Group Title: Immokalee ARC research report
Title: Non-staked tomato variety trial results
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00094212/00001
 Material Information
Title: Non-staked tomato variety trial results
Series Title: Immokalee ARC research report - University of Florida ; SF81-2
Physical Description: 3, 1 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Everett, P. H. ( Paul Harrison ), 1927-
Florida Agricultural Research Center (Immokalee, Fla.)
Donor: unknown ( endowment )
Publisher: Agricultural Research Center, IFAS, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Immokalee, Fla.
Publication Date: April, 1981
Copyright Date: 1981
 Subjects
Subject: Tomatoes -- Varieties -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: Paul H. Everett.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (leaf 3).
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "April, 1981."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00094212
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 406518598

Full Text



AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTER
IFAS, University of Florida
Immokalee, Florida

NON-STAKED TOMATO VARIETY TRIAL RESULTS
Paul H. Everett1


Imnokalee ARC Research Report SF81-2


April, 1981


A replicated trial was conducted at the Agricultural Research Center, Immokalee,
Florida, during the fall season (Aug.-Dec.) of 1980 to evaluate the performance of
fifteen tomato cultivars and/or breeding lines for once-over harvest. All entries
possessed the jointless (2J gene) characteristic. The following table is a list of
entries and seed sources.


Cultivar or
breeding line
FI S79 63x64
Burgis
Hybrid KS #2169
Hybrid KS #2170
FTE #12
Duke
91914
Fl F78 19x20
FE #16
Hayslip
Flora-Dade
E-1037
PSR 33777
E-1045
Florida MH-1


Seed source
IFAS Breeders Seed
IFAS Breeders Seed
Keystone Seed Company
Keystone Seed Company
Peto Seed Company (Fla.
Peto Seed Company (Fla.
IFAS Breeders Seed
IFAS Breeders Seed
Peto Seed Company (Fla.
IFAS Breeders Seed
IFAS Breeders Seed
Castle Seed Company
Peto Seed Company (Fla.
Castle Seed Company
Asqrow Seed Company


HUME LIBRARY

S JuL 14 1981

.F..S. Univ. of Florida

Tomato Exchange)
Tomato Exchange)

Tomato Exchange)


Tomato Exchange)


EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

All entries were seeded into Speedling trays (1-1/2 inch square cells) on
August 15, 1980, and were transplanted to field plots on September 2, 1980. Field
plots were arranged in randomized complete block design with three replications.
Each plot consisted of 10 plants spaced 18 inches apart on raised plant beds which
were spaced 6 feet on centers. Plant beds were irrigated with an open ditch seep
system with lateral ditches spaced 41.5 feet apart. This arrangement results in
5,250 linear feet of bed per acre. Yields are reported on this basis. All plots
were fertilized with 5-8-8-1.8 + micronutrients (60 lb FTE 503/ton) at 7 lb/100
linear bed feet plus 18-0-25 at 14 lb/100 linear bed feet. The 5-8-8 fertilizer was
Spread in a 30 inch wide band on a pre-bed, and the 18-0-25 was applied on the pre-
bed in a narrow band 10 inches to each side of the plant row. This was then


1Soil Chemist, Agricultural Research Center, Immokalee, FL 33934.


'714


---~


Florida MH-l









bedded-over to a depth of 3-4 inches, fumigated with Vorlex at 24 gal/treated acre,
and mulched with white plastic film. Plants were not staked or pruned. Fungicides
were applied on a 5-7 day schedule, and insecticides were applied on a need basis.
Diseases or insects were not a serious problem during this test. Fruits were
once-over harvested on November 18, 1980. Fruits were sized, counted, weighed, and
graded into marketable or cull fruit.
The general weather conditions are given in the following table.


Temperature F Rainfall
Month Avg max Avg min (inches)
Sept. 91 70 5.60
Oct. 89 65 0.65
Nov. 77 58 3.10
Dec. (1-10) 79 53 0.00


RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in marketable yield among the fifteen
entries in this trial (Table 1). Marketable yields ranged from a high of 1299 to a
* low of 1029 30 Ib boxes/A for F 579 63x64 and Fla. MH-1, respectively. Total
yields (marketable + cull fruit) are included in Table 1 as an indication of the
yield potential of the various entries. Total yield varied from a high of 1967 to
a low of 1268 30 Ib boxes/A for E-1045 and Fla. MH-1, respectively. Although E-1045
had the highest total yield, it ranked next to last in marketable yield due to a
high percentage of cull fruit.
Average fruit weight for E-1045 was significantly (5% level) higher than all
other entries in this trial. Six entries were in a group with average fruit weight
ranging from 5.6 oz/fruit for Hybrid KS #2169 to 5.3 oz/fruit for Hybrid KS #2170
and E-1037. Seven entries were in another group with average fruit weight ranging
from 5.1 oz/fruit for Burgis and FTE #12 to 4.7 oz/fruit for 91914.
With respect to fruit maturity, eight entries were equal to, two entries were
earlier and three were later than Fla. MH-1 (Table 1). FTE #16 was the earliest
and Hayslip the latest maturing entry in the trial.
Fla. MH-1 had the lowest (10.5%) percentage of cull fruit and E-1045 the
highest (47.2%). Four of the remaining 13 entries had cull percentages in the
15-20% range, 5 entries in the 20-25% range, 3 entries in the 25-30% range and 1
entry in the 30-35% range. As shown in Table 2, large and/or leaky blossom-end-scars
were responsible for most of the cull fruit from all entries. Fruit cracking, fruit
fleck (1), and odd shaped fruit were not major contributors with respect to cull
fruit. Graywall was moderate on E-1037 (4.9%) and E-1045 (8.3%). All other entries
exhibited 1.0% or less graywall.
SThe percent (by weight) of the total marketable fruit in each of four size
categories is shown in Table 3. When the percent large and extra-large fruit are
combined, all but one entry (91914) had better fruit size than Fla. MH-1. E-1045
(86.1%) had the largest fruit of any entry in this trial, but was low in marketable
yield due to a high percentage of cull fruit (Table 1). Hybrid KS #2169 (78.8%)









and Duke (78.3%) ranked second and third with respect to percentage of large +
extra-large fruit.



REFERENCE CITED
1. Crill, Pat, D. S. Burgis, J. P. Jones, and J. W. Strobel. 1973. The fruit pox
and gold fleck syndromes of tomato. Phytopathology 63:1285-1287.










Table 1. Marketable yields, total yields, percent cull fruit, average fruit weight,
and relative maturity from once-over harvested tomatoes.

Cultivar or Marketable Total Cull Average Relative
breeding line yield' yield1 fruit fruit weight maturity

30 lb boxes/A 30 lb boxes/A % oz/fruit
F1 S79 63x64 1299 1544 15.8 5.0 equal
Burgis 1297 1622 17.5 5.1 equal
Hybrid KS #2169 1283 1724 16.7 5.6 earlier
Hybrid KS #2170 1267 1629 22.2 5.3 equal
FTE #12 1257 1767 23.3 5.1 equal
Duke 1248 1761 29.1 5.5 equal
91914 1241 1484 15.6 4.7 equal
FI F78 19x20 1206 1610 22.3 5.0 later
FTE #16 1200 1622 26.0 5.0 earlier*
Hayslip 1198 1598 22.6 5.4 later**
Flora-Dade 1141 1604 21.1 4.9 later
E-1037 1139 1798 34.3 5.3 equal
PSR 33777 1134 1648 28.5 5.5 later
E-1045 1038 1967 47.2 6.6 equal
Florida MH-1 1029 1268 10.5 4.8--
L.S.D. 5% N.S. 92 9.6 0.4


* 1Yields are based on 5,250 linear bed feet/acre.
2Based on % fruit showing color at harvest as compared
*Earliest in trial.
**Latest in trial.


to Florida MH-1.






Table 2. Percent cull fruit from once-over harvested tomatoes.


Cultivar or
breeding line BES1 CR2 GW3 FF4 OS5 Other6 Total
----------------------------% --------------

Florida MH-1 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.2 10.5
91914 11.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 3.6 15.6
Fl S79 63xG4 12.5 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.9 2.1 15.8
Hybrid KS #2169 12.1 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.4 3.0 16.7
Burgis 11.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 5.3 17.5
Flora-Dade 13.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 5.1 21.1
Hybrid KS #2170 17.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.5 3.3 22.2
Fl F78 19x20 16.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5 4.3 22.3
Hayslip 15.6 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.1 4.9 22.6
FTE #12 18.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 3.3 23.3
FTE #16 19.8 0.2 0.4 0.0 2.3 3.3 26.0
PSR 33777 21.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 1.8 5.1 28.5
Duke 24.4 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.7 3.5 29.1
E-1037 23.0 0.0 4.9 0.6 0.8 5.0 34.3
E-1045 34.1 0.3 8.3 0.0 1.2 3.3 47.2

Blossom-end-scar.
2Crack (radial and concentric).
3Graywal .
4Fruit fleck.
50dd shape.
GrIechanical scar, decay, etc.






Table 3. Percent marketable fruit in each of four size categories for
once-over harvested tomatoes.

Cultivar or Size category
breeding line Small Medium Large X-Large (Lg + X-L)
-----------------------------% --------------

E-1045 2.2 11.6 21.9 64.2 86.1
Hybrid KS #2169 3.0 18.2 33.0 45.8 78.8
Duke 3.5 18.2 26.5 51.8 78.3
E-1037 3.9 19.2 29.4 47.6 77.0
Hybrid KS #2170 4.1 19.4 27.2 49.3 76.5
Hayslip 5.0 21.5 26.1 47.5 73.6
PSR 33777 4.2 22.3 23.8 49.8 73.6
F1 S79 63x64 4.9 22.2 34.4 38.5 72.9
FTE #12 4.5 23.2 31.1 41.3 72.4
Burgis 4.3 24.1 30.8 40.7 71.5
Flora-Dade 6.2 23.0 28.3 42.6 70.9
Fl F73 19x20 6.3 24.6 25.7 43.4 69.1
FTE #16 5.3 27.9 32.5 34.3 66.8
Florida MH-1 6.9 28.4 34.0 30.7 64.7
91914 6.6 32.9 32.6 27.8 60.4


. I




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