This page was
updated on
Monday March 17 2008
view and
print entire
publication
as a pdf
(24 pages
572 kb)
UC Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Statewide Processing Tomato Variety Evaluation Trials, 2003 |
|
Project Leader: |
Scott Stoddard |
|
|
Cooperating |
Diane Barrett, Food Science & Technology CE Specialist,
UCD |
Summary:Four early and 8 mid-maturity variety tests were conducted throughout the major processing tomato production regions of California during the 2003 season. Ten mid-maturity trials were planned, but one trial in Kings County did not get planted and an additional transplant test in Fresno County was lost due to irrigation problems. All of the major production areas had at least one test to identify tomato cultivars appropriate for that specific region. As in the past, both replicated and observational lines were evaluated. Transplants presently account for about half the production acreage in the state—with a greater percentage in the northern and central production areas (Merced County northward). In three of the mid-maturity tests transplants were used based on grower preference (Colusa, Yolo, and Merced); in Colusa and Yolo counties, both mid-maturity transplant and direct seeded trials were evaluated (in separate fields). All of the early-maturity tests were direct seeded. When averaged across all four locations, there were no significant differences among the early-maturing observation varieties for yield, ?Brix, Brix yield, color, or pH. Greatest yields occurred with UG 8168, HyPeel 45, and H 9280. For the replicated early lines, highest yields occurred with AP 957, H9997, and H9280 (52.5, 48.7, and 48.0 tons per acre, respectively). AP 957 had a relatively low ?Brix of 4.9, well below the group average of 5.2. The overall highest yielding lines for the mid-maturity observation test were CXD 223, H 8892, U 729, Sun 6360, HMX 2855, Sun 6324, H 2401, and U 886 ranging from 43.4 to 38 tons per acre. There were no significant differences with ?Brix, which averaged 5.4 across all locations. In the replicated mid-maturity trials, highest yields occurred with H 8892, U 941, and AB 5 at 43.3, 41.8, and 41.7 tons per acre. The lines with the best ?Brix were CPL 155, CXD 221, and H 2801, which all averaged more than 5.5% soluble solids. Objectives:The major objective is to conduct processing tomato variety field tests that evaluate fruit yield, ?Brix (a measure of soluble solids %), color, and pH in various statewide locations. The data from all test locations are used to analyze variety adaptability under a wide range of growing conditions. Continued support is needed to maintain weigh trailers to accurately measure fruit yield. These tests are designed and conducted with input from seed companies, processors, and other allied industry and are intended to generate information useful for making intelligent management decisions. Procedures:Four early-maturity variety tests and 8 mid-maturity tests were conducted in 2003, each with an observation and replicated component. Participating counties and Farm Advisors are listed in Table 1. Variety entries and their disease resistances are listed in Tables 2a and 2b. Early maturity tests were planted in February or early March and mid-maturity lines were planted from March to May. New varieties are typically screened one or more years in non-replicated observational trials before being included in the replicated trials. Tests were primarily conducted in commercial production fields with grower cooperators (the Fresno trials were located at the West Side Research and Extension Center [WSREC] near Five Points). Each variety was usually planted in one-bed wide by 100 foot long plots (Fresno used 75 foot long plots). Plot design was randomized complete block with four replications for the replicated trial. The observational trial consisted of one non-replicated plot directly adjacent to the replicated trial. Seeding or transplanting was organized by the Farm Advisor at approximately the same time that the rest of the field was planted. All cultural operations, with the exception of planting and harvest, were done by the grower cooperator using the same equipment and techniques as the rest of the field. All test locations were primarily furrow irrigated. A field day or arrangements for interested persons to view the plots occurred at all of the tests. Shortly before harvest, fruit samples were collected from all plots and submitted to an area PTAB station for soluble solids (reported as ?Brix, an estimate of the soluble solids percentage using a refractometer), color (LED color, lower values indicate redder fruit), and pH determinations. These samples were usually hand picked ripe fruit, however, at the Merced trial, samples were taken off the harvester. The plots were harvested with commercial harvest equipment, conveyed to a GT wagon equipped with weigh cells, and weighed before going to the trailers for processing. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance procedures with SAS, both for individual locations and combined locations. In the combined analysis, the block effect was nested within each county. Significant difference tests were performed using Fisher’s unprotected LSD at the 5% level. Because of planting problems with SUN 6119, it was not harvested in each county, and therefore was not included in the combined-location analyses. ResultsResults are presented in the following order and include combined county, yield, ?Brix, Brix yield, color, and pH for each trial: early maturity observational (Table 3 a - f), early replicated (Table 4 a – f), mid-maturity observational (Table 5 a – f), and mid-maturity replicated (Table 6 a – f). Early observational. Results averaged across counties and for individual counties are presented in Table 3 a – e. There were no significant differences between any of the varieties for any of the parameters measured in this test (Table 3a). Average yield in the early observational trials was 42.5 tons/A with an average ?Brix of 5.2. The best yielding variety was UG 8168 at 48.4 tons/A at 5.4 ?Brix. AGT 771 had the highest ?Brix at 5.7%. Brix yield was highest in UG 8168 at 2.6 tons/A, but this was not significantly different from any of the other varieties even though this was 0.63 ton improvement (32%) over the lowest yielder, HA 3523. Average color and pH were 24.7 and 4.42 respectively. Because there was no replication in this test, variety by location interactions could not be tested. Early replicated. Early replicated results are presented in Table 4 a – f. Significant yield and ?Brix differences were found between varieties, with the highest yields occurring with AP 957 at 52.5 tons/A. HyPeel 45, CXD 224, SUN 6358, H1400, APT 410, H 1100 had significantly better ?Brix than the other varieties, ranging from 5.5 to 5.3. Because AP 957 had a relatively low ?Brix of only 4.9, however, Brix yield was not significantly different between it and five other varieties (Table 4d). Large differences were found for color, with H9997 having significantly redder fruit than all other varieties (23.1). Average pH was 4.40 and ranged from 4.35 for H 1400 to 4.48 for Calista (Table 4f). Significant variety by location interactions occurred for yield, Brix yield, and color. This indicates that some varieties performed better at specific locations. Where significant, the variety by location LSD can be used to compare the performance of the same variety at one location to the other (Tables 4b, d, e). Mid observational. Mid-maturity observational results combining all locations are shown in Table 5a, and individual counties in Table 5 b – f. When all counties were combined, significant differences were observed between varieties for yield, Brix yield, color, and pH (Table 5a). The highest yields occurred with CXD 223, H 8892, U729, SUN 6360, and CPL 4863, all exceeding 40 tons/A. No significant differences were found for ?Brix, which was good for all lines, ranging between 5.1 to 5.6. Brix yield ranged from 2.21 tons/A for CXD 223 to 1.59 tons/A for CPL 1056, a 39% difference. Eleven varieties were in the top Brix yield group (Table 5d). UG 151 and SUN 6360 had the reddest fruit, but their color was not significantly different than 9 other varieties (Table 5e). Fruit pH ranged for 4.30 to 4.47 (Table 5f). Because there was no replication in this test, variety by location interactions could not be performed. Mid replicated. Combined mid-maturity replicated variety results are reported in Table 6 a, and individual counties in Tables 6 b – f. Significant differences occurred for all parameters measured, though individual counties may not have had significant differences for yield, ?Brix, and color (Tables 6b, 6c, and 6e). Highest yields occurred with H 8892, U 941, and AB 5, at > 40 tons/A. SUN 6119 yielded well with an average 39.3 tons/A, but because it was not tested in every location it is not included in the combined statistical analysis in Table 6a; however, it was included in the individual counties where data were collected. ?Brix was significantly higher in CPL 155, CXD 221, and H 2801 compared to the other varieties, at 5.6, 5.6, and 5.5 respectively. Lowest ?Brix occurred with H 8892, at 4.8. AB5 had the highest Brix yield of 2.16 tons/A, followed closely by U 941 and H8892 in the same high Brix yield group. Lowest Brix yield was with LaRossa at 1.60 tons/A—a reduction of 35% compared to the top yielding varieties. H2801, NDM0098, H2501, and AB2 had the best fruit color with an LED rating of 23.8 to 24.3 (Table 6e). Average pH ranged from 4.28 to 4.42 (Table 6f). Significant variety by location interactions occurred for yield, ?Brix, Brix yield, and pH. This suggests that certain varieties performed differently at different locations. H 8892, for example, yielded significantly better in Stanislaus than all other locations except Yolo (Table 6 b). Kern and Colusa often had significantly higher ?Brix for the same variety at the other locations. Acknowledgements
The tables are not available to be viewed here. The entire report including tables is available as a pdf document: 2003 tomato varietyreport.
|
