brand) Determinate, red, 75 days, resistant to 1,2,3

Mt. Fresh (SW) Determinate, red, 78 days, resistant to 1,2, early blight tolerance

BHN 641 (SW) Determinate, tangerine color, 76 days, resistant to 1,2,3

Plum Crimson (HMX 2808) Determinate, attractive crimson red plum tomato, high lycopene content, resistant to 1, 2, 3

Florida 91 (SW) Determinate, red, resistant to 1,2,3,6,7

¹1 = Verticillium Wilt, 2 = Fusarium Wilt R1, 3 = Fusarium Wilt R2, 4 = Nematode tolerant, 5 = TMV tolerant, 6 = Alternaria Stem Canker Tolerant, 7 = Stemphylium Tolerant, 8 = Bacterial Speck Tolerant, 9 = Fusarium Wilt R3, 10 = Late Blight, 11 = Bacterial Leaf Spot, 12 = Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus. Rogers Brand = Novartis, Seedway = SW, HM = Harris Moran.

Table 2. Results from soil test.

pH Buffer pH P K Ca Mg Zn

6.18 6.79 84 348 3173 265 4.4

Table 3. Prices used to calculate income for the tomato variety trial, Quicksand, Kentucky, 2003.

Week Grade or Type

No. 1 Large No. 1 Small No. 2 Plum/Roma Grape

$/lb

7/12 0.34 0.21 0.21 0.70 1.28

7/19 0.34 0.21 0.22 0.62 1.21

7/26 0.30 0.17 0.22 0.62 1.06

8/2 0.29 0.15 0.19 0.48 0.78

8/9 0.20 0.11 0.09 0.48 0.70

8/16 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.48 0.86

Table 4. 2003 Fresh market tomato early season yield, prior to 2 August.

Cultivar Jumbo & Extra Large (lb) Cull (lb) Total Marketable Yield (lb)¹ Income ($) Comments

Sunshine 24827 A 2269 A 26551 A $7,792 B nice looking fruit, small plant, fruit exposed

Amelia 8919 B 791 A 9568 C $2,776 C nice looking fruit

Sunchief 6651 BC 596 A 8064 CD $2,221 CD green shoulders when breaker

BHN591 7001 BC 2554 A 7766 CDE $2,203 CD

Sunguard 6884 BC 739 A 7117 CDE $2,069 CD nice looking fruit

Sunleaper 6054 CD 1737 A 6819 CDE $1,955 CD nice looking fruit, good plant

BHN641 5821 CD 1232 A 6314 DE $1,837 CD tangerine-colored fruit

Mt. Spring 6015 CD 972 A 6365 DE $1,825 CD

Mt. Fresh 5367 CD 1634 A 6262 DE $1,727 CD some green shoulders on mature green fruit

BHN555 4213 D 2269 A 5069 DEF $1,397 DE ugly looking tomato all season long!

BHN444 4032 D 830 A 4732 EF $1,353 DEF green shoulders, nice

BHN543 4174 D 2243 A 4771 EF $1,345 DEF

Red Pride 1037 E 1997 A 1465 G $381 EF green shoulders on mature green

Florida 47 1089 E 1647 A 1180 G $329 EF some green shoulders on mature green

Florida 91 812 E 156 A 812 G $236 F

Plum Crimson 39 E 65 A 2502 FG $1,207 DEF very attractive plum tomato

Navidad 0 E 0 A 13257 B $11,131 A grape tomato

Tami G 0 E 0 A 9671 CDE $8,580 B grape tomato

Duncan-Waller LSD (5%) 2630 2638 3102 1,138

¹ Includes all grades except culls.

Table 5. 2003 fresh market tomato full season yield.

Cultivar Jumbo & Extra Large (lb) Cull (lb) Total Marketable Yield (lb)¹ Income ($) Average Fruit Weight (oz.)¹ Comments

BHN444 63,914 A 17,904 BCD 72,833 A $9,025 DEF 11.1 CDE nice fruit, has green shoulders when mature green

Sunguard 61,645 AB 8,219 EF 66,921 AB $9,386 DE 10.0 G nice looking fruit

Mt Spring 57,198 ABC 9,088 EF 63,901 ABC $8,675 DEFG 10.6 EFG

Mt. Fresh 56,991 ABC 12,057 DEF 65,210 ABC $9,836 DE 10.7 DEFG some green shoulders on mature green fruit

BHN591 56,226 ABC 17,398 BCD 61,762 ABC $8,838 DEFG 10.1 FG

Amelia 54,787 ABC 7,597 EF 59,208 ABCD $10,304 D 10.5 EFG nice looking fruit

BHN543 54,255 ABC 20,121 B 61,334 ABCD $7,370 FGHI 10.5 EFG

BHN641 54,009 ABC 18,681 BC 62,215 ABCD $8,164 EFGH 10.3 EFG attractive tangerine-colored fruit

Sunshine 53,815 ABC 6,638 F 61,386 ABCD $12,652 C 8.7 H nice looking fruit, small plant, exposed fruit

Sunleaper 52,920 ABC 17,839 BCD 62,060 ABCD $8,238 EFGH 10.9 CDEF nice looking fruit, good plant

Florida 91 52,181 ABC 10,229 EF 55,565 ABCD $5,993 I 11.7 BC

Florida 47 50,587 ABC 13,107 CDE 59,713 BCD $6,980 GHI 13.9 A some green shoulders on mature green fruit

Sunchief 48,875 BC 8,530 EF 52,648 BCD $8,611 DEFG 11.5 BCD green shoulders at breaker

Red Pride 46,166 C 23,154 B 50,768 CD $7,004 GHI 11.1 CDE green shoulders on mature green fruit

BHN555 42,938 C 40,915 A 54,346 D $6,266 HI 12.2 BC an ugly-looking tomato all summer long in this trial

Plum Crimson 6,391 467 F 69,696 $23,609 B 3.5 I very pretty fruit, nice red color

Navidad 0 D 0 F 50,768 $31,283 A 0.42 J attractive small red fruit, more uniform than Tami G., large determinate plant

Tami G 0 D 0 F 34,226 $22,004 B 0.33 J attractive small red fruit, size variability, sometimes slow to ripen on stem end, very large plant

Duncan-Waller LSD (5%) 14,368 6,027 10,915 2,015 0.8

¹ Includes all grades except culls.

Weed Control in Pepper and Sweet Corn

Joseph Masabni, Shane Bogle, and Dwight Wolf, UK Research and Education Center, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Two experiments were conducted in 2003 to test labeled and two experimental herbicides on pepper and sweet corn. The experimental herbicides are not yet labeled on pepper and must not be used because this is against federal law. The purpose of trying new and experimental herbicides is to collect data to support their registration, if they perform well.

The two experiments were conducted at the University of Kentucky Research and Education Center (UKREC) in Princeton, Kentucky.

Materials and Methods

A randomized complete block design with three replications was used for both experiments. Prior to planting, lime and fertilizer were added per soil test recommendations. The soil was worked prior to planting to level ridges and break clods.

Pepper. Plot size was 6 ft. wide by 35 ft. long. Raised beds, 6 in. high, were shaped and drip-irrigation was installed using a plastic layer. No plastic was laid because bare ground was essential to test the herbicides. Herbicide treatments were applied using a four 8002-nozzle boom backpack sprayer set at 30 psi and 20 GPA with a 5.3-ft. spray width. For the incorporated treatments, a garden rake was used to manually incorporate the herbicides. Once all the herbicide treatments were applied, two rows of peppers, one for the variety Olympus and one for Wizard, were hand-transplanted on 22 May at 2 ft. spacing within rows. This is equivalent to 17 plants for each variety per bed/treatment. The postemergence treatments were applied on 9 July or 69 days after transplanting when plants were about 12 in. tall. Of all the herbicides used, only Sencor and Matrix are not currently registered for use on pepper.

Sweet corn. Plots were 6.5 ft. wide by 80 ft. long. Ten sh2 sweet corn varieties were seeded on 22 April using a John Deere plate seeder at 9 in. spacing. Three varieties had yellow kernels (6800 Y, AC945 Y, and Saturn Y). Four varieties had bicolor kernels (6802R BC, Camas BC, Saturn BC, and 8102R BC). Three varieties had white kernels (Boreal W, Saturn W, and 8101R W). The herbicide treatments were applied perpendicular to the seeded corn, in order to test the effect of herbicide treatments on each variety. The preemergence herbicide treatments were applied on 15 May, and the postemergence treatments were applied on 18 June. All sprays were applied using a two 8002-nozzle boom backpack sprayer set at 30 psi and 20 GPA with a spray width of 3.3 ft. The herbicide treatments ran across all three replications. With sweet corn seeded at 9 in. spacing, there are about 4.3 seeds in the 3.3 ft. herbicide band. Of the herbicides used in this experiment, Axiom, Callisto, Option, and Lumax are experimental herbicides, and their labels specifically ban their use in sweet corn.

For both experiments, weed control effectiveness and herbicide injury were rated visually on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 equivalent to no injury or similar to the control plot and 10 equivalent to complete kill or none present.

The following are abbreviations used in the following tables: DAT = days after treatment; PPI = preplant incorporated; PRT = pre-transplant; POT = post-transplant; PO1 = postemergence; EBNS = eastern black nightshade; LACG = large crabgrass; ILMG = Ivy leaf morningglory; JG = Johnsongrass; HVMW = honeyvine milkweed; CAWE = carpetweed, COPU = common purslane; COCO = common cocklebur.

Results and Discussion

Pepper

Table 1 includes the ratings of pepper injury and weeds present, taken at 20 DAT. Both pepper varieties showed little or no herbicide injury with nearly all treatments, except treatment 2 which included Sencor 0.5 lb ai/A PPI. As mentioned above, Sencor is not currently labeled, and the observed injury explains why Matrix, the other experimental herbicide, showed little or no injury when applied PRE or POT. All treatments showed excellent levels of weed control when compared to the level of weeds present in control plots.

Table 2 includes the ratings of pepper injury and weeds present, taken at 47 DAT or 2 days before postemergence treatments were applied. Sencor 0.5 PPI continues to show injury on both pepper varieties. Treflan 1 PPI and Dual Magnum 1.33 POT were the safest treatments on peppers. Treflan still had good control of Johnsongrass and large crabgrass but was weak on honeyvine milkweed and carpetweed and had no control of eastern black nightshade. The low rating values of Treflan on eastern black nightshade, at 47 DAT, must be attributed to a recent flush of weeds. Dual Magnum applied POT had the equivalent of 80% control of eastern black nightshade at 47 DAT but lost its effectiveness on carpetweed.

At 47 DAT, Matrix 0.031 PRT resulted in severe injury, at least 60% reduction in plant vigor and height, on both pepper varieties. This injury was not noticed at the first evaluation on 20 DAT. Matrix appears to be very effective in its control of Johnsongrass and carpetweed but had little effect on eastern black nightshade.

Table 3 lists the total yields for three harvests of both varieties for all herbicide treatments. The effects of injury related to use of Sencor PPI and Matrix PRT in peppers was very evident. Matrix resulted in an average of 13 and 17 fruits per plot, equal to about one fruit per plant, compared to 37 and 54 fruits in the control plots. Matrix appears to be very safe on peppers when applied postemergence and resulted in the highest yielding plot of Olympus and third highest for Wizard. Matrix applied POT also resulted in yields better than those for Treflan or Dual Magnum applied alone. Treflan PPI followed by Command PRT gave the highest yields of Olympus, whereas Dual Magnum gave the highest yields of Wizard.

Sweet Corn

The 10 sweet corn varieties were not rated for injury due to the complexity of this experiment (10 varieties/treatment and 12 treatments). Table 4 lists the weed control ratings taken 33 DAT. Only preemergence treatments are listed in this table since postemergence treatments had not been applied yet.

Of the registered sweet corn herbicides, Outlook and Dual Magnum were best for common purslane and large crabgrass control, whereas Aatrex and Outlook were slightly better on common cocklebur. The non-labeled herbicide Axiom completely killed all three weeds present at this rating date. Lumax followed closely with 100% kill of common purslane and common cocklebur and about 80% control of large crabgrass. Of the three non-labeled herbicides, Callisto was weakest on common purslane and large crabgrass but still had excellent control (95%) of common cocklebur.

Table 5 shows sweet corn yields in kg/plot, and Table 6 lists the number of ears/plot for all 10 sweet corn varieties. Both tables clearly indicate that the 10 sweet corn varieties responded differently to an herbicide. Differences or similarities in kernel color are not good predictors of the responses of the varieties to an herbicide treatment. Yields ranged from 0.5 to 3 kg/plot for Outlook PRE, and from 0.2 to 1.4 when applied PO1. Yields of plots treated with Aatrex were similar to those treated with Outlook. In addition, there were no observed differences in yields and number of ears per plot with Outlook applied either PRE or PO1.

Axiom (treatment 3) and Lumax (treatment 10), neither labeled for sweet corn, performed equal to, if not better than, Outlook and Aatrex for all 10 varieties in both yield (Table 5) and number of ears/plot (Table 6). Similarly, when Option was applied PO1 following a preemergence application of Dual Magnum (treatment 8), yield and number of ears/plot were equal to, if not better than, Outlook or Aatrex applied alone.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the excellent technical assistance provided by June Johnston and Hilda Rogers.

Table 1. Weed control effectiveness in pepper rated at 20 days after treatment.

Trt. No. Treatment¹ Rate Lb ai/A Appl. Stage Weed Control Rating 20 DAT

Olympus Wizard EBNS LACG ILMG

1 Treflan 1 PPI 2 2 9 9 9

2 Treflan 1 PPI 4 5 10 10 9

Sencor 0.5 PPI

3 Treflan 1 PPI 2 2 9 10 9

Command 0.25 PRT

5 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 1 1 10 10 9

7 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 2 1 10 10 9

Matrix 0.031 POT

10 Matrix 0.031 PRT 2 2 10 9 10

11 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 1 1 10 10 9

12 Untreated PRE 1 1 1 1 1

LSD (5%) 0.8 1.3 0.5 0.9 1.7

Standard Deviation 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.5 1.0

CV 27.27 41.37 3.26 6.07 11.8

¹Only treatments already applied at this date are included in this table.

Table 2. Weed control effectiveness in pepper rated at 47 days after treatment.

Trt. No. Treatment¹ Rate Lb ai/A Appl. Stage Weed Control Rating 47 DAT

Olympus Wizard ILMG JG LACG EBNS HVMW CAWE

1 Treflan 1 PPI 1 1 6 7 7 2 5 5

2 Treflan 1 PPI 3 5 5 10 7 5 8 4

Sencor 0.5 PPI

3 Treflan 1 PPI 1 2 3 10 7 3 6 2

Command 0.25 PRT

5 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 1 1 5 8 10 8 6 4

7 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 1 1 8 10 10 7 5 9

Matrix 0.031 POT

10 Matrix 0.031 PRT 6 6 8 10 9 3 7 10

12 Untreated PRE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

LSD (5%) 1.2 1.9 5.3 4.0 4.0 3.9 4.9 4.1

Standard Deviation 0.7 1.1 3.1 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.9 2.4

CV 37.08 50.81 61.49 28.9 31.97 47.34 49.39 46.6

¹ Only treatments already applied at this date are included in this table.

Table 3. Total yields of Olympus and Wizard peppers.

Trt. No. Treatment Rate Lb ai/A Appl. Stage Total Yield

Olympus Wizard

No./Plot Kg/Plot No./Plot Kg/Plot

1 Treflan 1 PPI 62 10.1 60 9.8

2 Treflan 1 PPI 48 8.4 45 7.2

Sencor 0.5 PPI

3 Treflan 1 PPI 78 13.5 74 12.8

Command 0.25 PRT

4 Treflan 1 PPI 63 8.6 78 10.8

Sandea 0.032 PO1

NIS 0.5 PO1

5 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 71 12.4 101 15.9

6 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 77 11.8 73 11.7

Sandea 0.032 PO1

NIS 0.5 PO1

7 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 55 9.2 76 12.4

Matrix 0.031 POT

8 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 85 12.5 94 13.5

Matrix 0.031 PO1

9 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 74 10.4 69 9.9

Sandea 0.032 PO1

Matrix 0.031 PO1

NIS 0.5 PO1

10 Matrix 0.031 PRT 13 1.9 17 2.3

Matrix 0.031 PO1

11 Dual Magnum 1.33 POT 79 13.5 102 15.5

Dacthal 7.5 Late PO1

12 Untreated PRE 37 5.8 54 8.2

Poast 0.19 PO1

COC 1% PO1

LSD (5%) 26.9 3.71 28.7 4.28

Standard Deviation 15.9 2.19 17.0 2.53

CV 25.74 22.29 24.12 23.34

Table 4. Weed control effectiveness in sweet corn rated at 33 days after treatment.

Trt. No. Treatment Name Rate Lb ai/A Appl. Stage Weed Species

COPU COCO LACG

Weed Control Rating 33 DAT

1 Outlook 0.75 PRE 8 4 9

3 Axiom 0.77 PRE 10 10 10

4 Aatrex 1 PRE 10 4 4

5 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 8 2 9

6 Callisto 0.2 PRE 1 10 2

7 Callisto 0.14 PRE 4 9 5

8 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 8 2 9

10 Lumax 2.5QT PRE 10 10 8

12 Untreated 1 1 1

LSD (5%) 4.8 2.3 3.1

Standard Deviation 2.8 1.4 1.9

CV 44.5 29.3 28.9

Table 5. Yield in kg/plot of 10 sh2 sweet corn varieties treated with herbicides.

Trt. No. Treatment Name Rate Lb ai/A Appl. Stage Sweet Corn Variety

6800
Y
AC945
Y
SATURN
Y
6802R
BC
CAMAS
BC
SATURN
BC
8102R
BC
BOREAL
W
SATURN
W
8101R
W

Yield (Kg) / Plot – 57 to 69 DAT

1 Outlook 0.75 PRE 1.4 2.1 0.8 1.6 1.2 2.0 1.1 0.5 3.0 0.6

2 Outlook 0.75 PO1 1.3 0.75 0.2 0.9 0.5 1.4 1.0 0.3 1.0 0.4

3 Axiom 0.77 PRE 1.3 3.2 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.0 0.9 2.7 0.8

4 Aatrex 1 PRE 1.1 1.8 0.6 1.6 1.5 1.9 1.3 0.5 2.8 1.0

5 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 1.0 2.3 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.1 1.0 2.3 0.9

Sandea 0.032 PO1

NIS 0.25% PO1

6 Callisto 0.2 PRE 1.0 1.9 0.7 1.4 0.9 1.8 1.0 0.4 2.2 1.4

7 Callisto 0.14 PRE 1.6 2.0 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.1 0.1 2.3 1.4

Callisto 0.06 PO1

8 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.8 2.1 1.0 0.7 2.2 1.0

Option 0.033 PO1

MSO 1% PO1

9 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 1.2 0.7 1.3 1.4 0.6 1.5 0.9 0.5 1.9 0.6

Clarity 0.5 PO1

10 Lumax 2.5QT PRE 1.6 2.2 1.4 1.6 1.9 1.6 1.2 1.4 3.8 1.3

11 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 1.0 1.5 0.7 1.0 1.1 1.5 1.2 0.6 1.9 0.8

Sandea 0.047 PO1

NIS 0.25% PO1

12 Untreated 1.0 0.7 0.6 1.0 0.6 1.3 0.6 0.6 1.8 0.3

LSD (5%) 0.83 1.10 0.81 0.74 0.66 0.85 0.89 0.87 1.53 0.78

Standard Deviation 0.49 0.65 0.48 0.43 0.39 0.50 0.52 0.52 0.90 0.46

CV 38.8 36.9 50.2 33.5 32.9 30.9 50.9 82.9 38.5 53.1

Table 6. Yield in number of ears/plot of 10 sh2 sweet corn varieties treated with various herbicides.

Trt. No. Treatment Name Rate Lb ai/A Appl. Stage Sweet Corn Variety

6800
Y
AC945
Y
SATURN
Y
6802R
BC
CAMAS
BC
SATURN
BC
8102R
BC
BOREAL
W
SATURN
W
8101R
W

Number of Ears / Plot - 57 to 69 DAT

1 Outlook 0.75 PRE 7 6 4 10 7 10 6 3 8 3

2 Outlook 0.75 PO1 6 4 1 7 4 6 5 1 3 3

3 Axiom 0.77 PRE 7 9 9 9 8 7 4 5 7 3

4 Aatrex 1 PRE 6 6 3 9 9 10 6 4 7 4

5 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 5 7 5 6 7 7 4 5 5 5

Sandea 0.032 PO1

NIS 0.25% PO1

6 Callisto 0.2 PRE 4 6 4 8 5 9 5 2 6 7

7 Callisto 0.14 PRE 9 6 7 7 9 7 5 1 5 6

Callisto 0.06 PO1

8 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 8 5 8 8 11 11 5 4 6 5

Option 0.033 PO1

MSO 1% PO1

9 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 9 4 8 9 6 8 5 7 6 4

Clarity 0.5 PO1

10 Lumax 2.5QT PRE 8 6 7 8 9 10 5 6 9 6

11 Dual Magnum 1.33 PRE 6 5 4 6 7 8 6 3 5 4

Sandea 0.047 PO1

NIS 0.25% PO1

12 Untreated 5 3 4 6 6 9 3 2 5 3

LSD (5%) 4.1 3.6 4.6 5.0 4.4 3.6 3.7 4.9 3.9 3.3

Standard Deviation 2.4 2.1 2.7 2.9 2.6 2.1 2.2 2.9 2.3 2.0

CV 36.9 38.3 50.6 37.6 34.9 24.5 44.0 77.7 38.9 43.8

Insecticides from Wild Tomato Leaves

George F. Antonious and John C. Snyder, Kentucky State University and University of Kentucky

Introduction

Health hazards created by synthetic pesticides have become a great public concern. Basic and applied research aimed at reducing pest resistance to insecticides and at providing effective pest controls that do not rely on synthetic pesticides is needed. Many studies have indicated the potential ecological damage due to the widespread use of synthetic pesticides. One alternative is using natural plant products for insect control. Natural products may inhibit, repel, or kill insects that feed on or harm crop plants.

Production of chemicals that are insect toxins is one method by which wild tomatoes resist insects. Depending on the particular line of wild tomato, resistance to spider mites, whiteflies, beet armyworm, cotton bollworm, cotton leaf worm, and aphids has been reported. The natural products responsible for resistance vary among lines of wild tomatoes. Some of those compounds are intermediate chain-length methyl ketones, sesquiterpenes and sesquiterpenoids, and glucolipids.

The goal of this study was to evaluate wild tomato accessions for their potential to produce natural insecticides.

Materials and Methods

Seeds of 11 wild tomato accessions were obtained from the USDA/ARS, Plant Genetic Resources Unit, Cornell University, Geneva, New York. Seeds of Lycopersicon. esculentum cv. Fabulous (included as control) were obtained from Holmes Seed Co. (Canton, OH). Wild tomato plants studied included five accessions of L. hirsutum f. glabratum C.H. Mull, three accessions of L. hirsutum f. typicum Humb & Bonpl., two accessions of L. pennellii Corr, and one accession of L. pimpinellifolium (Jusl.) Mill. Seeds were germinated in the laboratory on moistened filter paper in Petri dishes kept in the dark. After transplanting, plants were grown in a greenhouse equipped with sodium lamps for supplemental lighting. When the plants were 60 days old, leaves were removed. Leaf mass and area were determined and then extracts were prepared by shaking 5 g of leaflets of each accession with ethanol for 10 min. Similar extracts were also prepared in hexane. Toxicities of the extracts to several species of insects were evaluated with bioassays.

Results and Discussion

Hexane and ethanol crude extracts prepared from the leaves of the 11 wild tomato accessions and one commercial cultivar (Fabulous) were tested against the tobacco hornworm and budworm using a bioassay. The ethanol extracts of Lycopersicon hirsutum f. glabratum accessions PI-134417, PI-134418, and PI-126449 were the most effective against the two insects, the tobacco hornworm and tobacco budworm (Table 1). Because the extracts from f. glabratum contained methyl ketones, subsequent research emphasized these natural products.

Two methyl ketones, 2-tridecanone and 2-dodecanone, were more effective against the tobacco hornworm (LC₅₀ of 0.015 and 0.028 FM.cm^-2, respectively) than 2-undecanone (LC₅₀ of 0.096) (Table 2). 2-Pentadecanone at the highest concentration tested (5 FMoles/cm²) killed only 27% of the tobacco budworms, 15% of the tobacco hornworms, 15% of the spider mites, and none of the aphids were killed (data not shown). 2-tridecanone was the most effective methyl ketone against tobacco hornworm and budworm (LC₅₀ of 0.015 FM.cm^-2).

Based on LC₅₀ values, the order of decreasing toxicity to larvae of tobacco budworms and tobacco hornworms is 2-tridecanone > 2-dodecanone > 2-undecanone > 2-pentadecanone. 2-Dodecanone and 2-tridecanone were about equal in toxicity against aphid adults and required a significantly lower dose than 2-undecanone. Spider mites were more sensitive to 2-undecanone and 2-dodecanone than to 2-tridecanone and were insensitive to 2-pentadecanone (15% mortality at 5 FMoles^.cm^-2).

When grown under standard greenhouse conditions, some wild tomato accessions produced high levels of methyl ketones (Table 3). An average three-month-old accession of L. hirsutum f. glabratum (PI 134417) had 228 g of leaves. This mass of leaves would produce 411 mg of 2-tridecanone, 0.44 mg of 2-dodecanone, 99 mg of 2-undecanone, and 33 mg of 2-pentadecanone. Accordingly, it is possible to obtain about 543 mg of methyl ketones from 228 g of wild tomato leaves. Because these amounts do not include natural products that would be extracted from the plant stem, the amount of methyl ketones from 1 kg of plant foliage that included the stem would probably be more than what was obtained from just the leaflets.

The methyl ketones, which have toxicity to a range of insects, may have potential as insecticides and acaricides. Because they are natural products, they are probably highly biodegradable and may prove to be alternatives to synthetic pesticides. A formulation prepared from the leaves of selected accessions may allow creation of a mixture having the desired concentrations of constituents. However, if methyl ketones and other constituents in wild tomato leaves are to be used for organic production systems to control vegetable insects, further work is needed to investigate their performance under field conditions.

Future trends in agriculture and crop protection chemical technology will necessitate the discovery of agrochemicals having high selectivity, high mammalian and environmental safety, low rates of application, and low costs. This research can provide background information on the level of methyl ketones in wild tomato species and may provide an opportunity for many farmers and organic growers who may be able to grow wild tomato foliage for use as botanical insecticides on their farms.

Acknowledgments

This investigation was supported by a grant from the USDA/CSREES to Kentucky State University under agreement No. KYX-10-99-31P.

Table 1. Toxicity to tobacco hornworm and tobacco budworm of hexane and ethanol extracts from leaves of 11 wild tomato lines and one tomato cultivar.

Tomato Wild Accession or Cultivar Tobacco Hornworm Tobacco Budworm

Hexane Extract¹ Ethanol Extract¹ Hexane Extract¹ Ethanol Extract¹

PI-134417 35 a 78 a 97 a 98 a

PI-134418 20 b 80 a 93 a 86 a

PI-126449 0 d 82 a 100 a 98 a

LA-407 0 d 32 b 51 b 82 a

PI-251304 10 c 0 c 96 a 98 a

PI-246502 0 d 0 c 0 d 0 b

PI-414773 0 d 0 c 0 d 0 b

Fabulous 0 d 0 c 5 c 0 b

Jusl-335 0 d 5 c 0 d 0 b

PI-308182 0 d 0 c 6 c 0 b

PI-127826 0 d 0 c 0 d 0 b

PI-127827 0 d 0 c 5 c 0 b

¹Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05).

Table 2. LC₅₀ values of three methyl ketones determined by a no-choice filter paper bioassay using four insects.

Insect Compound

2-undecanone¹ 2-dodecanone¹ 2-tridecanone¹

LC₅₀ value (µMoles/cm²)

Tobacco budworm 0.09 b 0.03 c 0.02 b

Tobacco hornworm 0.10 b 0.03 c 0.02 b

Peach aphid 0.30 a 0.06 b 0.07 ab

Spider mite 0.21 ab 0.15 a 2.00 a

¹Values for each compound accompanied by different letter(s) are significantly different from each other.

Table 3. Concentrations of methyl ketones in hexane and ethanol extracts prepared from the leaves of three L. hirsutum f. glabratum accessions grown under greenhouse conditions.

Accession Undecanone (µg/g leaves) Dodecanone (µg/g leaves) Tridecanone (µg/g leaves) Pentadecanone (µg/g leaves)

Hexane Extract¹

PI-134417 1049a 12a 3629a 78a

PI-134418 257c 4b 1019c 22c

PI-126449 981b 10a 2403b 61b

Ethanol Extract¹

PI-134417 447ab 5a 2035a 118a

PI-134418 351b 6a 1488c 114a

PI-126449 471a 6a 1873b 124a

¹Each value in the table is an average concentration obtained from analysis of nine wild tomato leaflets. Values within a column for each extract having different letter(s) are significantly different (P < 0.05) from each other, using Duncan-Waller LSD.

Pyrethrin Residues on Field-Grown Pepper and Tomato

George F. Antonious and John C. Snyder, Kentucky State University and University of Kentucky

Introduction

Pyrethrins (Pys) are naturally occurring insecticides extracted from the flowers of Tanacetum cinerariifolium. Pys are the subject of intense interest for use in crop protection because they control certain insects at rates as low as 5 to 10 g/acre. Today, both agriculturalists and the public share a concern for the environment. The challenge is to seek alternatives that reduce environmental degradation while maintaining agricultural productivity and profitability. Many farmers and organic growers have recognized the effectiveness of some natural insecticides like Pys against many vegetable insects. When formulated, Pys have three modes of killing action (Figure 1). For most pesticides, including synthetic pyrethroids, the U.S. EPA requires fate information for registration, but the Pys have been relieved of this requirement. Piperonyl butoxide (PBO), a pyrethrum synergist and the most common commercial insecticide synergist, is as effective as fenvalerate (a synthetic pyrethroid insecticide) at protecting common eggplant from Colorado potato beetles. The present work was designed to determine the dissipation rates and half-lives (T_1/2) of Pys and PBO on pepper and tomato following application of a Multi-Purpose Insecticide formulation containing 0.2% pyrethrins, 1.0% piperonyl butoxide, 88.0% diatomaceous earth, and 10.8% inert ingredients at the rate of 6 lb of formulated product per acre, equivalent to 5.4 and 27.2 g a.i./A of Pys and PBO, respectively.

Materials and Methods

The study was conducted at Kentucky State University Agricultural Research Farm, Franklin County, Kentucky, on a silty loam soil (2% organic matter, pH of 6.7). Seedlings of pepper, cv. Bell Boy, and tomato, cv. Mountain Spring, were the planted crops. Multi-Purpose Insecticide formulation (Global Organic Resources, 8745 Grisson Rd. No.197, San Antonio, TX) was sprayed on pepper and tomato foliage when fruits were red ripe and peppers were mature green. Spraying was carried out at a height of 15 to 20 cm above plant canopy at the rate of 6 lb of formulated product.acre^-1 (5.4 and 27.2 g a.i. of pyrethrin and PBO, respectively) in a total volume of 157.5 L of water using a 4-gallon portable backpack sprayer (Solo) equipped with one conical nozzle operated at 40 p.s.i. Maximum and minimum temperatures averaged 27° and 18.6°C, respectively, with an average of 22.8°C during the experimental period. Mature pepper and tomato leaves were collected from the mid-canopy of field-treated plants and untreated controls. Triplicate leaf samples were collected randomly one hour prior to spraying and one hour to seven days post-treatment. Fruit were also harvested in a like manner.

Pyrethrin and PBO residues were extracted from pepper and tomato leaves by agitating 100 g of leaves with 200 mL of water containing 20 drops of 2% of Sur-Ten wetting agent for 20 min using a Multi-wrist shaker. The aqueous solution was filtered and then passed through a solid phase extraction cartridge. The Pys and PBO were then eluted from the cartridge with methanol. The methanol was evaporated and then the residues were re-dissolved in 0.5 mL of methanol. Pys and PBO were quantified with a high-pressure liquid chromatogragh. Residues on fruit of pepper and tomato were quantified in a similar manner.

Results and Discussion

The dissipation of pyrethrin was faster than PBO under field conditions (Figure 2). This indicated that pyrethrin rapidly disintegrated in sunlight and air, assuring no excessive buildup in the environment. Differences in concentration of residues of Pys detected on pepper and tomato were due to the different physical and chemical properties of each plant's surface. In addition, the rate at which a crop grows greatly influences the apparent persistence of pesticides on the leaves and other plant parts because residues are diluted by a greater surface area as the plant grows. Half-lives of several groups of insecticides are presented in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, the half-life (T_1/2), the time it takes for one-half of the pesticide to disappear for pyrethrin, is extremely low compared to other synthetic insecticides. Ideally, safe pesticides remain in the target area long enough to control the specific pest, then degrade into harmless compounds. The rapid breakdown of pyrethrin under field conditions is a desirable characteristic. In addition, the toxicity of Pys and PBO to mammals is quite low. Low toxicity provides safety in terms of environmental quality and consumer safety and for children and farm worker protection. The minimum intervals for picker reentry into treated vegetables are based on pesticide deposits and residues remaining on the treated foliage and fruits.

Pys have two types of action against insects: knockdown and kill. The extremely low mammalian toxicity of pyrethrin (acute oral LD₅₀ for male rats is 2,370 mg/kg and that of PBO 7,500 mg/kg) makes this group of insecticides an excellent candidate as an alternative insecticide. The low residues of Pys detected in runoff water (Table 2) and soil (data not shown), in addition to their low toxicity to mammals, should cause little environmental concern.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a capacity-building grant KYX-2803027 from USDA/CSREES to Kentucky State University under agreement No. KYX-10-99-33P.

Figure 1. Mode of action of pyrethrin formulation against insects.

Figure 2. Residues of pyrethrin on pepper and tomato leaves and fruits under field conditions.

Table 1. Half-lives (T_1/2) of pyrethrin and some of the commonly used insecticides on foliage.

Insecticide Crop T_½(Days)

Endosulfan Beet 2.9

Chard 3.0

Collards 3.7

Lettuce 2.6

Turnip 4.5

Acephate Tomato 2.9

Diazinone Tomato 0.8

Dimethoate Bean 4.3

Cucumber 3.8

Tomato 6.0

Soybeans 0.9

Beet 2.5

Lettuce 2.8

Broccoli 3.0

Cabbage 1.7

Chard 2.6

Collards 1.0

Malathion Turnip 6.4

Lima Beans 1.3

Carbaryl Strawberry 4.1

Tomato 1.4

Carbofuran Strawberry 3.1

Permethrin Soybean 7.7

Cypermethrin Bean 4.8

Deltamethrin Bean 4.1

Pyrethrins Pepper 0.90 hrs

Tomato 0.46 hrs

Table 2. Residues of pyrethrins (PY-1 and PY-2 and PBO in runoff water.

Days after Application PY-1 PY-2 Total PBO

ng/L

11 3.4 + 0.6 32.7 + 5.0 36.1 + 5.7 ND

29 0.5 + 0.2 19.5 + 2.0 20.0 + 2.2 ND

45 1.7 + 0.3 20.6 + 4.9 22.3 + 4.5 ND

ND = not detected.

Biological Control of European Corn Borers in Bell Peppers

Karen Friley, Brent Rowell, and Ric Bessin, Departments of Entomology and Horticulture

Introduction

In an effort to reduce pesticide costs and to use pesticides more effectively, commercial pepper growers in Kentucky have begun to adopt integrated pest management techniques. Difficult and often overlooked, biological control is a component of IPM that is receiving more attention and may prove valuable in vegetable crop production. Biological control techniques generally attempt to mimic natural controls in that they use a living "natural enemy" of the target pest to keep it in check, thereby eliminating or reducing the need for pesticides.

The European corn borer (ECB), Ostrinia nubilalis, is a serious pest of sweet corn and the primary pest of bell peppers in the state. Damage to pepper crops can be considerable and is most prevalent during the middle to later part of the growing season. The second and third generation ECB larvae are the principal culprits. After hatching, these larvae tunnel under the caps of pepper fruits, thereby protecting the larvae from pesticides. When using any control treatmentwhether pesticides or biological controlthis sheltering must be taken into consideration. Timing is a critical factor in controlling ECB.

Recent studies in the northeastern United States have demonstrated that the use of parasitic wasps of the genus Trichogramma is effective against ECB larvae in sweet corn. After a successful preliminary trial in 2001, the University of Kentucky Entomology and Horticulture departments, in collaboration with Pennsylvania State University and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, began a joint two-year study in 2002 to determine the feasibility of inundative releases of the egg parasite Trichogramma ostriniae (T.o) to control ECB in bell peppers. Researchers at Cornell University, the University of Maine, and the University of Massachusetts also began further studies with T.o. in sweet corn in 2002.

Materials and Methods

Five locations within a 35-mile radius of Lexington, Kentucky, were chosen as release sites for this study. Peppers were grown with conventional production methods at three sites and organic methods (certified organic) at two locations. Conventional field plots were located at the University of Kentucky Horticulture Research Farm ("South Farm," SF) and at the UK Spindletop Research Farm ("North Farm," NF), both in Lexington in Fayette County. The third conventional site was located within a commercial pepper grower's field in Scott County (SC). The two locations using organically approved production methods were at the students' CSA farm at Berea College (BC) in Madison County and at Kentucky State University's (KSU) Research and Demonstration Farm in Franklin County.

A bacterial-spot-resistant bell pepper cultivar, Aristotle, was used for these experiments at all locations. Plants were started in the greenhouse at the South Farm where they were grown conventionally or organically, depending on final destination. Peppers for the conventional plots were sown 26 March and transplanted to 72-cell trays on 14 April. Peppers for the organic plots were sown on 31 March and transplanted to 72-cell trays on 14 April. The commercial grower produced his own transplants (cv. Aristotle) at SC. Peppers were transplanted to the field on the dates shown in Table 1.

Peppers were transplanted into raised beds with black plastic and drip irrigation at all locations. At SF, NF, BC, and KSU, peppers were grown in two rows/bed with plants 15 in. apart in the rows and 18 in. between the double rows. At SC, peppers were grown in two rows/bed with plants 12 in. apart in the rows and 12 in. between the double rows. Beds were approximately 6 ft. between centers at each location. Drip irrigation was used at all locations. Nitrogen was applied according to standard commercial production practices for both conventional and organic locations throughout the growing season. Cultivation and hoeing was required for weed control at BC and KSU, while one application of herbicide and two cultivations were required in conventional plots at SF and NF. No insecticides were used in plots at any locations. However, insecticides were used at SC adjacent to the research plots. Copper was used for bacterial spot prevention at SC.

Treatments at each location consisted of a control (no wasp release) plot and a T.o. release plot. The two plots were at least 1,000 ft. apart except for SC where that separation distance was not possible because of the limited field size. Plots were at least 300 ft. apart at SC. At each location, we attempted to locate the release plot downwind from the control plot to reduce the possibility of T.o. being blown into the control plot. This was not possible at SF due to use of T.o. in a separate field for another research project. ECB pheromone traps (Texas cone traps) were placed adjacent to each plot to monitor timing and numbers of ECB moth flights. The traps were checked and emptied weekly, and the numbers of ECB moths recorded. Pheromone lures were replaced monthly.

Trichogramma ostriniae were obtained from Cornell University and sent by overnight express to arrive within a day or two of the scheduled release dates. These came in the form of parasitized Ephistia kuehniella eggs glued onto the inside of water-cooler cups that were stapled shut. A total release of 450,000 T.o./acre was made at each location. This total was divided among three releases of 150,000 T.o./acre each.

T.o. release dates at each location were chosen in accordance with a degree-day model predicting egg laying of second generation ECB. Releases began on or near the model-predicted date for the initiation of second generation ECB egg laying at that location. The second and third releases at each location corresponded to model-predicted 25% and 75% completion of egg laying (Table 1). Cups containing the T.o. were tied to pepper plants in the center of each release plot. The stapled cups protected the T.o. from predators while allowing the parasites to exit through small pinholes punctured into the cups.

Twenty sentinel ECB egg masses, provided by the USDA laboratory at Iowa State University, were pinned to the undersides of pepper leaves in the border rows of both the control and release plots at the time of each release and at weekly intervals thereafter until final harvests. These were used to determine the percentage of parasitization at each location and to help determine whether Trichogramma ostriniae were establishing themselves. These egg masses were retrieved after 48 to 72 hours, placed into gelatin capsules, and stored in a temperature-controlled cabinet at 74°F.

Plots were 70 ft. long at all locations, with six double rows, except for the control plot at NF, which had rows 54 ft. long. Plots at each location were approximately 2,520 sq. ft. (672 plants/plot in double rows), except for the control plot at NF, which was approximately 1,944 sq. ft. (518 plants/plot in double rows). The four inner rows of each plot were harvested to determine ECB infestation levels. For the second and third harvest at SC, three inner rows and one border row were harvested. Correction factors were used to equalize yields harvested from different sizes of plots. Average percentage of pepper fruits infested with ECB were calculated and compared. Peppers were harvested and separated into insect-damaged and undamaged fruits, then sorted again according to USDA grades, and then counted and weighed. All fruit appearing to be insect-damaged were carefully dissected to look for ECB larvae. The number of ECB-damaged or infested fruits as well as the number of larvae in each fruit were recorded. The number of times plots were harvested varied by location (Table 2).

The average percentage of parasitized ECB sentinel egg masses and eggs and the average percentage of pepper fruits infested with ECB were compared using T-tests (P < 0.05).

Results and Discussion

The overall average percentage of fruits infested with ECB in 2003 was lower (0.6%) in the T.o. release plots than in the control plots (1.1%) when data from all locations were combined (Table 3). While this is almost a 2:1 ratio, the numbers of infested fruits were so low that these differences were not statistically significant. These results are consistent with those for 2002, in which low overall numbers of ECB did not impact marketable yields between control and release plots.

Percent parasitization of ECB sentinel egg masses and eggs for 2002 was determined. The average percentage of parasitized egg masses for all sites was 6.8% in the control plots compared to 14.3% in the release plots (Table 4). The average percentage of parasitized eggs for all sites was 1.4% in the control plots compared to 6.1% in the release plots (Table 5). But percent parasitization of the masses and eggs was not statistically different. Any parasitization that occurred in the control plots most likely was the result of native natural enemies in the plots.

Numbers of ECB moths captured in pheromone traps have not yet been tabulated. Determination of percent parasitization of ECB sentinel egg masses for 2003 has also not been completed at the time of this writing.

European corn borer numbers were low at all locations in Central Kentucky throughout the 2003 growing season as indicated by trap catches. Due to the cold and wet spring, peppers at all locations were transplanted later than usual. T.o. were released in accordance to the degree-day model, but because the peppers were transplanted late, the fruits matured late, so the moth timing may have also been late. Thus, by the time the ECB moth numbers began to grow, the number of T.o. remaining may not have made much of an impact.

Biological control of ECB in peppers using inundative releases of T.o. appears promising, at least when ECB infestations are low. This was the second of a two-year study. Further research needs to be pursued, especially regarding the numbers of T.o./acre to be released, the number of releases, as well as consideration of alternate nectar sources and the possibility of habitat modification for the T.o.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to greatly thank Darrell Slone, April Satanek, Dave Lowry, Larry Blandford, Philip Bush, and the UK Horticulture Farm summer workers for all of their hard work and wonderful assistance. Thanks also to Dave Spalding for help in making the beds and laying plastic at BC and KSU. We would also like to thank the other institutions and individuals involved in this cooperative research, including Dr. Sean Clark and Dr. Michael Panciera at Berea College, Tony Silvernail and Mac Stone at Kentucky State University, John Bell in Scott County, Jeanette Dyer from the USDA lab at Iowa State University, and Sylvie Chenus at Cornell University. This project is supported by a grant from the USDA's Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES).

Table 1. Test locations, cultural practices, transplant, and T.o. release dates at five Central Kentucky locations, 2003.

Location¹ Transplant Date System² 1st Release 2nd Release 3rd Release

SF 30 May Conv 18 July 25 July 1 August

NF 5 June Conv 18 July 25 July 1 August

SC 20 May Conv 18 July 24 July 1 August

BC 6 June Organic 8 July 17 July 24 July

KSU 5 June Organic 18 July 24 July 30 July

¹ SF = South Farm, NF = North Farm, SC = Scott County, BC = Berea College, KSU = Kentucky State University.
²Conv = grown using conventional practices; Organic = grown under certified organic conditions.

Table 2. Bell pepper harvest dates at five locations in Central Kentucky, 2003.

Location¹ 1st Harvest 2nd Harvest 3rd Harvest

SF 23 July 12 August 19 September

NF 23 July 13 August 16 September

SC 29 July 18 August 9 September

BC 7 August 5 September --

KSU 6 August 10 September --

¹SF = South Farm, NF = North Farm, SC = Scott County, BC = Berea College, KSU = Kentucky State University.

Table 3. Average percentage of pepper fruits infested with one or more European corn borer larvae at each location (all harvests combined) and for all sites, 2003.

Treatment SF¹ NF SC BC KSU All Sites

Control 0.35 0.37 3.13 0.25 1.08 1.09

Release 0.24 0.25 1.13 0.29 1.10 0.59

Significance -- -- -- -- -- 0.34²

¹SF = South Farm, NF = North Farm, SC = Scott County, BC = Berea College, KSU = Kentucky State University.
² Difference not statistically significant by T test at P < 0.05.

Table 4. Average percentage of parasitized European corn borer sentinel egg masses (all dates combined) and for all sites, 2002.

Treatment SF¹ NF SC BC KSU All Sites

Control 3.08 6.55 7.32 8.69 7.95 6.84

Release 24.82 3.72 19.12 11.38 12.36 14.26

Significance -- -- -- -- -- 0.18²

¹SF = South Farm, NF = North Farm, SC = Scott County, BC = Berea College, KSU = Kentucky State University.
² Difference not statistically significant by T test at P < 0.05.

Table 5. Average percentage of parasitized European corn borer sentinel eggs (all dates combined) and for all sites, 2002.

Treatment SF¹ NF SC BC KSU All Sites

Control 0.95 1.51 0.99 1.79 1.51 1.36

Release 10.30 1.44 11.40 3.14 4.04 6.05

Significance -- -- -- -- -- 0.11²

¹ SF = South Farm, NF = North Farm, SC = Scott County, BC = Berea College, KSU = Kentucky State University.
² Difference not statistically significant by T test at P < 0.05.

Development of Organic Production Systems for Kentucky Horticultural Crops

Derek Law, Brent Rowell, and Mark Williams, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

Bell peppers are a popular and profitable crop for many Kentucky vegetable growers, particularly those selling to the wholesale fresh market. Additional demand exists for bell peppers and other fruit and vegetable crops produced in large quantities using certified organic practices. Because organic agriculture has become a fast-growing segment of American agriculture, there is an economic basis for developing organic production techniques suitable for Kentucky farmers. Organic vegetable production system research has recently begun at the University of Kentucky Horticulture Research Farm in Lexington, Kentucky. Eight acres are in transition, to be certified organic by 2006. Investigations aimed at establishing organic production practices began earlier this year. The primary purpose of this year's research was testing various weed control methods to ascertain which should be included in future trials.

Methods and Materials

Five weed management treatments were compared for their effectiveness and influence on bell pepper yields during summer 2003. Treatments included straw, chipped wood mulch, compost, corn gluten, and undersown clover as a living mulch.

Capsicum annuum `Aristotle' was sown on 23 March and transferred to cells on 14 April. Prior to transplanting, plants were fertigated nine times with Omega 6-6-6 at a rate of 25 fl oz per gallon of water.

Prior to planting, an organic fertilizer (Nature Safe Fine 10-2-8) was applied to the test plots and incorporated at a rate of approximately 60 lb N/A. An additional 55 lb N/A was fertigated in six weekly doses using liquid Phytamin 7-0-0. Parasitic Trichogramma wasps (Trichogramma brassicae) were released as a precautionary measure on July 18, July 25, and August 1 at a rate of 150,000/A for European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis) control. No insect- or disease-related problems were found during crop growth.

Main plots consisted of flat ground or black plastic-covered raised beds with peppers planted in double rows on 12-in. centers within the rows. The five weed control treatments and an untreated control were randomly distributed within each plot. The plots were replicated four times. Black plastic mulch with drip irrigation was used only on the raised beds, and the weed control treatments were placed between the beds. Drip irrigation was used on the flat ground treatments, and the mulch treatments were spread evenly over the entire planted area. Mulch treatments were applied at planting on 5 June, with the exception of the living mulch treatment, which was applied 16 June. Wood chips and compost were applied to a depth of 3 in., while the straw was spread to a depth of 6 in. Corn gluten was applied four times at a rate of 50 lb per 1,000 sq. ft. during the growth of the crop. The living mulch treatment consisted of white Dutch clover (Trifolium repens) at a rate of 20 lb/A two weeks after transplanting and following a single cultivation. Following the initial application of these treatments, the plots were not managed for weed control in any way for the remainder of the season. A tensiometer was placed in one black plastic plot and one flat ground plot, and water was applied when necessary.

Weed density was recorded on 10 July and 4 August using objective visual analysis on a 1 to 10 scale. A list of weed species was compiled through continuous observation during the growing season. Peppers were harvested on August 4 and August 24 and, after being graded into marketable fruits or culls, were counted and weighed. Marketable fruits were sorted in extra-large, large, medium, and choppers.

Discussion and Results

The primary purpose of this research was to conduct preliminary tests of various weed control methods to ascertain which should be included in future trials.

The objective analysis of the visual data indicated the following order of weed control efficacy: straw > wood chips > compost > corn gluten > living mulch. Overall pepper yields were greatly reduced on both raised bed and flat ground. The raised bed treatments yielded some marketable peppers; however, those grown on flat ground produced minimal amounts. In this experiment, none of the weed control treatments gave acceptable levels of control.

This is the first year of transition to an organic management scheme. Crop rotations and cover crops are an integral part of a mature organic farm and are viewed as important elements in whole farm fertility and weed control management.

Organic Fertilizers and Composts for Vegetable Transplant Production

Robert Murray and Robert G. Anderson, Horticulture Department

Introduction

Interest in organic production methods for vegetables continues to increase. Field production practices for organic vegetables have a long history, but practices to grow organic vegetable transplants in a spring greenhouse are poorly known. Organic fertilizers and composts are available, but the efficacy and rates for use have not been evaluated. Experiments in the summer of 2003 were completed to learn more about the use of two organic fertilizers (fish emulsion 5-1-1 and Omega 6-6-6) and three composts (derived from horse manure, cow manure, and worm castings) for the production of vegetable transplants.

Materials and Methods

Tomato (Better Boy) and pepper (California Wonder) seed were sown into MetroMix 360 in 200-cell plug trays. After germination, plants were watered with clear water only, until the "nutrient deficient" seedlings were transplanted two weeks later.

Seedlings were transplanted into 3-in. pots that contained Scott's MetroMix 560 (not an approved organic growing medium) in Experiment 1. Plants were irrigated by hand, approximately 4 fl oz per plant, three times each week with solutions of 0, ¼ tsp., ½ tsp., or 1 tsp. per gallon of water with Omega 6-6-6 (microbe digested organic fertilizer derived from blood meal, bone meal, and sulfate of potash, Peaceful Valley Farm Supply, Grass Valley, CA) or Safer Fish Emulsion (derived from acidulated fish tankage, urea, phosphoric acid, and potassium chloride, Woodstream Corp, Lititz, PA). An inorganic fertilizer, Peter's 20-10-20 at 1/8 tsp., 1/4 tsp. or 1/2 tsp. per gallon of water was used as a standard and control treatment. Plants were typically watered with clear water twice each day unless fertilizer was applied. Plants were harvested after 16 days, and dry weights were obtained.

In Experiment 2, seedlings were transplanted into 3-in. pots containing Scott's MetroMix 560 mixed with (0%, 10%, 20%, or 30%, by volume) composted worm castings (derived from horse manure and peat moss, Wyatt Farms, Benton, KY), commercial composted cow manure, 0.5-0.05-0.05 (derived from cow manure, peat, and organic humus, Green Thumb Organics Inc., LaPorte, IN), or commercial composted horse manure (Thoroughbred Compost Inc., Lexington, KY). Plants were irrigated with clear water only. Plants were harvested, and dry weights were determined after four weeks. Plants were also grown with a standard inorganic fertilizer, Peter's 20-10-20, at ½ tsp. per gallon of water (three times per week) as a control.

Each treatment in Experiments 1 and 2 was composed of three replications of six plants per replication. Plants were grown in a naturally ventilated double poly greenhouse in June and July 2003. Greenhouse temperatures were 65° to 95°F each day. Soil samples of the initial mix were collected for each experiment. At harvest, soil samples were collected from each treatment and nutrient analysis was completed at the UK Soil Testing Laboratory.

Results and Discussion

Fish emulsion and Omega organic fertilizers were effective fertilizer treatments for tomato and pepper transplants. Fish emulsion increased dry weights of transplants approximately 200% to 300%, and Omega increased dry weights 200% to 500% over the unfertilized control (Table 1). The inorganic fertilizer increased plant dry weights by approximately 200% to 700%, but this fertilizer has a much higher percent of nutrients than the organic fertilizers. Plants were considered typical quality transplants, even though they were not grown in transplant trays.

Levels of plant nutrients in the growing media at the end of the experiments were reasonably good. Yet the analyses did not reflect the differences in fertilizer rates used in the experiments (Table 2). The pH of the media remained in the appropriate range with the expected decrease in pH at the higher rates of Peter's and Omega. Electrical conductivity in all treatments was somewhat higher than optimal levels. The level of nitrate nitrogen was surprisingly low for all treatments. Phosphorus levels were lowest in the fish emulsion, yet no problems would be expected at these levels. Potassium was somewhat low for all treatments. The highest fertilizer rates for Peter's and Omega yielded the lowest potassium levels for an unknown reason. Most calcium and magnesium were supplied by the irrigation water, not the fertilizer. Calcium levels were fine in all treatments. Magnesium levels were increased somewhat by the Omega organic fertilizer.

Mixtures of organic composts and a typical growing medium were not effective for production of vegetable transplants (Table 3). Tomato and pepper plants grew similarly for the first seven days in Experiment 2. By day seven, the plants treated with Peter's or composted cow manure were growing normally and remained green, while the plants in the horse and worm compost mixtures and the untreated control were changing little. By day 14, plants in the no-fertilizer control and horse and worm composts began to turn purple on the stems, leaves turned yellow, and plants seemed to have stopped growing. At harvest, the plants with Peter's were green and tall; the plants treated with cow manure were generally green but had been slowing down for a week, and yellowing was starting to occur. The plants grown in worm and horse compost or the no-fertilizer control had similar heights and appearance including purple stems, yellow leaves, and some dead leaves at the bases of stems. The mean dry weight of the plants grown in worm and horse compost was less than that of the control plants grown in MetroMix 560 alone. This suggests that the worm and horse composts were probably not fully composted, and they stole nutrients from the MetroMix 560 as composting continued.

Young pepper plants performed similarly to the young tomato plants grown in different types of organic composts. The pepper plants treated with Peter's appeared normal and were green at harvest. Pepper plants treated with composted cow manure were only somewhat better than the other composts. Young pepper plants grown with composted horse manure were significantly smaller at harvest than all other plants.

The nutritional characteristics of the organic composts were significantly different as demonstrated by the soil tests. The composted worm castings had a high pH, high levels of calcium and magnesium, and very high levels of nitrate nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium that led to a very high conductivity reading (Table 4). The very high nutrient levels were satisfactorily diluted by mixing with Metromix 560 and then used to grow tomato and pepper transplants. It is likely that this compost was incompletely composted; thus, plants were smaller than those grown without fertilizer.

The composted cow manure had a very low pH and low levels of phosphorus, a moderate level of potassium, and very high levels of nitrate nitrogen, calcium, and magnesium that led to a very high electrical conductivity (Table 4). When added to Metromix 560, the conductivity, magnesium, and calcium readings were brought to typical use standards, but N, P, and K were at very low levels, and the pH was too low. However, plants grew reasonably well in the mixtures. Plants in the 20% and 30% mixtures were relatively normal.

The composted horse manure had a very high pH and very high levels of phosphorus and potassium that led to very high electrical conductivity (Table 4). Nitrate nitrogen, calcium, and magnesium were measured at typical use levels. Unfortunately, plants performed poorly in the three mixtures of composted horse manure, probably because this material was incompletely composted.

Conclusions

Omega and fish emulsion organic fertilizers can be used to grow vegetable transplants. Based on the experiments reported here, it seems that these fertilizers should be applied four to eight times at the label rate during the life (eight to nine weeks) of tomato or pepper transplants. Growers will have to learn the amount best for their production conditions. A mixture, 20% to 30%, of composted cow manure may be effective for transplant production, but mixtures of composted worm castings and composted horse manure were not effective. Separate trials, not reported here, demonstrated that the composted horse manure (Thoroughbred Compost) was an effective addition to growing media when the mixture was fertilized normally, so composting could proceed without affecting plant growth. Omega and fish emulsion were not effective as a foliar-applied fertilizer in a separate experiment, not reported here. More work is necessary to evaluate foliar application of fertilizer for greenhouse transplants.

Table 1. The average percent increase in the dry weight, when compared to the unfertilized control, of tomato and pepper transplants grown with two organic fertilizers and a standard inorganic fertilizer.

Fertilizer rate (tsp. per gallon of water) Fish Emulsion Omega 6-6-6 Peter’s 20-10-20

Tomato Pepper Tomato Pepper Tomato Pepper

Percent Increase in Dry Weight

1/8 na¹ na na na 218 207

1/4 190 173 216 247 413 407

1/2 280 173 355 447 732 687

1 332 307 502 447 na na

¹na = not applicable.

Table 2. Nutrient analyses of growing media collected at harvest.

Fertilizer Rate (tsp. per gallon) pH Conductivity Nitrate Nitrogen (ppm) Phosphorus (ppm) Potassium (ppm) Calcium (ppm) Magnesium (ppm)

Target Level for Transplant Production

5.6-6.0 0.5-0.7 30-75 5-10 50-100 60-120 30-70

Peter’s 20-10-20

1/8 6.0 0.9 3 4 70 83 23

1/4 5.9 0.7 3 4 28 79 22

1/2 5.7 0.8 3 7 17 97 25

Omega 6-6-6

1/4 5.9 1.2 2 4 60 120 71

1/2 5.7 1.2 2 7 37 135 76

1 5.5 1.1 2 10 14 132 71

Fish Emulsion 5-1-1

1/4 5.9 1.0 4 2 44 107 30

1/2 5.9 1.0 2 3 36 103 29

1 5.8 1.1 2 3 40 128 35

Table 3. The average percent increase in the dry weight, when compared to the unfertilized control, of tomato and pepper transplants grown in mixtures of organic composts and a standard inorganic fertilizer.

Mixture Composted Horse Manure Composted Worm Castings Composted Cow Manure Inorganic Fertilizer Control

Tomato Pepper Tomato Pepper Tomato Pepper Tomato Pepper

Average Percent Increase in Dry Weight

10% 60 53 63 122 128 136

20% 55 42 95 131 226 184 537 567

30% 30 27 84 118 220 122

Table 4. Nutrient analyses of mixtures of organic composts and growing media collected after preparation and at harvest.

Growing Medium Mixture pH Conductivity Nitrate Nitrogen (ppm) Phosphorus (ppm) Potassium (ppm) Calcium (ppm) Magnesium (ppm)

Composted worm castings

Initial 6.8 5.3 295 90 1751 155 104

10% 6.7 0.7 5 10 71 62 26

20% 6.7 0.7 3 14 78 67 28

30% 6.7 2.2 101 38 634 95 53

Composted cow manure

Initial 4.0 6.7 389 0.4 192 1521 309

10% 5.4 0.7 0 0.3 29 116 36

20% 4.8 1.2 3 0.7 27 170 64

30% 4.6 1.4 5 0.4 22 209 33

Composted horse manure

Initial 8.2 8.5 135 65 3476 118 55

10% 6.6 0.7 7 14 107 41 16

20% 6.9 1.5 16 40 386 50 10

30% 7.2 1.4 12 42 412 39 14

MetroMix 560

Initial 5.3 2.0 42 15 83 79 55

At harvest 6.1 0.8 3 2 65 70 42

High Tunnel Production for Cold-Season Crops

Amanda Ferguson, Darrell Slone, Phillip Bush, Robert Houtz, and Brent Rowell, Department of Horticulture

Introduction

After traveling throughout the world, the plasticulture technique known as high tunneling has returned to the University of Kentucky. Begun in the 1950s by UK researchers such as E.M. Emmert, simply constructed plastic tunnels have been used from Turkey to Egypt to China. Researchers at the University of Kentucky are revitalizing and improving this technology. While other universities publish plans and guidelines for large-scale tunnels, often including a kit, UK tunnels are low-cost and, when possible, rely on common materials. Kentucky's mild winter enables the use of simpler tunnels. The goal of this research is to develop a low-cost production system that allows Kentucky farmers to produce high-quality produce off-season for local markets.

A high tunnel is a plastic-covered house, usually Quonset in shape. There is no electricity for heating or ventilation, and the only external link is irrigation. The frame can be made from many materials, e.g., steel, PVC, or wood. The tunnel itself should have two end walls, with a door either at both ends or at least a window on the end opposite the door for ventilation. A clear 6-mil plastic cover is preferable, one that will last throughout the year. When the season is over, the tunnel can be dismantled for the next year, or moved.

High tunnels are used primarily as season-extenders. The sunny days in March and April in Kentucky can warm tunnels, allowing production of warm-season crops such as tomatoes and cucumbers. In the fall, when the days are shorter and frost threatens, tunnels can capture heat from the sun and protect plants at night. A fine layer of condensation may build up on the walls and ceiling of the tunnel, which helps trap additional heat. We hope to extend cold-season vegetable production through the winter.

Materials and Methods

At the Horticulture Research Farm in Lexington, four high tunnels were constructed in early November 2002. Each tunnel was built with a single layer of 6-mil clear plastic, braced by painted PVC pipe, and wooden ends. The tunnels measured 10 ft. wide by 40 ft. long by 6 ft. high. Two rows of spinach were planted in each tunnel. One row was additionally protected by a small tunnel, made of PVC bent into a 4-ft. diameter half circle, covered with clear 6-mil plastic. Rows of spinach were also planted outside the high tunnels, to provide an uncovered control. Due to extreme wetness in November and December, our cold-season crops did not get planted until mid-December. For each treatment (none, one, or two covers) ground and air temperatures, relative humidity, and light were recorded at 30-minute intervals.

Results

The tunnel within a tunnel (two covers) had the highest yields (Table 1). This trend continued until the outside temperature became what most would consider more appropriate for spinach growth (50° to 64°F). At this time, spinach grown outside a tunnel (no cover) had yields that began to equal or exceed yields of spinach grown in a tunnel (data not shown).

References

Butler, Bryan, H. Swartz, and D. Lankford. June 2002. High tunnels extend season and allow winter production. The Vegetable Growers News.
Orzolek, M., and O.S. Wells. 2002. High Tunnels for Early Spring/Late Fall Production. PENpages.
Wells, O. Rowcovers and High Tunnels Growth-enhancing Technology. American Society for Horticultural Science Seminar Series.

Table 1. Average leaf areas and weights per plant for spinach grown without protection (no cover) or in unheated tunnels (one cover) or in a tunnel within a tunnel (two covers).
Number of Covers	Average Leaf Area per Plant (cm²)	Average Weight per Plant (g)
None	331	31
One	1124	87
Two	1784	114

Equal opportunity statement

Table 1. Early harvest skin color, yield distribution, and estimated yield for colored and fingerling potatoes, Lexington, Kentucky.
Cultivar	Seed Source	Skin Color¹	Grade C²(%)	Grade B³(%)	Grade A⁴(%)	Lb/A (cwt)
Red Gold	JS	red	23	54	23	216.1
Reddale	TS	red	11	43	45	193.9
Cranberry Red	TS	red	18	75	8	181.7
Rose Gold	TS	pink	31	59	11	175.0
Red Pontiac	SO	red	22	49	30	162.2
All Red	JS	dk red	42	56	2	152.9
Red Cloud	TS	red	34	54	12	119.3
Dk. Red Norland	JS	red	37	49	14	68.4
Corola	TS	yellow	54	42	4	150.4
Yukon Gold	JS	yellow	16	46	38	140.8
Superior	JS	white	14	66	21	146.8
Butte	TS	russet	80	20	0	129.6
Kennebec	SO	white	38	58	3	84.2
Catalina	PA	white	92	8	0	34.0
Caribe	TS	dk blue	14	67	19	193.9
All Blue	JS	violet	78	22	0	145.0
Fingerlings			% Short⁵	% Medium⁶	% Long⁷	Lb/A (cwt)
Swedish Peanut	TS	yellow	37	63	0	152.2
Russian Banana	JS	yellow	50	50	0	107.6
¹ Exterior color; dk = dark ² Grade C = potatoes with diameters between 1 in. and 1¾ in., often called “creamers.” ³ Grade B = potatoes with diameters between 1¾ in. and 2¼ in. ⁴ Grade A = potatoes with diameters larger than 2¼ in. ⁵ Short = potatoes less than 2 in. long. ⁶ Medium = potatoes between 2 in. and 3½ in. in length. ⁷ Long = potatoes longer than 3½ in.

Table 2. Flesh color and appearance ratings of the colored and fingerling potato early harvest, Lexington, Kentucky.
Cultivar	Flesh Color	Shape Uniformity (1-5)¹	Size Uniformity (1-5)²	Overall Appearance (1-9)³
Red Gold	lt yellow	4.0	4.0	7.0
Reddale	white	3.0	4.0	6.0
Cranberry Red	pink	4.0	3.0	7.0
Rose Gold	lt yellow	4.0	4.0	8.0
Red Pontiac	white	3.0	3.0	5.0
All Red	pink	4.0	3.0	8.0
Red Cloud	white	2.0	3.0	6.0
Dk. Red Norland	white	4.0	4.0	7.0
Corola	lt yellow	3.0	3.0	6.0
Yukon Gold	lt yellow	3.0	4.0	5.0
Superior	white	4.0	4.0	6.0
Butte	white	4.0	4.0	8.0
Kennebec	white	3.0	3.0	5.0
Catalina	white	3.0	2.5	6.0
Caribe	white	4.0	3.0	6.0
All Blue	violet	4.0	3.0	7.0
Fingerlings
Swedish Peanut	yellow	3.0	4.0	7.0
Russian Banana	yellow	3.0	3.0	6.5
¹ Shape uniformity: 1 = least uniform, most variable, 5 = completely uniform. ²Size uniformity: 1 = least uniform, most variable, 5 = completely uniform. ³ Overall appearance: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 1. Results for soil tests, gourmet potato RACE trial, for Eastern and Central Kentucky, 2003.
PH	Buffer pH	P	K	Ca	Mg	Zn
5.26	6.5	98	302	2113	179	9.5

Table 2. Potato varieties evaluated in the 2003 "Gourmet" and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky and their skin and flesh colors, reported maturities and disease resistances, sources, tuber characteristics, and storability.
Cultivar	Skin Color	Flesh Color	Maturity (days)	Maturity Class	Disease Resistance¹	Source²	Tuber Size or Type	Storability
Superior	White	White	NA³	NA³	NA³	WCF	NA³	NA³
Kennebec	White	White	NA	NA	NA	WCF	NA	NA
Butte	Russet	White	110-135	Late	none listed	TR	NA	NA
XP707 Corola	Gold	Gold	90-110	Mid	none listed	TR		Good
Yukon Gold	Yellowish	Lt. Yellow	70-90	Early	R-leaf roll, potato virus	JS	Med-Lg	Excellent
Swedish Peanut	Gold/Brown	Gold	105-135	Late	none listed	TR	Fingerling	Excellent
Russian Banana	Yellow	Lt. Yellow	NA	Late	R-scab, T-late blight	JS	Fingerling	Good
Dark Red Norland	Red	White	NA	Early	R-scab, PVA, PVY, PLRV	JS	NA	Good
Red Dale	Red	White	70-90	Early	R-verticillium wilt	TR	Large	Good
Red Cloud	Red	White	90-110	Mid	none listed	TR	NA	Excellent
Red Pontiac	Red	White	NA		NA	WCF	NA	NA
Red Gold	Red	Yellow	NA	Early	R- scab, virus	JS	Medium	Fair-poor
Rose Gold	Red	Yellow	90-110	Mid	none listed	TR	NA	Fair
All Red (Cranberry Rd)	Red	Pink	NA	Mid	none listed	JS	NA	NA
Cranberry Red (All Red)	Red	Red	70-90	Early	none listed	TR	NA	Good
All Blue	Blue	Blue	NA	Mid-Late	none listed	JS	Medium	Good
Caribe	Blue	White	70-90	V.Early	none listed	TR		Good
Catalina	Brown	white	70-90	Early	NA	Bejo	Flat	NA
¹R = resistant; T = tolerant; PVA = Potato Virus A; PVY = Potato virus Y; PLRV = Potato leaf roll virus. ²Sources listed at the end of the 2003 Research Report. ³NA = not available or not reported.

Table 3. Quantity and percentage of seed in each size class for the 2003 "Gourmet" and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.
Cultivar	Seed Planted (lb)	Percentage of:
Cultivar	Seed Planted (lb)	B-size	2-cut	4-cut
Superior	7.3	51	50	0
Kennebec	17.4	32	38	31
Butte	7.0	29	71	0
XP707 Corola	7.1	13	75	11
Yukon Gold	16.0	36	64	0
Swedish Peanut	7.1	100	0	0
Russian Banana	9.9	81	20	0
Dark Red Norland	8.1	42	55	4
Red Dale	7.2	52	49	0
Red Cloud	6.9	35	66	0
Red Pontiac	27.1	16	33	51
Red Gold	7.4	54	46	0
Rose Gold	7.2	52	48	0
All Red (Cranberry Red)	7.1	29	15	52
Cranberry Red (All Red)	7.0	38	62	0
All Blue	7.3	51	45	4
Caribe	7.3	61	40	0

Table 4. Yield of small medium, large, US #1 and cull potatoes, and ratings of tuber appearance for the first new potato harvest (16 July), 2003 "Gourmet," and new potato race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.
Variety	Small <1 7/8 in.		Medium >1 7/8 in.		Large >2 1/4 in.		US # 1¹ Potatoes (cwt/A)	Culls (lb)	Tuber Appearance
Variety	(no./A)	(lb/A)	(no./A)	(lb/A)	(no./A)	(lb/A)	US # 1¹ Potatoes (cwt/A)	Culls (lb)	Skin Color²	Flesh Color²	Shape³	Size³	Appearance⁴	Comments/Taste
Superior	8297	415	2489	3008	5704	18357	214	0.4	W	W	4	4	8	nice white potato
Kennebec	33188	830	4667	4356	52894	13275	176	5.4	W	W	2	2	4	very variable in size, poor shape with a lot of knobs
Butte	49783	3008	50820	7156	50820	14624	218	0.0	W/R	W	4	3 ½	8-9	very attractive long white
XP707 Corola	40448	1763	44597	4667	52894	12238	169	0.0	W	Y	4	3	7 ½	fairly attractive, nice looking potato
Yukon Gold	9334	415	21780	2697	36300	1823	145	0.0	W	Y/W	4	4	8	nice looking potato
Dark Red Norland	8297	207	33188	3630	7260	23751	274	0.2	R	W	4	4	8	some growth cracks or splits; deep eyes, nice looking
Red Dale	6223	103	16594	1141	59117	22506	236	0.6	R	W	4	2	7	some huge potatoes, nice looking but size variable
Red Cloud	23854	726	352634	3319	52894	13483	176	0.5	R	W	3	2	6	a lot of growth cracks & knobs, fair
Red Pontiac	4667	1763	46671	7053	36300	13068	201	0.0	R	W	4	3	7	fairly nice
Red Gold	4149	104	38374	2178	81934	19290	215	0.0	R	Y/W	4	3	8	attractive, could be redder
Rose Gold	29034	1348	45634	5912	44597	14001	199	0.7	R/W	Y	4	4	8	white skin with pink especially near eyes, nice
All Red (Cranberry Red)	62228	2593	52894	5393	84008	21987	274	1.1	R	W/R	2	2	5	fair shape and size quite variable
Cranberry Red (All Red)	41486	933	30077	2074	41486	7675	97	0.0	R	W	4	2 ½	8	dark red attractive potato
All Blue	4149	103	84008	7364	45634	8297	157	0.3	P	P/W	4	3	6	rough skin, Rhizoctonia infection(?), alligator skin, poor
Caribe	17631	830	33188	4045	64303	18150	222	0.1	P/R	W	4	3	8	purplish red skin color, fairly attractive potato, nice
Catalina	21780	519	18669	1141	12446	1763	29	0.0	W	W	2	2	2	poor yield, very uneven size distribution, no good
¹Marketable yield is all medium and large tubers free from defects. ²W = White; R = Red; P = Pink; Y = Yellow. ³Scale of 1 to 5: 1 = least uniform, most variable; 5 = completely uniform. ⁴Scale of 1 to 9: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 6. Yield by length size classes, total yield, and cull weight and ratings of tuber appearance for the first (16 July) and second harvest of fingerling potatoes, 2003 "Gourmet," and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.
Cultivar	Tuber Size Class						Total Yield¹(cwt/A)	Culls (lb)	Tuber Appearance					Comments/taste
	< 2 in. long		2 - 3½ in. long		>3½ in. long				Tuber Appearance
	(no./A)	(lb/A)	(no./A)	(lb/A)	(no./A)	(lb/A)			Skin Color²	Flesh Color²	Shape³	Size³	Appearance⁴
Harvested 16 July 2003
Swedish Peanut	80897	1452	100603	6430	4149	830	87	0	W	Y	2	2	5	variable, curved shape
Russian Banana	91268	1867	71563	4252	53931	6845	130	0	W	W	3	2	7 or 6.5
Harvested 13 September 2003
Swedish Peanut	68451	3111	52894	4460	35263	4771	123	622	W	Y/W	2	2	7
Russian Banana	32151	1245	39411	2385	30077	3630	73	104	W	Y/W	1	1	5.5
¹Marketable yield is all tubers free from defects. ²W = White; Y = Yellow. ³Scale of 1 to 5: 1 = least uniform, most variable; 5 = completely uniform. ⁴Scale of 1 to 9: 1 = worst, 9 = best.

Table 7. Culinary evaluation of six selected cultivars grown in the 2003 "Gourmet" and new potato Race trial for Eastern and Central Kentucky.
Cultivar	Method of Preparation
	Baked		Boiled
	Rating	Comments	Rating	Comments
Russian Banana	4	Yellow flesh, good flavor when baked, a little mealy	3	Skin is bitter, flesh is OK, good texture, better baked
Dark Red Norland	2	Good potato flavor, poor texture (too firm)	3.5	Good texture boiled, firm bite, bitter skin
Superior	4.5	Buttery yellow flesh, good baked potato	4	Good flavor, good texture
Yukon Gold	3.5	Yellow flesh, great visual color	3	Buttery yellow flesh, good flavor
Red Dale	1.5	Mushy texture, watery flavor	2.5	Watery flavor, sticky
Kennebec	3	Firm texture	4.5	Very good boiled, good potato flavor
Potatoes tested 4 August 2003. Evaluations were conducted by Martha Yount and Sarah Brandl, Family and Consumer Sciences Agents. Evaluation panel was composed of Family and Consumer Sciences Agents from the Quicksand Area.

Table 1. Marketable yields and gross returns of slicing cucumber varieties and advanced breeding lines; data are averages from four replications at Lexington, Kentucky, 2003. Entries ranked from highest to lowest yield of US Fancy plus US No. 1 grade fruits.
Entry	Seed Source	US Fancy+ US No. 1 (tons/acre)	Marketable Yields¹			Gross Returns² ($/acre)	Overall Appear.
			% Fancy+ No. 1 (%)	US No. 2	US No. 1 large
			% Fancy+ No. 1 (%)	tons/acre
Daytona	SW	20.7	83	2.4	1.8	8864	5.0
Dasher II	SW	20.4	79	4.0	1.5	7619	7.5
General Lee	SW	20.1	80	3.3	1.6	7463	7.5
SRQ 2983	SS	19.4	79	3.7	1.4	7166	4.5
Greensleeves	HM	19.1	81	3.1	1.4	6877	6.0
Turbo	RU	18.8	82	3.1	1.0	6663	7.5
Indy	SW	18.8	82	2.8	1.3	6700	7.5
Cobra	UA	18.5	78	3.4	1.7	6959	5.5
SXQ 2387	SS	18.5	73	3.8	3.1	7639	7.0
Speedway	RU	18.4	79	3.3	1.7	6907	5.0
Stonewall	SW	18.0	82	2.6	1.3	6353	7.0
Thunder	SW	17.9	75	3.9	2.2	6999	8.0
Panther	SW	17.8	76	2.7	2.9	7097	5.5
Slice More	SW	17.4	75	3.9	2.0	6852	5.5
SXQ 2389	SS	16.3	71	4.5	2.1	6852	4.5
Waller-Duncan LSD (P = 0.05)		5.9	7.9	1.7	1.2	2327	---
¹The combined yields of USDA grades Fancy and US No. 1 are equivalent to the Superselect marketing category, while US No. 2 grade is equivalent to Select; yields of US No. 1 Large are equivalent to yields of cucumbers used in 24-count packs. ²Gross returns are calculated for each entry by multiplying yields of each marketing category (Superselect, Select, and 24-count) by its appropriate price for a given harvest date (nine harvests). Prices used were actual average weekly prices received by a Kentucky cooperative from June 22–August 10, 2003. Higher returns may reflect earlier yields and/or higher yields of Superselect cucumbers. Prices are shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Fruit shape, color, and overall appearance assessments for slicing cucumber varieties; scores are averages for all fruits of each variety from four replications harvested on 28 July 2003; varieties are listed from highest to lowest US Fancy + US No. 1 yields.
Entry	Shape¹	Fruit Yellowing²	Appear. Rating³
Daytona	2.0	3.5	5.0
Dasher II	4.5	3.5	7.5
General Lee	4.0	3.5	7.5
SRQ 2983	4.0	2.0	4.5
Greensleeves	3.5	2.0	6.0
Turbo	3.5	3.0	7.5
Indy	3.5	3.0	7.5
Cobra	3.0	2.5	5.5
SXQ 2387	4.5	2.5	7.0
Speedway	4.0	2.0	5.0
Stonewall	3.0	2.0	7.0
Thunder	2.5	4.0	8.0
Panther	2.5	4.0	5.5
Slice More	4.5	2.5	5.5
SXQ 2389	3.0	3.0	4.5
¹Shape ratings: 1 = worst (large percentage of misshapen fruits) to 5 = best (most fruits uniform, long, straight, cylindrical). ²Extent of yellowing: 1 = worst (large percentage of fruit surface yellow on most fruits), 5 = best (no yellow color on most fruits). ³Appearance ratings: 1 = worst; 9 = best, taking into account, in order of importance, shape, shape uniformity, and color.

Table 3. Average weekly wholesale prices received for slicing cucumbers during the period from 29 June-27 July 2003. The first trial harvest was July 11. Prices are before packing charge and marketing commissions are subtracted. Prices are dollars per standard 1 1/9 bu (55 lb) carton.
Week Ending	Market Grade¹
Week Ending	Superselect+ Select	Small
June 29	14.65	11.25
July 6	10.25	8.60
July 13	7.30	5.25
July 20	7.20	5.25
July 27	7.05	5.00
¹Market grades correspond to the following USDA grades: Superselect = US Fancy + US No. 1; Select = US No. 2; Small = US No. 1 Small.

Table 1. Average weekly wholesale prices for slicing cucumbers from 20 June-22 July 2003.
Week Ending on	Price per Box
Week Ending on	Super-select¹	Select¹	24-Count¹
28 Jun	$13.32	$8.01	$4.35
5 Jul	$15.16	$9.27	$5.63
12 Jul	$14.46	$5.44	$5.93
19 Jul	$ 3.30	$5.35	$5.00
26 Jul	$10.19	$1.63	$4.84
¹Market grades correspond to the following USDA grades: Superselect = U.S. Fancy + U.S.No.1; Select = U.S. No.2; Small = U.S. No.1 Small; 24-count = U.S. No. 1 Large.

Table 2. Yields of market grades of Speedway slicing cucumbers from trellised and non-trellised plots in McLean County, Kentucky, 2003.
Market Grade	Number of Boxes
Market Grade	No Trellis	Single-Strand Trellis	Double-Strand Trellis
Superselect	523	536	550
Select	427	378	371
24-count	375	470	393
Culls	130	113	135
Total boxes	1,455	1,497	1,449
Income/acre¹	$11,078	$11,025	$10,387
¹$ Income/acre is minus cost of trellising.

Table 1. Yields and powdery mildew assessments for yellow straightneck, crookneck, and zucchini squash cultivars and breeding lines. Data are means of four replications.
Entry	Source	Type¹	Mkt. Yield (boxes/acre)²	Disease Rating³		Appear. Rating⁴
Entry	Source	Type¹	Mkt. Yield (boxes/acre)²	PM	Virus	Appear. Rating⁴
I. Yellow straightneck and slight semi-crookneck:				18 Sept	13 Oct
Conqueror III	SW	SN, Tg-3+	1027	2.4	0.3	6.5
Precious II	AC	SN-Py	806	2.6	0.3	4.5
Cougar	SW	SN-Py	732	3.8	1.5	6.5
Lioness	SW	SN	713	1.8	1.0	6.0
Multipik	HM	SN-Py	672	3.3	1.5	8.0
Sunray	SW	SN-Py	643	2.8	2.0	7.0
Fortune	RG	SN-Py	629	3.5	2.3	7.0
Seneca Supreme	SM	SN-Py	626	3.5	2.8	8.0
Daisy	SM	SN-	566	3.1	2.5	7.5
Superpik	HM	SN-Py	544	3.9	2.3	6.5
XPT 1832	SM	SN-Py, Tg-3	384	3.1	1.5	6.0
II. Yellow semi-crookneck or crookneck:
Medallion	AC	SCN	906	3.3	3.5	6.5
Gentry	RG	sCN	704	3.4	1.5	6.5
Destiny III	SW	sCN, Tg-3	668	3.6	0.0	6.0
Dixie	SM	CN	595	3.5	2.0	6.5
Prelude II	SW	CN, Tg-3	567	1.0	0.3	7.0
Sunglo	RG	sCN	505	1.4	0.8	7.0
Supersette	HM	CN-Py	500	2.5	3.0	7.0
Pic-N-Pic	SW	CN	400	3.5	0.3	6.0
Waller-Duncan LSD (all yellow squash, P = 0.05).			150	.77	.89	---
III. Zucchini:
Radiant	SM	Z	1099	3.4	0.3	6.5
Payroll	RG	Z	1080	2.4	0.0	8.0
Wildcat (HMX0710)	SW	Z	1011	1.8	0.0	8.5
Tigress	SW	Z	951	2.9	0.3	7.5
Zucchini Elite	HM	Z	918	2.1	0.5	7.0
Cashflow	RG	Z	899	3.5	0.5	7.0
Spineless Beauty	RG	Z	874	3.4	0.3	6.0
Independence II	SW	Z,Tg-2	849	3.9	0.0	5.5
ACX 45a	AC	Z	822	3.8	0.0	5.5
Senator	SW	Z	763	1.9	1.3	7.0
Sensor (9523)	SS	Z	763	3.6	0.0	5.0
Dividend	RG	Z	758	3.0	0.0	7.0
Robuster	SS	Z	751	3.0	0.8	7.5
EXP 718	SW	Z	708	3.7	0.3	6.5
Revenue	RG	Z	614	3.0	0.0	6.5
Waller-Duncan LSD (zucchinis, P = 0.05)			181	1.1	1.4	--
¹All entries from conventional breeding programs except for: Tg = transgenic for resistance to two (Tg-2) or three (Tg-3) viruses; Tg-3+ = transgenic for three viruses with resistance to the fourth (PRSV) obtained through conventional breeding. Type descriptions based on our observations on 15 Sept.: SN = straightneck, CN = crookneck, sCN = semi-crookneck; some cultivars that we considered semi-crookneck are considered straightneck by the seed company and are included in the straightneck grouping; Py = has precocious yellow gene to mask virus symptoms. ²Number of half-bushel (21lb = 9.52 kg) boxes per acre. ³ Visual rating scale from 0 = no symptoms to 5 = extensive symptoms on entire plants; ratings took into account the percentage of upper and lower leaf and stem surfaces that were covered by powdery mildew and virus symptoms; assessed by W. Nesmith on 18 Sept and 13 Oct. ⁴Appearance ratings: 1 = worst, 9 = best, taking into account, in order of importance, overall attractiveness, shape, and color.

Table 1. Maturity, yields (boxes/A), and income ($/A) for a bell pepper variety trial conducted at West Kentucky Grower Cooperative in Daviess County, Kentucky, 2003.
Variety¹	Maturity (days)	Extra Large	Boxes/A				Total Yield	Income ($/A)
Variety¹	Maturity (days)	Extra Large	Large	Medium	Chopper	Culls	Total Yield	Income ($/A)
Olympus	71	535	618	379	99	2	1633	12,922
Revolution	74	493	562	391	68	15	1529	12,048
Brigadier	71	249	569	422	229	39	1508	10,618
Crusader	74	356	531	415	44	10	1356	10,519
Defiance	72	219	482	421	220	11	1353	9,653
Red Knight	64	319	524	407	90	5	1345	10,253
Heritage	74	251	524	429	106	15	1325	9,808
Aristotle X3R	72	489	478	258	75	2	1302	10,481
X3R Wizard	73	279	514	369	26	15	1203	8,382
Orion	74	293	357	382	27	8	1067	7,473
¹Sorted by total yield.

Table 2. Average wholesale prices for bell peppers in 2003.
Grade	Price
X-Large	$10.02
Large	$7.03
Medium	$7.27
Chopper	$4.61

Table 1. Variety, colors, and sources of supersweet corn, UKREC, Princeton, Kentucky, 2003.
Variety	Color	Source
6802R	Bicolor	AC
8102R	Bicolor	AC
Camas or BSS9686	Bicolor	SW
Saturn	Bicolor	SW
8101R	White	AC
Boreal	White	SW
Saturn	White	SW
AC945	Yellow	AC
6800	Yellow	AC
Saturn	Yellow	SW

Table 2. Germination and plant and ear characteristics of sweet corn in the 2003 variety trial at UKREC, Princeton, Kentucky.
Variety	Germination Percent 28 May	Plant Height (in.)	Ear Length (in.)	Ear Width (in.)	Ear Weight (oz)	Number Ears/ Plant	Total Ear Number	Harvest Date(s) (July)
6802R BC	100	58	7.6	1.7	6.8	1.2	61	9, 14
6800 Y	100	61	7.5	1.7	7.1	1.0	58	9, 14
Camas BC	100	62	7.9	1.8	7.8	1.0	56	21
Saturn Y	89	62	7.4	1.9	7.4	1.1	45	21
Boreal W	68	65	7.4	1.8	7.3	1.3	41	21
8102R BC	79	64	8.3	1.8	7.8	1.1	39	21
Saturn BC	96	64	7.4	1.8	7.5	1.1	51	16, 21
8101 W	72	58	7.7	1.6	6.7	1.4	46	16, 21
Saturn W	85	62	7.4	1.8	6.5	1.3	50	14, 16
AC 945 Y	81	61	7.3	1.8	6.6	1.0	37	14, 16
LSD 5%	20	3	4.4	1.2	NS	0.3	15
CV	14	3	1.3	1.6	13.5	13.6	18

Table 1. Plant characteristics and yield of supersweet corn cultivars, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
Cultivar	Seed Source¹	Days to Maturity	Plant Stand² (%)	Height to First Harvested Ear	Ease of Ear Harvest³ (1-5)	Yield (dozen ears per acre)
Attribute WSS 0987	SY	81	80	19	2.3	2645
Tahoe	SW/SY	81	94	23	3	2593
Attribute BSS 0977	SY	78	96	24	3.4	2256
Attribute WSS 0966	SY	79	91	24	2.8	2217
Morning Star	HR/HM	83	76	27	3.3	2139
Polaris	HM	81	90	22	2.4	2061
Rustler	HM	84	92	24	2.9	2048
Max (HMX 8392s)	HM	85	92	23	2.8	2022
Gourmet Brand 276A	ST	76	88	17	3.5	1997
Candy Corner	HM	76	92	23	3.6	1984
Shooting Star	HM	83	95	24	3.4	1945
Bandit	HM	80	86	26	3.5	1893
Gourmet Brand 272A	ST	72	95	10	3.5	1884
Summer Sweet 7631	AC	84	84	24	3.8	1841
Summer Sweet 8101R	AC	81	86	23	3.9	1815
Zenith	HM	81	91	28	2.4	1802
Extra Tender 275A	SI	75	95	17	3.9	1789
Gourmet Brand 378A	ST	78	94	17	3.5	1789
382A Xtra Tender Brand	SW	82	78	23	2.8	1776
WSS 9870	SY	78	95	18	3.4	1776
Summer Sweet 7650	AC		95	26	3.9	1737
Summer Sweet 8102R	AC		88	23	3.8	1724
Winstar	SY	82	94	26	3.4	1724
Boreal	SY	78	93	19	2.9	1698
Snowstorm	ST	82	94	23	3.1	1647
White Saturn	SW	75	91	19	3.2	1647
278A Extra Tender Brand	SI/SW	78	82	23	3.9	1634
372A Xtra Tender Brand	HR	72	92	12	2.7	1634
Camas	SY	84	96	26	3.1	1621
Tethys	SY/RU	77	97	19	3.6	1595
Mirai	SI		75	23	3.2	1530
Gourmet Brand 175A	ST	75	94	22	3	1517
Obsession	RU/ST	79	88	23	3.8	1517
Abco Brand Var. 946BC	AC		93	18	4.2	1491
First Class	SW	69	91	17	3.5	1452
Ice Queen	HR/HM	77	94	16	3.4	1452
Gourmet Brand 182A	ST	82	98	20	3.1	1439
6800R Hybrid Sweet	AC		97	16	4	1413
ACX 738W Hybrid	AC		81	13	4	1348
Gourmet Brand 277A	ST/RU/HR	76	87	19	1.8	1335
Millenium	SW	82	67	20	4	1335
First Snow	SW	72	88	16	3.5	1322
Eagle	RU	76	79	21	3.9	1296
Abco Brand Var. 945Y	AC		95	18	3.9	1284
282A Xtra Tender Brand	RU	82	84	21	4	1245
178A Xtra Tender Brand	RU	78	88	19	3.6	1206
GSS 9525	SY	77	87	15	3.3	1115
Gourmet Brand 177A	ST	77	90	17	3.3	1037
Waller-Duncan LSD (P = 0.05)						419
¹See Appendix for seed company addresses. ²Plant stand is percentage emergence based on planting 100 seeds. ³ Ease of harvest: 1 = hard, 5 = easy.

Table 2. Ear characteristics of supersweet corn, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
Cultivar	Husk Coverage¹(1-10)	Ear Length (in.)	Ear Width (in.)	Tip Fill²(1-10)	Kernel Color³	Row Straightness⁴(1-10)
Attribute WSS 0987	8.8	7.3	1.8	9.3	W	7.5
Tahoe	8.8	7.9	1.9	8.5	W	7.5
Attribute BSS 0977	9.8	7.3	1.8	9.3	BC	6.8
Attribute WSS 0966	9.3	7.3	1.8	10.0	Y	8.1
Morning Star	10.0	7.6	1.9	9.8	Y	6.5
Polaris	8.5	7.8	1.8	9.8	BC	7.5
Rustler	6.5	7.8	1.9	7.7	Y	8.1
Max (HMX 8392S)	10.0	7.5	1.8	8.9	Y	7.1
Gourmet Brand 276A	9.8	7.7	1.8	10.0	BC	8.8
Candy Corner	8.5	7.4	1.7	10.0	BC	8.3
Shooting Star	9.3	8.3	1.9	9.3	BC	8.8
Bandit	8.0	7.3	2.0	10.0	Y	8.0
Gourmet Brand 272A	7.8	7.6	1.8	8.3	BC	7.5
Summer Sweet 7631	9.5	8.0	1.8	6.5	W	5.8
Summer Sweet 8101R	9.0	8.0	1.8	10.0	W	7.3
Zenith	9.7	7.2	1.8	10.0	Y	7.8
Extra Tender 275A	10.0	7.7	1.8	9.3	W	8.3
Gourmet Brand 378A	9.3	7.7	1.9	8.7	W	7.6
382A Xtra Tender Brand	9.0	7.4	1.9	9.7	W	7.8
WSS 9870	8.5	7.6	1.8	9.8	W	7.0
Summer Sweet 7650	8.3	8.2	1.8	9.0	Y	6.3
Summer Sweet 8102R	8.0	8.4	1.8	8.9	BC	7.8
Winstar	10.0	7.5	1.9	9.5	Y	7.0
Boreal	6.5	7.7	1.8	9.5	W	6.8
Snowstorm	3.5	7.5	1.9	8.8	W	6.0
White Saturn	9.5	7.5	1.8	10.0	W	9.0
278A Extra Tender Brand	8.6	7.8	1.8	9.7	BC	8.5
372A Xtra Tender Brand	7.8	7.7	1.8	9.5	W	8.3
Camas	9.5	7.9	1.8	8.0	BC	6.5
Tethys	5.0	7.9	1.8	8.5	BC	7.8
Mirai	8.7	7.6	1.9	8.3	Y	8.7
Gourmet Brand 175A	5.8	8.2	1.7	10.0	Y	7.0
Obsession	8.0	8.4	1.9	10.0	BC	7.9
Abco Brand Var. 946BC	6.3	6.1	1.8	8.0	BC	8.3
First Class	9.0	7.9	1.7	10.0	W	8.0
Ice Queen	8.5	8.0	1.8	8.3	W	7.3
Gourmet Brand 182A	8.4	7.9	1.9	9.5	Y	8.1
6800R Hybrid Sweet Corn	9.7	7.4	1.7	9.0	Y	8.0
ACX 738W Hybrid	9.3	7.7	1.9	9.3	W	8.3
Gourmet Brand 277A	8.8	7.4	1.7	9.8	BC	7.0
Millenium	9.5	7.9	1.9	6.0	W	8.0
First Snow	7.8	7.7	1.7	10.0	W	6.8
Eagle	5.0	8.3	1.9	3.0	BC	8.5
Abco Brand Var. 945Y	7.8	8.1	1.8	7.3	Y	9.0
282A Xtra Tender Brand	10.0	7.4	1.9	10.0	BC	7.3
178A Xtra Tender Brand	9.0	7.5	1.8	8.8	Y	8.0
GSS 9525	6.0	9.4	2.0	1.8	Y	5.3
Gourmet Brand 177A	5.5	7.5	1.8	8.0	Y	7.5
¹Number of ears out of 10 that had tight husk coverage over the ear tip. ²Number of ears out of 10 that had good tip fill. ³Y = yellow; W = white; BC = bicolor. ⁴Number of ears out of 10 that had straight rows of kernels.

2003 Fruit and Vegetable Crops Research Report

All America Selections Vegetables for 2002 and 2003

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

2002 Winners Basil `Magical Michael'

Cucumber `Diva'

Pumpkin F1 `Orange Smoothie'

Pumpkin F1 `Sorcerer'

Winter Squash `Cornell's Bush Delicata'

2003 Winners Melon F1 `Angel'

Squash F1 `Papaya Pear'

Acknowledgments

References

Observation of Specialty and Colored Potatoes from Early and Late Harvests

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgments

Gourmet Potato "RACE" Trial, 2003

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results

Yields and Gross Returns from New Slicing Cucumber Varieties

Introduction

Methods and Materials

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgments

Trellised Slicing Cucumbers in Western Kentucky

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Yield and Powdery Mildew Resistance of Fall-Harvested Summer Squash

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgments

Bell Pepper Cultivar Trial, Western Kentucky

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Sweet Corn Variety Trial, Western Kentucky, 2003

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgment

Supersweet Corn Evaluations in Central Kentucky, 2003

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgments

Supersweet Corn Evaluations in Eastern Kentucky, 2003

Introduction

Methods

Results

Yields and Net Returns for New Muskmelon Cultivars Grown on Green and Black Plastic Mulch for Commercial Markets in Central Kentucky

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgment

Specialty Melon Variety Evaluation, 2003

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results

Acknowledgments

Specialty Melon Variety Observation Trial

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Acknowledgments

Triploid Mini-Watermelon Variety Trial, 2003

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results and Discussion

Seedless Watermelons

Seeded Watermelons

Literature Cited

Acknowledgments

2003 Quicksand Pumpkin Cultivar Trial

Introduction

2002 Winners
Basil `Magical Michael'

2003 Winners
Melon F1 `Angel'

Table 3. Ear quality characteristics of supersweet corn varieties, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
Cultivar	Cooked Corn			Comments
Cultivar	Pericarp Tenderness¹ (1-4)	Kernel Tenderness²(1-4)	Sweetness³ (1-4)	Comments
Attribute WSS 0987	2.5	2.0	3.0	Attractive husk, short tassels in ears, deep kernels
Tahoe	2.5	2.0	3.5	Attractive husk and ear, small kernel, tassels in ear tip
Attribute BSS 0977	1.5	2.0	2.5	Attractive husk, some ears with tassels in the ends
Attribute WSS 0966	2.0	2.0	3.3	Dark green husk, attractive ear
Morning Star	3.0	2.5	3.0	Attractive dark green husk, few tassels in the ends
Polaris	2.3	2.1	3.3	Attractive ear and husk
Rustler	3.0	2.0	2.0
Max (HMX 8392S)	3.5	2.0	3.0	Small kernels, nice flavor
Gourmet Brand 276A	3.0	2.0	2.8	A lot of secondary ears
Candy Corner	1.0	1.5	2.5
Shooting Star	2.0	2.0	2.5	Attractive ear and husk, short flags
Bandit	1.5	2.5	3.0	Large ears, dark green attractive husk
Gourmet Brand 272A	3.1	2.0	3.3	Attractive ear, difficult to husk
Summer Sweet 7631	3.0	2.0	3.0	Attractive husk
Summer Sweet 8101R	3.0	2.0	2.5	Attractive husk, some tassels in ends
Zenith	2.8	2.5	3.3
Extra Tender 275A	2.5	2.3	2.8	Attractive husk and ear
Gourmet Brand 378A	2.5	2.5	3.2	Attractive husk and ear, deep kernels
382A Xtra Tender Brand	4.0	4.0	3.2
WSS 9870	2.0	2.0	3.4	Attractive husk, long flags, short tassels in ear ends
Summer Sweet 7650	2.0	2.0	3.0	Attractive ear, small kernels
Summer Sweet 8102R	3.0	3.0	3.2
Winstar	2.0	2.0	2.9	Attractive husk and ear, good corn flavor
Boreal	3.0	3.0	3.0	Some have short tassels in ears
Snowstorm	2.0	2.0	3.5	All ears slightly bent, unattractive husk
White Saturn	2.5	2.5	3.0	Attractive husk, tight shucks, short flags, some tassels
278A Extra Tender Brand	2.5	2.5	3.2	Nice shuck, some tassels in the ends
372A Xtra Tender Brand	2.5	2.2	3.0	Many lost to raccoons
Camas	3.0	2.5	3.0	Ears are crooked
Tethys	3.3	2.0	3.0
Mirai	2.0	3.0	3.0
Gourmet Brand 175A	3.8	2.0	3.3	Attractive, has long flags, some with tassels in ends
Obsession	3.0	2.5	3.5	Attractive husk and ears
Abco Brand Var. 946BC	3.0	2.5	2.0	Attractive husk
First Class	2.8	2.5	3.0	Nice green husk, easy to husk, heavy raccoon damage
Ice Queen	2.0	1.5	2.9	Easy to shuck
Gourmet Brand 182A	3.0	2.0	3.0	Attractive, dark green husks
6800R Hybrid Sweet Corn	2.8	2.5	3.5	Small ear, big shucks, attractive ear
ACX 738W Hybrid	2.5	2.3	3.1	Attractive husk and ear
Gourmet Brand 277A	3.0	2.8	3.4	Attractive ear and husk, tight shuck
Millenium	2.0	2.5	3.6	Husk not attractive
First Snow	3.0	3.0	3.3	Attractive ear
Eagle	2.8	2.3	2.8	Nice corn flavor
Abco Brand Var. 945Y	2.5	2.0	3.5	Attractive husk
282A Xtra Tender Brand	2.0	2.5	3.0
178A Xtra Tender Brand	3.3	2.3	2.9	Some ears flattened, very attractive when cooked
GSS 9525	3.0	4.0	3.5	Very large ear
Gourmet Brand 177A	3.8	2.3	3.0	Attractive, small kernels, nice flavor
¹1 = tough, 4 = tender. ²1 = crisp, 4 = creamy and tender. ³1 = starchy, 4 = very sweet; ratings are based on one microwaved ear.

Table 1. 2003 Sweet corn cultivar trial soil test results.
pH	Buffer pH	P	K	Ca	Mg	Zn
5.65	6.48	50	393	2793	195	7.4

Table 2. 2003 Early sweet corn plant characteristics and yield components, Robinson Station, Quicksand, Kentucky.
Cultivar Name¹	Seed Source	Plant Stand²	Husk Coverage³	Tip Fill^4,6	Disease Rating	Commercial Acceptability^5,6	Dozen Ears/acre	Early Points⁷	Rank Based on Points
Attribute BSS 0977 (BC)	SY	90	10.0	10.0	0.00	5.0	2511	3646	1
Ice Queen (W)	HR/HM	82	10.0	9.3	0.00	5.0	2360	3486	2
MAX (HMX 83925) (Y)	HM	85	9.8	9.0	0.00	5.0	2360	3466	3
Shooting Star (BC)	HM	84	10.0	9.0	0.00	5.0	2208	3461	4
WSS 9870 (W)	SY	82	10.0	10.0	0.00	4.0	2118	3427	5
Attribute WSS 0966 (Y)	SY	78	9.8	10.0	0.00	4.5	2118	3412	6
Rustler (Y)	HM	76	10.0	9.5	0.00	5.0	2027	3408	7
Gourmet Brand 182 A (Y)	ST	96	8.8	10.0	0.00	3.0	2057	3336	8
Tahoe (W)	SW/SY	84	10.0	9.5	0.00	3.0	2420	3327	9
Gourmet Brand 378 A (W)	ST	90	8.5	9.5	0.00	4.0	2178	3313	10
Summer Sweet 7650 (Y)	AC	89	10.0	8.5	0.00	3.0	2118	3252	11
Zenith (Y)	HM	84	9.5	9.5	0.00	3.0	1966	3242	12
Boreal (Y)	SY	85	8.8	10.0	0.00	3.0	2148	3240	13
Obsession (BC)	RU/ST	84	9.5	9.0	0.00	3.0	2148	3205	14
Winstar (Y)	SY	91	10.0	8.0	0.00	2.5	1997	3160	15
282A Extra Tender Brand (BC)	RU	74	9.5	9.5	0.00	3.0	1966	3142	16
Abco Brand Var. 945Y (Y)	AC	83	9.0	9.5	0.00	3.0	1603	3140	17
Candy Corner (BC)	HM	59	9.0	9.5	0.00	5.0	1755	3115	18
278A Extra Tender Brand (BC)	SI/SW	84	9.0	8.5	0.00	3.0	1997	3095	19
Polaris (BC)	HM	73	9.0	9.3	0.00	3.0	2178	3078	20
Bandit (Y)	HM	56	10.0	8.8	0.00	5.0	1240	3064	21
Morning Star (Y)	HR/HM	58	10.0	9.5	0.00	4.0	1331	3063	22
Tethys (BC)	SY/RU	89	8.5	8.5	0.00	3.0	1543	3044	23
Abco Brand Var. 946 BC (BC)	AC	73	9.5	9.0	0.00	3.0	1634	3043	24
Summer Sweet 8102 R (BC)	AC	71	9.0	8.8	0.00	3.5	1997	3035	25
382A Extra Tender Brand (W)	SW	68	9.0	8.8	0.00	3.0	1724	2922	26
Camas (BC)	SY	70	9.5	8.0	0.00	3.0	1664	2911	27
ACX 738W (W)	AC	66	9.5	9.0	0.00	2.0	1966	2907	28
White Saturn (W)	SW	58	9.5	9.5	0.00	3.0	1210	2896	29
Gourmet Brand 175 A (Y)	ST	93	6.5	9.3	0.00	1.3	2239	2854	30
Attribute WSS 0987 (W)	HM	69	8.5	8.5	0.00	3.0	1573	2847	31
Summer Sweet 7631 (W)	AC	64	9.5	8.3	0.00	3.0	1301	2845	32
Extra Tender Brand-275A (BC)	SI	78	8.0	8.5	0.00	2.0	2087	2834	33
Summer Sweet 8101 R (W)	AC	69	8.0	9.0	0.00	2.8	1361	2796	34
Gourmet Brand 277 A (BC)	ST/RU/HR	70	7.0	9.5	0.00	2.0	1876	2733	35
Gourmet Brand 276 A (BC)	ST	59	9.0	8.0	0.00	2.5	1603	2700	36
Gourmet Brand 272 A (BC)	?	79	6.5	9.0	0.00	1.0	2178	2653	37
Gourmet Brand 177 A (Y)	ST	67	7.0	8.5	0.00	2.5	1392	2604	38
First Class (W)	SW	52	8.5	9.0	0.00	2.0	1301	2600	39
GSS 9525 (Y)	SY	61	9.5	6.5	0.00	2.0	1361	2541	40
Millenium (W)	SW	44	10.0	8.0	0.00	2.0	908	2526	41
178A Xtra Tender Brand (Y)	RU	73	7.3	8.3	0.00	1.0	1361	2516	42
372 A Xtra Tender Brand (W)	HR	65	7.5	8.8	0.00	1.0	1271	2502	43
6800 R (Y)	AC	85	6.0	7.5	0.00	1.0	1513	2451	44
Mirai (Y)	SI	35	10.0	8.5	0.00	1.0	787	2374	45
Eagle (BC)	RU	51	8.0	7.3	0.00	1.0	1059	2236	46
Snowstorm (W)	ST	64	6.0	6.0	0.00	2.0	1482	2188	47
First Snow (W)	SW	37	5.0	7.5	0.00	1.0	696	1790	48
¹BC = bicolor, W = White, Y = Yellow. ²Plant stand is percent emergence of 100 seeds. ³ Husk coverage: 1 = poor, 10 = excellent. ⁴ Number of ears out of 10 that had good tip fill. ⁵ Commercial acceptability: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent. ⁶ Based on 10 ears of corn. ⁷ Points obtained (rank) = (10 x stand) + (100 x husk coverage) + (100 x tip fill) + (100 x commercial acceptability) + (yield/10).

Table 1. Muskmelon cultivar trial yields and fruit characteristics, Bowling Green, Kentucky, 2003.
Cultivar Plastic Mulch	Seed Source	Days to Maturity¹	Fruit Shape	Net Type²	Cavity	Avg. Wt. (lb/fruit)	Avg. Sugar (%)	Large Marketable Fruit/A³	Medium Marketable Fruit/A⁴	Cull (%)	Yield (cwt/A)
Aphrodite/Green	SW	66	Oval	md/lt	large	6.5	10.9	9720	360	12.5	655
Aphrodite/Black	SW	66	Oval	md/lt	large	7.1	11.8	8400	960	7.1	664
Athena/Green	SW	68	oval/round	md	medium	6.1	11.7	6960	1560	10.1	520
Athena/Black	SW	68	oval/round	md	medium	5.9	12.2	4320	840	12.2	304
PXC221/Green	SW	69	round/oval	md/hv	small	5.9	11.6	5640	840	16.9	382
PXC221/Black	SW	69	round/oval	md/hv	small	6.2	11.9	5400	600	21.9	372
¹ Days from transplanting to first fruit harvested. ² Net type: lt = light netting, md = medium netting, hv = heavy netting. ³ Commercially marketable melons greater than 4 lb. ⁴ Commercially marketable melons that were 4 lb.

Table 2. Projected costs and returns for three commercially marketed muskmelon cultivars grown on green and black plastic mulch.
Inputs	Aphrodite Green Mulch	Aphrodite Black Mulch	Athena Green Mulch	Athena Black Mulch	PXC221 Green Mulch	PXC221 Black Mulch
Plants/Transplants¹	$367	$367	$360	$360	$331	$331
Fertilizer/Lime	110	110	110	110	110	110
Plastic mulch	207	135	207	135	207	135
Drip lines	130	130	130	130	130	130
Ryegrass	20	20	20	20	20	20
Herbicides	70	70	70	70	70	70
Insecticides	230	230	230	230	230	230
Fungicides	180	180	180	180	180	180
Pollination rental	50	50	50	50	50	50
Machine²	150	150	150	150	150	150
Municipal water³	400	400	400	400	400	400
Irrigation⁴	180	180	180	180	180	180
Labor⁵	1008	936	852	516	648	600
Field production cost	$3102	$2958	$2939	$2531	$2706	$2586
Freight to co-op⁶	403	374	341	206	259	240
Co-op 15% commission⁸	1139	1040	927	564	715	667
Box/Pallet fee⁷	996	911	811	494	626	583
Co-op labor expense⁸	587	514	483	300	398	392
Co-op membership	50	50	50	50	50	50
Harvest bin rental	100	100	100	100	100	100
Marketing cost	$3275	$2989	$2712	$1714	$2148	$2032
Total expenses	6377	5947	5651	4245	4854	4618
Yield	10,080	9360	8520	5160	6480	6000
Income co-op sales⁸	7592	6931	6179	3762	4765	4446
Net income (loss)	$1215	$984	$528	($483)	($89)	($172)
Dollar return/Dollar input	1.19	1.17	1.09	.89	.98	.96
¹ Differences due to seed cost; production costs are the same. ² Machine rental, fuel and lube, repairs and depreciation. ³ Based on 13,500 gallons @3 cents for 10 weeks. ⁴ Includes cost of fertilizer and five-year amortization of irrigation system. ⁵ Based on yield @10 cents per muskmelon; includes unpaid family labor. ⁶ Based on yield @4 cents per muskmelon. ⁷ Based on 110 large count and 150 medium count @$11.00 box/pallet. ⁸ Based on 2002 yearly averages of a local marketing cooperative’s per muskmelon cost/returns: 5.1 cents per melon labor cost including culls; returns of 76 cents per large melon; returns of 57 cents per medium melon.

Table 1. Specialty melon variety trial yield and fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
Variety	Melon Type¹	Seed Source	Days to Harvest	Yield (cwt/A)²		Avg. No. Melons/A	Avg Wt./Fruit (lb)	Culls (%)	Outside Measurements		Flesh Thickness (in.)	Seed Cavity
Variety	Melon Type¹	Seed Source	Days to Harvest	Yield (cwt/A)²		Avg. No. Melons/A	Avg Wt./Fruit (lb)	Culls (%)	Length (in.)	Width (in.)	Flesh Thickness (in.)	Length (in.)	Width (in.)
Sundew	HD	SS	85	697	a	11236	6.2	2	7.9	7.2	1.9	5.1	3.6
Honey Brew	HD	AC/RU	90	532	bcd	7779	6.9	9	8.9	7.7	1.8	5.9	4.0
Honey Pearl	HD	JS	80	408	cde	9766	4.2	3	7.7	6.6	1.6	5.1	3.3
San Juan	HD	RU	85	407	cde	13224	3.1	6	6.3	6.0	1.9	4.0	2.6
Honeydew Green Fleshed	HD	RU	110	406	cde	7519	5.4	6	8.3	7.6	1.7	5.4	4.6
Sweet Delight	HD	RU	90	391	de	5531	7.2	5	8.4	7.9	1.8	5.6	4.7
White Skinned	HD	SI	85	376	e	5964	6.2	28	8.3	7.8	2.2	5.2	3.8
Orange Blossom	HD	HR	82	351	e	8556	4.1	2	7.4	6.1	1.9	4.6	2.4
Sugar Nut	CA	JS	77	654	ab	24373	3.0	0	6.4	5.6	1.8	3.8	2.4
Golden Beauty	CA	JS	80	533	bcd	8384	6.4	0	9.6	6.7	2.0	6..5	3.2
Dorado	CA	HR/SW	85	492	cde	8470	5.8	6	9.2	6.9	1.8	6.2	3.4
Branco Perfecto	SC	SW	92	544	bc	6655	8.2	15	9.7	7.8	1.9	6.5	4.1
Sancho	PD	RG/SY	90	460	cde	6050	7.5	14	11.5	6.9	2.0	8.1	3.2
Angel	SH	HR	80	416	cde	13224	3.1	3	6.3	5.8	1.8	3.8	2.6
Sprite	SH	CF	90	381	e	27744	1.3	6	5.1	4.2	1.0	3.4	2.2
¹ Melon type: HD = honeydew, CA = Canary, SC = Sicilian, PD = Piel de Sapo, SH = specialty hybrid. ² Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Duncan Waller LSD P = 0.05). Cwt = hundred weights (100 lb units) per acre.

Table 2. Specialty melon trial fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
Variety	Flavor (1-5)¹	Sugar (%)	Interior Color²	Rind Color³	Fruit Shape	Cracking (1-4)⁴	Net Type⁵	Comments
Sundew	3.8	12.0	cr-lg	lg/cr	round	1.5	na	Doesn't slip, very attractive rind
Honey Brew	3.7	13.8	cr-lg	lg/cr	oval	1	na	Doesn't slip
Honey Pearl	3.8	14.7	cr-wh	lg/cr	oblong	1	na	Doesn't slip, has small brown spots
San Juan	3.8	14.6	cr-lg	lg/cr	oval	1	na	Doesn't slip, some checking when ripe
Honeydew Green Fleshed	4.3	13.8	cr-lg	lg/cr	oval	1	na	Doesn't slip, some checking when ripe
Sweet Delight	4.1	13.2	cr-lg	lg/cr	oval	1	na	Doesn't slip, rind is slightly wrinkled
White Skinned HD #6	3.3	14.0	cr-lg	lg/cr	oval	3.8	na	Doesn't slip, good taste, many fruit
Orange Blossom	3.7	12.9	or	lg/cr	oval	1.2	na	Doesn't slip, very firm flesh, small cavity, very orange flesh, ripe when ground spot slightly orange
Sugar Nut	3.5	13.8	cr	dy	almond	1	na	Doesn't slip, some longitudinal checking when ripe, uniform fruit size, harvest when rind is golden yellow
Golden Beauty	3.9	13.1	cr	dy	almond	1	na	Doesn't slip, good taste, very attractive
Dorado	4.1	14.5	cr	dy	almond	1	na	Doesn't slip, excellent taste, very attractive rind, uniform fruit size, harvest
Branco Perfecto	3.8	15.2	cr-lg	lg/cr	round	1.4	na	Doesn't slip, some checking at maturity, wrinkled rind, uniform fruit size, ripe
Sancho	4.4	13.1	cr-wh	gr w/dg streaks	almond	1.5	na	Doesn't slip, excellent taste, wrinkled rind, dark yellow groundspot when ripe
Angel	2.8	17.8	wh	yl	round	1	md	Doesn't slip, nice melon taste but unpleasant grainy flesh, attractive rind, ripe when rind is light yellow
Sprite	3.9	16.2	wh	cr	oval	1	na	Doesn't slip, yellow spots on exterior at maturity, very attractive rind, very uniform fruit size, ripe when small checks appear around blossom end
¹Flavor: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent, sweet taste, pleasant texture. ²Interior color: lo = light orange, cr = cream, lg = light green, wh = white. ³Rind color: lg = light green, gr = green, dg = dark green, yl = yellow, dy = dark yellow, tn = tan. ⁴Cracking: 1 = little or no cracking, 4 = severe cracking and fruit splitting. ⁵Net type: lt = light netting, md = medium netting, na = none.

Table 2. Specialty melon fruit and vine characteristics from single plots, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
	Flavor¹ (1-5)	Sugar (%)	Interior Color²	Rind Color³	Fruit Shape	Cracking⁴ (1-4)	Net Type⁵	Comments
HSR 4036	3.3	10.8	lt gr	yl	round	1.0	med	Nice aroma, 2nd set had no netting on melons, harvest when just turning yellow
HSR 4022	4.0	12.3	cr	be/yl	oblong	2.5	lt	Harvest when just turning yellow
Vanilla Ice	2.9	14.5	cr	yl	round	1.5	lt	Very short shelf life, variable fruit quality
Creme de la Creme	4.5	15.8	lt gr	med/yl	round	1.5	med	Outstanding quality, harvest when just turning yellow
Galileo	4.0	13.3	lt gr	yl/gr	round	1.0	hv	Nice balance of sweet and musky flavor, harvest when just turning yellow
Arava	3.5	12.5	cr	med/yl	round	1.0	lt	Attractive, harvest when just turning yellow
Sweet Dream	3.8	13.3	lt gr	yl/gr	round	2.0	lt	Exterior not attractive
Vicar	3.8	10.3	cr	med/yl	oblong	1.5	lt	Attractive, harvest when just turning yellow
HSR 4238	5.0	13.9	cr	med/yl	round	1.5	med	Attractive exterior, excellent quality
HSR 4261	2.8	10.3	lt gr	med/yl	round	1.5	lt	Harvest when just turning yellow
HSR 4278	4.1	15.0	lt gr	med/yl	round	1.0	med	Harvest when just turning yellow
Fantasma	3.7	14.1	lt gr	lt gr/cr	round	1.5	na	Firm flesh, develops cream blush and ground spot when ripe
Honey Orange	4.0	14.1	or	cr/gr	oval	1.5	na	Develops light orange ground spot when ripe
Morning Ice	3.9	15.1	lt gr	gr/cr	oval	1.5	na	Harvest when just turning yellowish
Super Dew Hybrid	3.3	12.6	lt gr	cr/gr	oval	1.0	na	Harvest when just turning yellowish
HSR 4208	4.4	11.1	cr/lt or	cr/yl	oval	1.8	lt	Harvest when just turning yellowish
HSR 2528	3.7	11.5	cr	yl/or	oblong	1.5	lt	Harvest when just turning yellowish
HSR 4220	4.2	10.0	cr/lt or	med/yl	round	1.8	med	Harvest when just turning yellowish
HSR 4038	3.0	9.5	cr/or	yl	oblong	1.3	med	Sunburns and breaks down easily
HSR 4018	3.3	10.8	cr	or/yl	oblong	1.8	lt	Bottoms rot if fruit sits on the ground
HMX 1602	3.4	11.9	cr	gd/yl	almond	1.3	na	Pick when rind is golden yellow
Serenade	3.9	16.5	dk or	cr/gr w/spots	round	1.5	na	Nice aroma and flavor, pick when fruit has cream blush
Sweetie #6	2	14.3	or	or/lt gr	round	2.5	na	Fruit cracked, rind still green when over ripe
St. Nick	3.4	11.3	wh	dk gr	almond	2.3	na	Crunchy white flesh, harvest when longitudinal checks appear
¹Flavor: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent, sweet taste, pleasant texture. ²Interior color: lt = light, gr = green, cr = cream, or = orange, dk = dark, wh = white. ³Rind color: yl = yellow, be = beige, gd = golden, gr = green, or = orange, cr = cream, lt = light, med = medium, dk = dark. ⁴Cracking: l = little or no cracking, 4 = severe cracking and fruit splitting. ⁵ Net type: lt = light netting, med = medium netting, hv = heavy raised netting, na = no netting.

Table 2. Seeded and seedless mini-watermelon variety trial fruit characteristics, Lexington, Kentucky, 2003.
Variety	Soluble Solids (%)	Flavor (1-5)¹	Hollow Heart (1-2)²	Rind Thickness (in.)	Avg. Seed No./Fruit	Interior Color³	Rind Type⁴	Fruit Size Uniformity⁵(1-5)	Comments
Sunday Special	12.7	4.4	2.0	0.7	0.7	dk pnk	BK	3.2	Rind with black stripes
Extazy	11.3	4.2	2.0	0.6	4.7	red	JU	3.7	Very tough rind, very firm flesh, some internal fiber
Valdoria	11.8	4.0	2.0	0.5	0.7	red	BK	3.5	Has a few small seed traces
Demi Sweet	12.8	4.6	1.7	0.6	3.0	red	DK JU	2.8	Attractive rind, has a few small seed traces
Miniseedless 618	12.8	4.9	2.0	0.5	2.0	red	BK	3.2	Attractive rind
Lilliput	11.8	4.5	2.0	0.5	1.3	red	BK	3.5	Firm flesh, some fiber throughout, some tough seed traces
Vanessa	11.1	3.0	2.0	0.4	na⁶	dk pnk	BK	2.8	Seeded, slight sour taste
Manilla	11.3	3.8	2.0	0.4	na	red/or	BK	4.0	Many small seeds, quick maturing
Situla	11.6	3.8	2.0	0.4	na	red/or	DK JU	3.5	Many small seeds
¹ Taste rating: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent. ² Hollow heart rating: 1 = hollow heart, 2 = no hollow heart. ³ Flesh color: dk = dark, pnk = pink, or = orange. ⁴ Rind type: JU = Jubilee, light green rind w/distinct, narrow, dark green stripes; BK = Black, solid dark green rind; DK = Dark green ⁵Fruit size uniformity: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent. ⁶na = not applicable.

Table 1. Soil test results, 2003 pumpkin cultivar evaluation, Quicksand, Kentucky.
pH	Buffer-pH	P	K	Ca	Mg	Zn
5.97	6.68	45	233	2960	195	8.1