• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Main
 Historic note






Group Title: Research Report - Leesburg ARC ; WG74-2
Title: Cantaloupe cultivars for Florida.
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00075756/00001
 Material Information
Title: Cantaloupe cultivars for Florida.
Series Title: Research Report - Leesburg ARC ; WG74-2
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Elmstrom, G. W.
Publisher: Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. University of Florida
Publication Date: 1974
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States -- Florida -- Leesburg
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00075756
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 127283003

Table of Contents
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Historic note
        Historic note
Full Text



Cantaloupe Cultivars for Florida


.... G. W. Elmstrom

Field?;trials ofcantaloupe cultivars were conducted on Astatula fine
sand at the Agricultural Research Center, Leesburg during the period
1969-1973. Direct-seeded plants were spaced at 2-3 feet in rows
spaced at 10 feet. Hills were thinned to 1 plant each. In 1969 and'
1970,, 1200 Ib/acre of a 6-10-6 fertilizer was applied in a 10-inch
band .directly below the center of the bed. In 1971 and 1972, 1080
lb/acre of a 1-15-0 fertilizer was placed in a 10-inch band below
the center of the bed and 328 Ib/acre of a 15-0-19 fertilizer was
broadcast over the 40-inch bed. In 1973, 1200 Ib/acre of a 6-10-6-
fertilizer was broadcast over the -40-inch bed prior to bedding.
Fritted micronutrients were applied at a rate of 30 lb/acre each year.
Supplemental fertilizer was applied at emergence (100 lb/acre,
15-0-14 )-cand' at layby (350 lb/acre, 14-0-14 or 15-0-14).

'Samson Hybrid', 'Gulfcoast', 'Edisto 47', and 'Planters Jumbo' did well
in the trials and are recommended. Total yield, soluble solids content,
and disease resistent were consistently high in 'Samson Hybrid. '' Gulf-
coast-'..had very good internal quality; 'Planters Jumbo' had good disease
resistance but somewhat lower internal quality. Chilton is a relatively
new .&Al'tivar--that. has. performed quite well. 'Southland' had poor fruit
quality and lacked uniformity. "Cultivars which lacked acceptable
resistance to foliar:.diseases were 'Saticoy Hybrid', 'Super Market',
'Gulf stream': and ...'.H.a-ls Best' Jumbo'. Other cultivars which were
tested and 'bouhd unsatisfactory were 'Harper Hybrid', 'Dulce', 'Golden
Perfectionn, 'Edisto', 'Burpee Hybrid', and 'Harvest .Queen'.

Table 1. Early marketable yields of several cantaloupe cultivars at
Leesburg, 1969-1973.

-Yield, tons/acrez
Cultivar 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

Gu'lfcoast 6.6 1.4 1.6 -- 2.2
Super Market -- 2.9 -- -- -
Saticoy Hybrid 5.5 1.7 1.2 5.7 --
Samsibo Hybri-d- _-.5 4-........_ 0.5 0.9 3.7 2.1
Hales Best Jumbo 7.7 5.4 -.-- -- -- -

Southland -- -- 0.5 3.2 2.0
Planters Jumbo 5.9 1.3 0.1 3.0 1.3
Chilton -- 0.6 1.8 1.1
Gulfstream -- -- 1.8 1.2
Edisto 47 -- 0.4 0.2 1.5 0.4


Z Harvest dates included in the early yield were: 196
1970, June 4-12, 1971, June 7-18; 1972, June 2] :T


Leesburg ARC Research Report-WG74-2 A
350 copies
January 1974





-2-

Table 2. Total marketable yields of several cantaloupe cultivars
at Leesburg, 1969-1973.

Yield, tons/acrez
Cultivars ; 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

Samson Hybrid 9.6 7.4 14.4 9.1 8.2
Gulfcoast 10.5 '6.9 11.4 -- 7.6
Southland -- 12.0 10.6 7.0
Planters Jumbo; 9.5 6.8 13.5 8.5 6.8
Saticoy Hybriid 7.5 7.2 11.9 .8.2

Edisto 47 -- 5.3 13.2 6.4 6.6
Chilton -- 10.5 7.8 5.8
Gulfstream -- 7.2 6.4
Hales Best Jumbo 9.0 6.3 -- --
Super Market -- 5.7 --

Z Harvest dates included in total yield were: 1969, June 1-30;
1970, June 4-24; 1971, June y-July 2; 1972, June 2-26; and
1973, ~June 8-July 2..


Table 3. Soluble solids content of several cantaloupe cultivars
at Leesburg, 1969-1973.

Soluble solids content (%)
Cultivar 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

Samson Hybrid 11.8 11.0 10.6 11.2 10.4
Edisto 47 -- 11.6 .9.6 .11.4 11.5
Gulf coast 11.1 9.0 -. :10.2 -- 11.9
Saticoy Hybrid 11.5 10.0 10.7 11.1.
Chilton -- 10.9 12.0 11.4

Super Market -- 10.3 -- -
Gulfstream -- -- 10.2 10.0
Planters Jumbo 9.7 9.0 10.8 10.9 8.4
Southland -- -- 10.2 8.7 9.4
Hales Best Jumbo 9.4 7.5 --






-3-


Table 4.


Mean fruit weight of several cantaloupe cultivars at
Leesburg, 1969-1973.


Pounds per fruit
Cultivar 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

Planters Jumbo 3.1 3.1 4.6 4.3 3.8
Edisto 47 -- 2.5 4.1 4.1 3.7
Saticoy Hybrid 3.1 3.1 3.9 3.7
Southland -- 3.4 3.5 3.4
Hales Best Jumbo 3.1 3.2 -- -- -

Gulfcoast 3.8 3.1 3.0 -- 2.9
Samson Hybrid 2.7 2.5 3.5 3.2 3.0
Chilton -- -- 2.6 2.9 2.6
Gulfstream -- -- 2.7 2.6
Super Market -- 2.4 -- --


Table 5. Resistance to general foliar diseases, downy mildew,
gummy stem blight and powdery mildew of several
cantaloupe cultivars at Leesburg, 1969-1973.

Disease resistance rating
Gummy
Downy stem Powdery
General mildew blight mildew
Cultivar 1969 1971 1973 1971 1972 1973 1973

Planters Jumbo 5 4 4 5 4 4 3
Samson Hybrid 5 4 4 4 3 4 4
Gulfcoast 4 3 4 3 3 5
Edisto 47 4 3 3 3 3 5
Chilton 2 3 2 3 4 5

Southland 4 3 4 1 3 5
Gulfstream 3 3 3 5
Hales Best Jumbo 2 -
Saticoy Hybrid 1 2 2 2 -


by Dr.


z Rated from 1 to 5 with increasing disease resistance
D. L. Hopkins, Assistant Plant Pathologist.









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




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