• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 Materials and methods
 Results and discussion
 Reference






Group Title: Research report - Bradenton Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - BRA1985-22
Title: Snap and snow pea variety trial
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00067749/00001
 Material Information
Title: Snap and snow pea variety trial spring 1985
Series Title: Bradenton GCREC research report
Physical Description: 3 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Howe, T. K ( Teresa K )
Geraldson, C. M ( Carroll Morton ), 1918-
Gulf Coast Research and Education Center (Bradenton, Fla.)
Publisher: Gulf Coast Research & Education Center, IFAS, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Bradenton FL
Publication Date: 1985
 Subjects
Subject: Peas -- Varieties -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Peas -- Yields -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (p. 3).
Statement of Responsibility: T.K. Howe and D.N. Maynard.
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "September 1985."
Funding: Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00067749
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: oclc - 73480534

Table of Contents
    Copyright
        Copyright
    Materials and methods
        Page 1
    Results and discussion
        Page 2
    Reference
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida








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


Bradenton GCREC Research Report BRA1985-22 September 1985

,SNAP AND SNOW PEA VARIETY TRIAL
S. SPRING 1985

T. K. Howe and D. N. Maynardl


Commercial production of both snap and snow peas in Florida is very limited
at the present time. However it appears that there is potential for more
production based on increased consumer interest and consumption. 'The
Packer's' recent profile of fresh produce consumers showed that of 30
specialty crops, about 55% of the respondents have tried snow peas, and
another 29% indicated that they had heard of them (1).

In addition to the limited local supply of snow peas, other principal
sources are Central America and California. In both cases, Florida growers
should have considerable transportation advantage over these areas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two distinct types of edible-podded peas were evaluated in this trial.
Snap pea pods are similar in appearance to those of English or :garden
peas. The pods, however, do not develop the tough, membranous layer found in
shelling peas, so the pod along with the peas is tender and edible.. Snow
peas, on the other hand, are harvested when the pods are flat, and before the
peas develop.

The land was prepared before bedding operations on April 19, 1984, by
the broadcast application and incorporation of one ton/acre dolomite and
600 Ib/acre superphosphate (0-20-0) containing 80 lb/ton minor elements
as 503 oxide. At bed preparation, the full width (38") of each bed was
broadcast with 10.3 lb/100 linear feet of bed of 6-6-6 (N-P205-K20) and
.incorporated 3 to 4 inches. Dyfonate(R) was incorporated with the
fertilizer. The beds were spaced on 4.5 ft centers with irrigation ditches
every 7 beds.

Seed was treated with Captan dust before direct field sowing on January
30, 1985. Three plant rows were centered on the bed and spaced 8 inches
apart. Plants were thinned to 2 inches between plants. The 11 varieties
were replicated 4 times with 175 plant-plots and arranged in a randomized
complete block design. Dual(R) (1 Ib a.i./A) was applied preemergence.


IBiological Scientist III and Professor of Vegetable Crops, respectively.






2



Plants were staked and tied 3 weeks after sowing. On March 6, each plot was
top dressed with a broadcast application of ammonium nitrate at 1.1 lb/100
linear feet of bed. Liquid fertilizer was applied as a foliar spray
(20-20-20 at 5 lb/100 gal/A) on March 12, and ammonium nitrate liquid
fertilizer was drenched into the soil at 0.33 Ib N/100 linear feet of bed on
March 13.

Pesticides, utilized as necessary, were Lannate (R) on March 5, Diazinon (R)
on March 12 and April 18, Dithane M-22(R) plus copper on March 8, Dithane
M-45(R) plus copper on March 26, and Dithane M-22(R) alone on April 2.
Powdery mildew was not evident until the last 10 days of harvest.

Harvesting began March 13, and continued through April 29, 1985. Samples of
10 pods per plot were taken at the first harvest for the measurement of pod
length and width. Color and straightness of pod were judged by a subjective
rating, and pod bearing habit (pods per cluster) was estimated near
mid-season. Vine heights taken at the end of harvest for each cultivar were
measured five times per replication. Yields were adjusted to 100% plant
stand and are given on the basis of 10 pound cartons.

Weather information for the evaluation period from January 31 through
April 29 is given in Table 1.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Horticultural characteristics of three snow pea and six snap pea varieties
(two varieties were duplicated from two sources, for a total of 11 entries)
are shown in Table 2.

Maturity from planting to first harvest ranged from 43 days for 'Sugar
Ann' and 'Sugar Bon' to 69 days for 'Sugar Snap' and 'Sugar Daddy'. Vine
height varied from 20 in. or less for 'Sugar Bon', 'Sugar Ann' and 'Early
Snap' to 4 to 5 ft for 'Mammoth Melting Sugar,' 'Sugar Snap,' 'Sweet Snap,'
'Oregon Sugar Pod,' and 'Oregon Sugar Pod II,' while 'Sugar Daddy' had
intermediate length vines that were about 30 in. high.

Most of the varieties bore pods singly, but 'Sugar Snap' (Abbott & Cobb) and
'Sweet Snap' had some double pods, and 'Sugar Snap' (Burpee) had mostly
double pods. Snap pea pods were from 2.1 to 2.8 in. long, and were mostly
0.5 in. wide, whereas the snow peas produced longer (3.4 in.) and wider (0.8
in.) pods. 'Early Snap' and 'Sugar Daddy' pods were dark-green colored,
'Mammoth Melting Sugar' pods were light-green colored, and the other
varieties were intermediate between these extremes. 'Oregon Sugar Pod' pods
tended to be curved, whereas 'Sugar Ann' pods were straight.

Total and weekly yields are shown in Table 3. Snow pea yields were about 900
10-lb cartons per acre, and were greater than snap pea yields that ranged
from 344 to 730 10-lb cartons per acre. The snow pea yields compare











favorably with those reported from California (2). Furthermore, the harvest
period for snow peas was generally more concentrated than that for snap
peas. On the other hand, the snap peas tended to be somewhat earlier than
the snow peas.

Based on yields, concentration of maturity and perceived market acceptance,
it appears that snow peas offer more potential than snap peas as a commercial
crop in Florida. From these results, 'Mammoth Melting Sugar,' although light
colored, is worthy of trial. If pod straightness is not critical, 'Oregon
Sugar Pod' and 'Oregon Sugar Pod II' might also be evaluated in trial
plantings by commercial growers.

Growers considering snow pea production should establish a market prior' to
planting, and have adequate labor for tying and at least thrice-weekly
harvests.


REFERENCES

1. Campbell, P. 1985. Profile of the fresh consumer. Focus, The Packer.
Shawnee Mission, KS.

2. Valenzuela, L. H. 1983. Edible pod pea production in California.
Calif. Coop. Ext. Ser. Leaf. 21328.



Table 1. Mean temperature and rainfall at the Gulf Coast Research &
Education Center from January 30 to April 29, 1985.


Average
Daily Temperature ('F) Rainfall
Month (date) Maximum Minimum (inches)


January (30-31) 74.0 51.0 0
February 75.3 52.4 1.04
March 81.2 57.1 2.91
April (1-29) 82.3 58.9 2.27







Table 2. Horticultural characteristics of snap and snow peas in the spring 1985 variety trial.

Pod characteristics
First Vine
harvest height Bearing LengthY WidthY Colorx Straightnessw
Cultivar Source Type (days) (in.) habit (in.) (in.) (1-5) (1-5)

Oregon Sugar Pod Abbott & Cobb Snow 61 33 Single 3.4 0.8 3 1
Oregon Sugar Pod II Burpee Snow 61 32 Single 3.4 0.8 2 2
Mammoth Melting Sugar Burpee Snow 65 58 Single 3.5 0.8 1 4
Sugar Snap Burpee Snap 69 63 Mostly Double 2.8 0.5 4 4
Sweet Snap Burpee Snap 61 48 Mostly Single 2.8 0.5 2 2
Sugar Snap Abbott & Cobb Snap 69 54 Mostly Single 2.9 0.6 4 2
Early Snap Abbott & Cobb Snap 52 20 Single 2.6 0.5 5 2
Sugar Daddy Burpee Snap 69 29 Single 2.3 0.5 5 3
Sugar Ann Abbott & Cobb Snap 43 19 Single 2.1 0.5 3 5
Sugar Bon Burpee Snap 43 18 Single 2.3 0.5 4 3
Sugar Bon Abbott & Cobb Snap 43 17 Single 2.3 0.5 3 4


ZMeans of 5 observations per plot for 4 replications,
YMeans of 10 observations per plot for 4 replications.
Xl (light green) to 5 (dark green).
W1 (most curved) to 5 (straight).








Table 3. Yield and percentage of total marketable yield by week of harvest of snap and snow peas
in the spring 1985 variety trial.

Yieldz Harvest/weekY
10-lb 10-lb cartons
Cultivar cartons/A /1000 LBF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Oregon Sugar Pod 954 aX 99 a 0 0 4.6 28.0 48.1 15.9 3.4
Oregon Sugar Pod II 902 ab 93 ab 0 0 6.0 33.8 45.3 11.9 3.0
Mammoth Melting Sugar 899 ab 93 ab 0 0 0 7.8 31.8 41.8 18.6
Sugar Snap (B) 730 bc 75 bc 0 0 0 1.8 26.0 47.0 25.1
Sweet Snap 672 c 69 c 0 0 1.1 16.1 51.6 25.9 5,4
Sugar Snap (A & C) 656 c 68 c 0 0 0 2.4 28.3 41.4 27.9
Early Snap 597 cd 62 cd 0 1.4 21.8 38.0 30.2 8.6 0
Sugar Daddy 594 cd 61 cd 0 0 0 3.1 35.1 45.2 16.6
Sugar Ann 446 de 46 de 17.0 5.9 14.9 4.4 43.3 14.6 0
Sugar Bon (B) 365 e 38 e 23.1 2.5 5.2 11.4 46.8 10.9 0
Sugar Bon (A & C) 344 e 35 e 26.7 6.0 5.2 12.0 38.8 11.4 0


ZAcre = 9680 linear feet of bed (LBF).
YWeek 1 = March 13-19.
Week 2 = March 20-26
Week 3 = March 27-April 2
Week 4 = April 3-9
Week 5 = April 10-16
Week 6 = April 17-21
Week 7 = April 24-30
Small discrepancies in percentages for summation of all harvests to 100% is due to rounding
XMean separation within columns by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.


error.




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

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