Horticultural Sciences Department

A Vegetable Crops Extension Publication

Archives
Events Calendar
Index
Related Links

_____________________

Anyone is free to use the information in this newsletter. Whenever possible, please give credit to the authors.
The purpose of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing information and does not necessarily constitute a recommendation of the product.)


Webmaster - Susie Lonon

 

veggies growing.gif (7628 bytes)  Vegetarian Newsletter

A Vegetable Crops Extension Publication
Vegetarian 01-12
December 2001

University of Florida
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Cooperative Extension Service

(Note: Anyone is free to use the information in this newsletter. Whenever possible, please give credit to the authors.
The purpose of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing information and does not necessarily constitute a recommendation of the product.)

PDFICON.GIF (224 bytes)Print Version

EVENTS CALENDER

COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES
grnbullet.gif (839 bytes) Snack Food Association Potato Variety Trial, 2001
grnbullet.gif (839 bytes) Copper Toxicity of Vegetable Crops
grnbullet.gif (839 bytes) Spring 2001 GCREC Cantaloupe Variety Evaluation
grnbullet.gif (839 bytes) Spring 2001 GCREC Tomato Variety Evaluation
grnbullet.gif (839 bytes) Sensory Evaluation of Cantaloupe Varieties in North Florida


VEGETABLE GARDENING
grnbullet.gif (839 bytes)
No article this month

List of Extension Vegetable Crops Specialists

calender butt.jpg (2719 bytes)

2002 Postharvest Horticulture Industry Tour - March 4-7, 2002. Visit postharvest operations from harvest through shipping in central and southwest Florida. Special rates are available for county and statewide faculty. Contact Steve Sargent (sasa@mail.ifas.ufl.edu, 352-392-1928, ext. 215) or Mark Ritenour (mrit@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu, 561-467-3877).
Cucurbitaceae 2002 - December 8-12, 2002 - Naples Beach and Golf Club, Naples, FL. Contact Donald N. Maynard at (941)751-7636 x239 or dnma@mail.ifas.ufl.edu.

comm veg butt.jpg (5124 bytes)

Snack Food Association Potato Variety Trial, 2001

Cooperators:

Chad Hutchinson, Hastings REC, University of Florida/IFAS, P.O. Box 728, Hastings, FL.  Telephone: 904-692-1792, Email: cmhutch@ufl.edu.
Marion White, Mid-Florida REC, University of Florida/IFAS, 2725 Binion Road, Apopka, FL.  Telephone: 407-884-2034.
Pete Weingartner, Hastings REC, University of Florida/IFAS, P.O. Box 728, Hastings, FL.  Telephone: 904-692-1792.

 General Comments:

Chip potato production is valued at over $100 M annually in Florida.  Chip potatoes are grown in many areas of the state although the greatest concentration of chip potato acreage (20 k + acres) is in Hastings.  The goal of the Snack Food Association Potato Variety Trial is to find a chip potato with better quality and production characteristics than Atlantic, the standard Florida chip variety.  Varieties and clones are submitted for evaluation in the program by unviersity, USDA, and private breeding programs.  Clones are evaluated under Florida’s short day growing conditions for higher gravity, better production, improved chip color, and improved disease resistance compared to Atlantic.  (See Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4.)

Planting Site: Hastings REC, Yelvington Farm
Planting Date/Harvest Date:  February 16, 2001; June 4, 2001
Season Length:  108 days
Growing Conditions:  A dry season with average temperatures and a low incidence of Late Blight resulted in higher than average tuber yields in North Florida.
Experimental Design:  Each variety/clone was planted in a single 200 ft row as dictated by the SFA protocol.  Four 20 ft sections of each row were harvested and graded. This was not a replicated experiment. Only means were calculated.
Row Spacing: 8 inches in-row, 40 inches between-row
Fertilizer: preplant, 168-24-144 lb/A; sidedress, 98-14-84 lb/A
Pest Control:  Telone II, 6 gpa December 20, 2001
Temik 15G, 20 lb/A, February 16, 2001
Sencor DF, 16 oz/A, at hilling
Fungicides, IPM program
Early Plant Size (Early Vigor): Rated 39 days after planting
Highest Total Yield:  Atlantic (410 cwt/acre)
Highest Marketable Yield: W1431 (374 cwt/acre)
Best Overall Tuber Appearance:  NY120 (5.7), AF1424-7 (5.7)

Specific Comments:

Atlantic.  Total and marketable yields were 410 and 335 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was tan with a slightly netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white to cream. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair.  Early plant size was rated between 4 and 6 inches.  Plant maturity at harvest was scored as yellow and dying to completely dead. Scab was noted on tubers when harvested.  Average specific gravity for Atlantic tubers was 1.078. The Agtron reading was 55 with 4% external defects. Chips were noted as “fairly bright”.

La Chipper.  Total and marketable yields were 266 and 244 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was tan to smooth with a moderately smooth texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with deep to intermediate eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair. Early plant size was rated between 6 and 8 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was rated as completely dead. Mild scab was noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for La Chipper tubers was 1.070. The Agtron reading was 54 with 1% external defects. Chips were noted as “dark golden”.

Snowden.  Total and marketable yields were 315 and 286 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was tan with a slightly netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was scored as fair to good. Early plant size was between 8 and 10 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was scored as moderately mature to yellow and dying. Mild scab and large lenticels were noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for Snowden tubers was 1.079. The Agtron reading was 57 with 3% external defects.

AF1424-7.  Total and marketable yields were 204 and 177 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was buff to white with a slightly netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair to good. Early plant size was rated between 8 and 10 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was scored as completely dead. Scab and large lenticels were noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for AF1424-7 tubers was 1.077. The Agtron reading was 62 with 7% external defects.  Chips were noted as “nice”.

AF1775-2.  Total and marketable yields were 373 and 353 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was tan to buff with a moderately smooth texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair to good. Early plant size was rated as 2 inches or less.  Plant maturity at harvest was scored as yellow and dying. Scab was noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for AF1775-2 tubers was 1.075. The Agtron reading was 58 with 2% external defects.

B0766-3.  Total and marketable yields were 336 and 293 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was buff with a slightly netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair to good. Early plant size was rated between 4 and 6 inches.  Plant maturity at harvest was scored as yellow and dying to completely dead. Scab was noted on tubers when harvested.  Average specific gravity for B0766-3 tubers was 1.070. The Agtron reading was 58 with no defects.

NDTX4930-5W.  Total and marketable yields were 333 and 276 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was tan to buff with a moderately smooth texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair. Early plant size was rated between 6 to 8 inches.  Plant maturity at harvest was scored as completely dead. Large lenticels were noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for NDTX4930-5W tubers was 1.068. The Agtron reading was 54 with 1% external defects. Chips were noted as “good appearance”.

NY120.  Total and marketable yields were 297 and 273 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was brown to tan with a netted to slightly netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as mostly round to round/oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair to good. Early plant size was rated between 8 and 10 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was rated as yellow and dying to completely dead. Scab was noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for NY120 tubers was 1.077. The Agtron reading was 48 with 1% internal defects. Chips were noted as “dark golden”.

MSA091-1.  Total and marketable yields were 301 and 263 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was buff with a moderately smooth texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as mostly round to round/oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair. Early plant size was rated between 8 and 10 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was scored as completely dead. Tubers were noted as misshapen when harvested. Average specific gravity for MSA091-1 tubers was 1.076. The Agtron reading was 53 with 13% internal defects.

MSG227-2.  Total and marketable yields were 295 and 257 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was brown with a slightly netted to netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as mostly oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair. Early plant size was rated between 4 and 6 inches.  Plant maturity at harvest was scored as completely dead. Scab was noted on tubers when harvested. Average specific gravity for MSG227-2 tubers was 1.071. The Agtron reading was 57 with 3% internal and 3% external defects. Chips were noted as having an “oblong appearance”.

W1355-1.  Total and marketable yields were 170 and 152 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was tan to buff with a slightly netted texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as round to oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as fair. Early plant size was between 6 and 8 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was rated as yellow and dying to completely dead. Average specific gravity for W1355-1 tubers was 1.079. The Agtron reading was 51 with 1% internal defects.

W1431.  Total and marketable yields were 374 and 356 cwt/acre, respectively. Potato tuber skin color was buff with a lightly netted to moderately smooth texture. Tuber flesh color was white. Tubers were rated as mostly oblong with intermediate to shallow eyes. Overall external tuber appearance was noted as poor to fair. Early plant size was rated between 4 and 6 inches. Plant maturity at harvest was scored as yellow and dying to completely dead. Tubers were noted as misshapen when harvested. Average specific gravity for W1431 tubers was 1.074. The Agtron reading was 52 with 2% external defects. Chips were noted as "dark golden".

Table 1. Snack Food Association Trial. Total yield, marketable yield, percentage of yield by grade, size distribution, percent culls, and specific gravity of chipping potato clones grown in Hastings, FL – 2001.

Clone

Total Yield (cwt/A)

Marketable Yield1

Size

Size

 

Specific Gravity

(cwt/A)

percent of standard

Distribution by Class (%)2

Distribution (%)

1

2

3

4

5

2 to 4

3 to 4

culls

Season–108 days

Atlantic

410

335

100

2

29

39

30

0

98

69

16

1.078

LaChipper

266

244

73

4

44

42

10

0

96

52

5

1.070

Snowden

315

286

85

3

39

41

15

2

95

56

4

1.079

AF1424-7

204

177

53

9

54

33

4

0

91

37

5

1.077

AF1775-2

373

353

105

1

23

37

39

0

99

75

4

1.075

B0766-3

336

293

87

4

30

34

32

1

95

66

8

1.070

NDTX4930-5W

333

276

82

5

56

37

2

0

95

39

13

1.068

NY120

297

273

81

4

49

41

6

0

96

47

5

1.077

MSA091-1

301

263

79

4

52

43

1

0

96

44

9

1.076

MSG227-2

295

257

77

9

74

17

0

0

91

17

4

1.071

W1355-1

170

152

45

6

62

31

0

0

94

31

4

1.079

W1431

374

356

106

3

44

45

8

0

97

53

2

1.074

Average

306

272

                 

1.074

Planted on February 16, 2001, fertilizer rate was 168-24-144/A plus 98-14-84/A side dressed, harvested on June 4, 2001.
1 - Marketable Yield: size classes 2 to 4.
2 - Size classes: 1 = <1 7/8", 2 = 1 7/8 to 2.5", 3 = 2.5 to 3.25", 4 = 3.25 to 4", 5 = >4"; Size Distribution by Class was calculated with the following formula: Class (wt)/Total Yield (wt) – culls (wt)

 

Table 2. Snack Food Association Trial. Yield, vine maturity, tuber characteristics, and internal defects of chipping potato clones grown in Hastings, FL - 2001.

 Clone

Total Yield (cwt/A)

Marketable Yield (cwt/A)

Vine Maturity1

Tuber Characteristics1

Internal Defects2

IFC

SC

ST

TS

ED

APP

HH

BR

CRS

INT

Season–108 days

Atlantic

410

335

2.0

1.3

6.0

6.0

3.3

6.3

5.0

1

0

0

3

LaChipper

266

244

1.0

1.0

6.7

7.0

3.7

4.7

5.0

0

0

0

0

Snowden

315

286

3.5

1.0

6.0

6.0

3.3

5.0

5.3

0

0

0

1

AF1424-7

204

177

1.0

1.0

7.3

6.7

3.0

6.3

5.7

0

0

0

0

AF1775-2

373

353

3.0

1.0

6.7

7.0

3.3

6.0

5.3

0

0

0

4

B0766-3

336

293

1.5

1.0

7.0

6.0

3.0

6.3

5.3

0

0

0

0

NDTX4930-5W

333

276

1.0

1.0

6.7

7.0

3.3

6.3

5.0

0

0

0

0

NY120

297

273

1.5

1.0

5.3

5.7

2.7

6.3

5.7

0

0

0

0

MSA091-1

301

263

1.0

1.0

7.0

7.0

2.7

6.0

5.0

0

0

0

1

MSG227-2

295

257

1.0

1.0

5.0

5.7

4.0

6.3

5.0

0

0

0

0

W1355-1

170

152

2.0

1.0

6.3

6.0

3.0

6.0

5.0

0

0

1

0

W1431

374

356

1.5

1.0

7.0

6.7

4.0

5.7

4.7

1

0

0

0

1  See rating system outlined in Florida Rating Code Table (Table 4).
2 Percent of tubers with defects. HH = hollow heart, BR = brown rot, CRS = corky ring spot, INT = internal browning.

 

Table 3. Snack Food Association Trial. Chip quality data for chipping potato clones grown in Hastings, FL – 2001.

Clone

Total
Yield
(cwt/A)

Marketable
Yield
(cwt/A)

Chip Data1

Wise Defect Score

Wise
Agtron

SG

Comments

External

Internal

Season–108 days

Atlantic

410

335

4

0

55

1.078

fairly bright

LaChipper

266

244

1

0

54

1.070

dark golden

Snowden

315

286

3

0

57

1.079

 

AF1424-7

204

177

7

0

62

1.077

nice

AF1775-2

373

353

2

0

58

1.075

 

B0766-3

336

293

0

0

58

1.070

 

NDTX4930-5W

333

276

1

0

54

1.068

good appearance

NY120

297

273

0

1

48

1.077

dark golden

MSA091-1

301

263

0

13

53

1.076

MSG227-2

295

257

3

3

57

1.071

oblong appearance

W1355-1

170

152

0

1

51

1.079

 

W1431

374

356

2

0

52

1.074

dark golden

Average

306

272

   

55

1.074

 

1Color: 58 minimum acceptable; defects: 15 maximum combined internal and external allowed. Defects are defined as any imperfection equal to or greater than 3/16 inch in diameter.

 

Table 4. Florida Rating Codes for Potato Plant and Potato Tuber Characteristics1

Plant Characteristics

Rating Code

Early Vigor

Plant Size

Vine Maturity

Plant Type

Vine Maturity at Harvest/Vinekill

 

0

No Emergence

         

1

Plants Just Emerged

Very Small

Very Early

Decumbent – Poor

Dead

 

2

Leaves in Rosette

--

Early

Decumbent – Fair

--

 

3

Emerged Leaves Open

Small

+

Decumbent – Good

Yellow and Dying

 

4

Plants < 2"

--

Medium Early

Spreading – Poor

--

 

5

Plants 2" to 4"

Medium

Medium

Spreading – Fair

Moderately Mature

 

6

Plants 4" to 6"

--

Medium Late

Spreading – Good

--

 

7

Plants 6" to 8"

Large

+

Upright – Poor

Starting to Mature

 

8

Plants 8" to 10"

--

Late

Upright – Fair

--

 

9

Plants > 10"

Very Large

Very Late

Upright - Good

Green and Vigorous

 

Tuber Characteristics

Rating Code

Internal Flesh Color

Skin Color

Skin Texture

Tuber Shape

Eye Depth

Overall Appearance

1

White

Purple

Part. Russet

Round

Very Deep

Very Poor

2

Cream

Red

Heavy Russet

Mostly Round

--

--

3

Light Yellow

Pink

Mod. Russet

Round to Oblong

Deep

Poor

4

Medium Yellow

Dark Brown

Light Russet

Mostly Oblong

--

--

5

Dark Yellow

Brown

Netted

Oblong

Intermediate

Fair

6

Pink

Tan

Slightly Netted

Oblong to Long

--

--

7

Red

Buff

Mod. Smooth

Mostly Long

Shallow

Good

8

Blue

White

Smooth

Long

--

--

9

Purple

Cream

Very Smooth

Cylindrical

Very Shallow

Excellent

1Based on the standard NE 184 rating codes for plant and tuber characteristics.

(Hutchinson - Vegetarian 01-12)

 

Copper Toxicity of Vegetable Crops

Copper (Cu) is an essential micronutrient for plant growth. It is an important component of proteins found in the enzymes that regulate biochemical reactions in plants. Copper-deficient plants are stunted and have short internodes and necrotic young leaves. Optimal Cu contents in leaves for most vegetable crops are 1-10 ppm. Copper deficiency often occurs in soils with high pH and in organic soils where Cu is complexed to organic substances. In early 50s, Cu fertilizer significantly increased crop production in Belle Glade area. Most mineral soils in Florida contain adequate amounts of Cu for optimum vegetable yields. Actually, high Cu concentrations in some soils cause toxicity to crops.

A recent study reported the background Cu concentrations for Florida surface soils are 0.2-22 ppm. However, some soils have as high as 1500 ppm for total Cu and 200 ppm for plant available Cu. Copper was accumulated in soils through application of fungicides, fertilizers, animal manures, and municipal solid wastes. Copper-formulated fungicides are probably a main source for most high Cu soils.

Copper toxicity to citrus was first reported in Florida as early as 1954. We did not find literatures on Cu toxicity to vegetable crops in Florida. However, for last several years I have seen Cu toxicity symptoms on various vegetable crops in south Florida. Recently, we evaluated effects of Cu on 6 vegetable crops (mustard, Chinese cabbage, tomato, pea, sweet corn, snap bean) in the Indian River Research and Education Center at Ft. Pierce. Growth of mustard, tomato and sweet corn were significantly reduced in the solution containing 10 ppm Cu. Chinese cabbage, pea and snap bean relatively resisted to Cu toxicity.

Copper toxicity symptoms include plant stunting, a bluish tint to leaf color, and leaf cupping followed by chlorosis or necrosis. Feeder roots may become darkened. Crops planted in high Cu soils often show iron deficiency symptoms. Some literature suggested that the Cu toxicity concentration in leaves is 150 ppm while other proposed toxicity levels as low as 20-30 ppm. There are large differences in Cu tolerance among crops. Bean is much more tolerant than sweet corn.

Copper is tightly adsorbed by most soils and will not easily leach. Therefore, once Cu accumulates in a soil and toxicity problem develops, it is very difficult to alleviate it. Several approaches may prevent or reduce Cu toxicity to vegetable crops: 1) testing soils before planting vegetables, especially for old citrus or avocado lands; 2) planting Cu-tolerant crops or varieties; 2) liming acid soil to pH 6.5; 3) using soil organic amendments; and 4) apply iron and other fertilizers to stimulate root growth.

 (Yuncong Li and Zhenli He- Vegetarian 01-12)

 

Spring 2001 GCREC Cantaloupe Variety Evaluation

Cantaloupe is included in the melon group Cucumis melo cantalupensis in the Cucurbitaceae family. Cantaloupes are a relatively minor crop in Florida so there are no data available on commercial acreage, yield, production or value. However, there has been a great increase in production in west-central Florida and throughout the state in recent years indicating the potential for a strong commercial cantaloupe industry in Florida.

The ideal shipping variety for Florida should combine the following traits: (1) capacity to produce high yields; (2) fruit that is sutureless or nearly so, round to slightly oval, fully netted, a minimum 3 lb weight with a thick, deep salmon interior, a small, tight seed cavity, and high soluble solids; (3) a pleasant aroma and taste; and (4) resistance to fruit rots and foliar diseases, especially downy and powdery mildew. ‘Athena’, introduced several years ago, has become the industry standard and is largely responsible for the increased acreage. The object of this trial was to further evaluate outstanding varieties from the 2000 trial to identify slightly sutured, heavily netted cantaloupe varieties for potential production in west-central Florida.

Ten cantaloupe hybrids were direct seeded on 15 March in holes that were punched 2 ft apart in the black polyethylene mulch. The 20-ft long plots contained 10 plants each and were replicated four times in a randomized, complete block design. Weed control in row middles was by cultivation and application of paraquat. Pesticides were applied as needed for control of silverleaf whitefly (endosulfan), downy mildew (chlorothalonil, fosetyl-aluminum, azoxystrobin, thiophanate-methyl, and maneb), powdery mildew (trifoxystrobin), and lepidopterous larvae (Bacillus thuringiensis, spinosad, esfenvalerate, and methomyl).

Cantaloupes were harvested eight times beginning on 28 May and ending on 13 June. Marketable fruit were separated from culls that included fruit weighing less than 2.0 lb or that were cracked, rotted, or poorly shaped. Observations were made on fruit shape, sutures, and netting. Soluble solids were determined with a hand-held digital refractometer on several fruit from each entry on several harvest dates.

Early yields, as represented by the first two of eight harvests, ranged from 21 cwt/acre for ‘Odyssey’ to 483 cwt/acre for RML 8726-VP (Table 1). Average fruit weight of early-harvested cantaloupes varied from 4.8 lb for ‘Athena’ to 8.8 lb for ‘Minerva’.

Total marketable yields for the entire season varied from 514 cwt/acre for RML 9602-VP to 773 cwt/acre for RML 8793-VP (Table 1). Seven other entries had yields similar to those of RML 8793-VP. Average fruit weight ranged from 5.0 lb for ‘Athena’ and PXC 221 to 8.6 lb for RML 9601-VP which was statistically superior to all but one other entry. Soluble solids varied from 10.7% for RML 9602-VP to 13.2% for RML 8793-VP. Very good internal quality is used to describe cantaloupes containing not less than 11% soluble solids. Using this criterion, all but three entries qualify for the very good internal quality designation. Cull fruit was between 64 cwt/acre for RML 8793-VP and 298 cwt/acre for RML 8797-VP. The principal causes of cull fruit were stem-end cracks, fruit rots and misshapen fruit. Marketable fruit per plant varied from 1.7 for RML 8797-VP to 3.3 for ‘Athena’.

Previous cantaloupe variety evaluation trials were conducted at this location in the spring 1988, 1990, 1991, 1999 and 2000 seasons. Total marketable yields from cantaloupe hybrids in 2001 ranged from 514 cwt/acre to 773 cwt/acre, in 2000 yields varied from 265 cwt/acre to 681 cwt/acre; in 1999 they ranged from 382 cwt/acre to 660 cwt/acre; in 1991 yields varied from 327 cwt/acre to 547 cwt/acre and in 1990 yields ranged from 300 to 566 cwt/acre. Accordingly, yields in recent years are about 100 cwt/acre greater than those obtained a decade ago. In 2001, yields were still higher with the yields being related largely to large fruit size. Also, some of the more recently introduced hybrids are more dependable producers and have better shipping qualities than those previously available. ‘Athena’ remains the leading variety. However, growers may want to make trial plantings of ‘PXC 221’, ‘Odyssey’, ‘Eclipse’, or ‘Vienna’ to evaluate their performance on their own farms.

A complete report of this trial can be obtained from the author at dnma@mail.ifas.ufl.edu

Table 1. Early and total marketable yields, average fruit weight, soluble solids, cull weight, fruit per plant, and plant stands for cantaloupe. Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Bradenton. Spring 2001.

 

Early Harvest1

Total Harvest

Entry

Source

Marketable (cwt/A)2

Avg fruit wt (lb)

Marketable (cwt/A)2

Avg fruit wt (lb)

Soluble solids (%)

Cull fruit (cwt/A)2

Fruit per plant

Plant Stand (%)

RML 8793-VP

Syngenta

337 ab3

6.3 bc

773 a

6.0 d

13.2 a

64 c

3.0 ab

100 a

RML 8726-VP

Syngenta

483 a

8.0 ab

766 a

8.0 ab

11.9 a-c

135 bc

2.3 bc

98 a

Minerva

Syngenta

29 d

8.8 a

746 ab

7.7 bc

12.2 a-c

128 bc

2.3 bc

98 a

Athena

Syngenta

124 cd

4.8 c

718 a-c

5.0 e

12.7 ab

86 c

3.3 a

100 a

RML 9601-VP

Syngenta

222 b-d

8.4 a

713 a-c

8.6 a

11.5 a-c

179 a-c

2.2 bc

88 a

PXC 221

Siegers

71 d

5.0 c

681 a-c

5.0 e

12.1 a-c

128 bc

3.1 a

100 a

Odyssey

Sunseeds

21 d

6.3 bc

591 a-c

6.1 d

10.8 bc

229 ab

2.3 bc

95 a

RML 9603-VP

Syngenta

322 a-c

7.3 ab

581 a-c

7.7 bc

10.8 bc

197 a-c

2.1 c

85 a

RML 8797-VP

Syngenta

34 d

8.2 a

545 bc

7.4 bc

11.7 a-c

298 a

1.7 c

98 a

RML 9602-VP

Syngenta

124 cd

7.0 ab

514 c

6.9 c

10.7 c

224 ab

1.8 c

98 a

1First two of eight harvests.
2Acre = 8712 linear bed feet.
3Mean separation in columns by Duncan’s multiple range test, 5% level.
4Not determined.

 

Spring 2001 GCREC Tomato Variety Evaluation

In 1999-2000, 43,200 acres of tomatoes were harvested in Florida, yielding 62.2 million 25-pound cartons worth over $418 million. Tomatoes accounted for almost 30% of the total value for all vegetables grown during 1999-2000, making it the most important vegetable produced in the state. The Palmetto-Ruskin area (west-central Florida) accounted for over 36% of the state’s total fresh market tomato production in 1999-2000.

A tomato variety trial was conducted in spring 2001 at the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Bradenton located in west-central Florida to evaluate fresh market tomato varieties and breeding lines. Twenty-nine entries were evaluated in a replicated yield trial.

Seeds were sown on 9 January into planter flats (1.5 x 1.5 x 2.5-inch cells) containing a commercial mix (60% sphagnum peat moss and 40% vermiculite with 3 pounds dolomite, 1 pound Micromax [microelements] and 1 pound gypsum per yd3). Transplants were fertilized periodically with a liquid 20-20-20 (N-P205-K20) to sustain growth during production. Plants were conditioned before transplanting by limiting water and nutrients in the final phase of production.

The Eau Gallie fine sand in the experimental area was sampled before fertilization and analyzed by the University of Florida Extension Soil Testing Laboratory (Hanlon and DeVore, 1989): pH = 7.3 (target pH is 6.5) and Mehlich I extractable P = 147 (very high), K = 48 (medium), Mg = 114 (high), Ca = 1058 (adequate), Zn = 10.2 (adequate), Cu = 6.3 (adequate), and Mn = 8.8 (response possible) ppm. The land was prepared in early February. Beds were formed and fumigated with methylbromide:chloropicrin, 67:33 at 2.3 lb/100 lbf. Banded fertilizer was applied in shallow grooves on the bed shoulders at 2.52-0-3.50 lb N-P2O5-K2O/100 lbf after the beds were pressed and before the black polyethylene mulch was applied. The total fertilizer applied was equivalent to 220-0-305 lb N-P2O5-K2O/A. The final beds were 32-in. wide and 8-in. high, and were spaced on 5-ft centers with six beds between seepage irrigation/drainage ditches, which were on 41-ft centers.

Transplants were set in the field on 25 February and spaced 24 in. apart in single rows down the center of each bed. Transplants were immediately drenched with water containing 16 fl. oz/acre of imidacloprid for silverleaf whitefly control. Four replications of 10 plants per entry were arranged in a randomized complete block design in the replicated trial and single 10-plant plots were used in the observational trial. Plants were lightly pruned, staked, and tied.

Plants were scouted for pests throughout the season. Lepidopterous larvae, silverleaf whitefly, and russet mites were the primary insects found. Bacillus thuringiensis, abamectin, indoxacarb, spinosad, endosulfan and tebufenozide were used according to label instructions to manage insect pest populations during the season. A preventative spray program using maneb, copper hydroxide, azoxystrobin and chlorothalonil was followed for management of plant pathogens. Tomato yellow leaf curl virus plants were removed and disposed of early in the season, but were allowed to remain after the second tie.

Fruit were harvested at or beyond the mature-green stage on 17 and 31 May. Tomatoes were graded as cull or marketable by U.S. standards for grades and marketable fruit were sized by machine (see footnotes Tables 2, 3 for specifications). Marketable fruit were counted and weighed, cull fruit was weighed.

Early marketable yields ranged from 209 25-lb cartons for ‘Sanibel’ to 905 cartons/acre for BHN 543 (Table 1). Eighteen other entries had yields similar to BHN 543. Extra large fruit yield varied from 151 cartons/acre for ‘Sanibel’ to 765 cartons/acre for BHN 543. Fifteen other entries had early extra large fruit yields similar to those of BHN 543. Large fruit yields varied from 30 cartons/acre for BHN 442 to 182 cartons/acre for ASX 013. Average fruit weight for the early harvest ranged from 5.7 oz for ‘Solar Set’ to 8.0 oz for HA 3028. Plant stand was statistically similar for all the entries. Cull fruit by weight for the early harvests varied from 6% for PS 150535 to 61% for ‘Sanibel’. There was a high incidence of blossom-end rot throughout the trial. Other principal defects were large blossom scars, persistent green shoulders and rough shoulders.

Seasonal marketable yields from two harvests ranged from 1737 cartons/acre for SVR 1440598 to 2821 cartons/acre for ASX 013 (Table 2). Twenty-one entries had yields similar to those of ASX 013. All entries produced yields greater than the state average yield for spring 1999-2000 of 1693 cartons/acre (Witzig and Pugh, 2000).

Yields of extra large fruit varied from 1244 cartons/acre for ‘Sanibel’ to 2392 cartons/acre for BHN 543. Twenty-two other entries had extra large fruit yields similar to those of BHN 543. Large fruit yields ranged from 147 cartons/acre for SVR 1405037 to 771 cartons/acre for ASX 013. Cull fruit for the entire season varied from 12% for Fla. 7973, PS 150535, and ‘Florida 47’ to 32% for HA 3028. Blossom-end rot and persistent green shoulder affected fruit were the principal defects. Average fruit weight was from 5.8 oz for ‘Solar Set’ to 7.8 oz for ‘Florida 47’. The incidence of tomato yellow leaf curl virus infection was low and varied form none for PS 150535, BHN 442, Fla. 7816, HA 3057, HA 3028, and ‘Sanibel’ to 10% for BHN 575, but there was no significant difference among the entries.

Overall, total marketable yields surpassed those obtained at this location in recent spring seasons. In spring 2001, yields ranged from 1737 cartons/acre to more than 2800 cartons/acre.

The proportion of extra-large fruit was very high, e.g. about 86% of the BHN 543 and ‘Florida 91’ fruit were in this size category. Exceptional experimental hybrid performers in spring 2001 were ASX 013, Fla. 7973, ASX 911, PS 150535, HA 3026, Fla.7943, Fla. 7816, Fla. 7964, and ASX 174.

A complete report of this trial can be obtained from the author at dnma@mail.ifas.ufl.edu

Table 1. Seed source, early marketable yields, average marketable fruit weight, cull percentages, and plant stands for fresh market tomato entries in the first harvest, 17 May 2001. Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Bradenton. Spring 2001.

Entry

Source

Total

X-Large

Large

Medium

Culls (%)2

Avg Fruit Wt (oz)

Plant
Stand
(%)

------------------(cartons/A)1-----------------

BHN 543

BHN Research

905 a3

765 a

131 ab

9 c

12 bc

7.8 a

98 a

ASX 013

Agrisales

841 ab

620 ab

182 a

39 ab

16 bc

6.7 a-d

98 a

PS 150535

Seminis

749 a-c

621 ab

118 ab

10 c

6 c

7.7 ab

100 a

ASX 911

Agrisales

694 a-d

590 a-c

94 ab

10 c

17 bc

7.3 a-c

100 a

HA 3057

Hazera

666 a-e

510 a-e

111 ab

45 a

20 bc

6.9 a-d

88 a

Flavormore 223

Harris Moran

651 a-e

494 a-e

141 ab

17 bc

23 bc

6.6 a-d

100 a

Florida 47

Seminis

643 a-e

569 a-d

59 b

14 bc

22 bc

7.4 a-c

98 a

RFT 0252

Syngenta

638 a-e

536 a-e

83 ab

18 bc

25 bc

7.9 a

98 a

HA 3028

Hazera

573 a-e

505 a-e

61 b

7 c

28 bc

8.0 a

98 a

RFT 6153

Syngenta

563 a-e

428 a-e

123 ab

11 c

17 bc

7.6 a-c

90 a

Florida 91

Seminis

551 a-e

457 a-e

74 ab

20 bc

21 bc

7.2 a-c

98 a

BHN 575

BHN Research

529 a-e

420 a-e

102 ab

7 c

14 bc

6.7 a-d

100 a

SVR 1405037

Seminis

494 a-e

433 a-e

45 b

16 bc

21 bc

7.2 a-d

100 a

Fla. 7964

GCREC-UF

485 a-e

407 a-e

72 ab

6 c

35 b

6.9 a-d

100 a

Agriset 761

Agrisales

475 a-e

408 a-e

58 b

9 c

37 b

7.6 a-c

93 a

RFT 0417

Syngenta

460 a-e

389 a-e

63 b

8 c

29 bc

7.2 a-d

98 a

Floralina

Petoseed

452 a-e

352 b-e

84 ab

17 bc

33 b

7.0 a-d

100 a

Fla. 7816

GCREC-UF

449 a-e

370 b-e

59 b

21 bc

25 bc

6.6 a-d

90 a

HA 3026

Hazera

446 a-e

370 b-e

64 b

13 c

24 bc

7.0 a-d

100 a

Fla. 7973

GCREC-UF

423 b-e

348 b-e

68 ab

7 c

14 bc

6.7 a-d

98 a

ASX 174

Agrisales

388 b-e

334 b-e

47 b

7 c

26 bc

7.2 a-c

98 a

Sunguard

Seminis

383 b-e

278 b-e

94 ab

10 c

25 bc

6.6 a-d

100 a

Fla. 7943

GCREC-UF

340 c-e

257 b-e

74 ab

9 c

34 b

6.1 b-d

98 a

SVR 1440598

Seminis

336 c-e

240 b-e

86 ab

10 c

32 b

6.2 b-d

90 a

Solar Set

Seminis

303 c-e

187 de

101 ab

15 bc

37 b

5.7 d

100 a

BHN 442

BHN Research

255 de

223 c-e

30 b

3 c

22 bc

7.4 a-c

98 a

Sanibel

Seminis

209 e

151 e

50 b

8 c

61 a

6.2 b-d

100 a

1Carton = 25 lbs. Acre = 8712 lbf. Grading belt hole sizes: X-Large = no belt, > 2.75"; Large = 2.75" - 2.51"; Medium = 2.50" - 2.26"; and Cull < 2.25".
2By weight.
3Mean separation in columns by Duncan’s multiple range test, 5% level.

 

Table 2. Total marketable yields, average marketable fruit weight, and cull percentages for fresh market tomato entries. Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Bradenton. Spring 2001. (Harvest Dates: 17 May and 31 May 2001).

 

Entry

Total

X-Large

Large

Medium

Culls
(%)2

Avg Fruit
Wt (oz)

TYLCV3
(%)

------------------(cartons/A)1-----------------

ASX 013

2821 a4

1850 ab

771 a

201 ab

22 a-d

6.2 cd

5 a

BHN 543

2796 ab

2392 a

348 f-k

57 e-h

16 cd

7.3 a-c

5 a

Fla. 7973

2681 a-c

1876 ab

622 a-d

183 a-c

12 d

6.9 a-d

5 a

Sunguard

2619 a-d

2125 ab

420 c-i

73 d-h

17 cd

6.7 a-d

5 a

ASX 911

2558 a-d

2038 ab

422 c-i

98 c-h

19 a-d

6.7 a-d

5 a

Flavormore 223

2540 a-d

1781 ab

639 a-c

120 b-h

24 a-d

6.3 cd

5 a

PS 150535

2540 a-d

2148 ab

338 f-k

54 e-h

12 d

7.2 a-c

0 a

Florida 47

2496 a-d

1955 ab

451 c-h

90 c-h

12 d

7.8 a

5 a

HA 3026

2356 a-d

1982 ab

310 g-k

64 d-h

20 a-d

6.5 b-d

5 a

BHN 442

2347 a-d

1814 ab

454 c-h

79 d-h

19 a-d

6.6 b-d

0 a

Florida 91

2338 a-d

2045 ab

258 h-k

35 gh

16 cd

7.1 a-c

3 a

Fla. 7943

2320 a-d

1354 b

705 ab

261 a

14 d

6.3 cd

3 a

Fla. 7816

2256 a-d

1464 ab

609 a-e

183 a-c

21 a-d

6.7 a-d

0 a

Fla. 7964

2254 a-d

1588 ab

524 b-g

142 b-f

22 a-d

6.9 a-d

5 a

ASX 174

2250 a-d

1728 ab

404 d-i

118 b-h

25 a-d

6.4 cd

3 a

BHN 575

2236 a-d

1749 ab

403 d-i

83 d-h

17 b-d

6.5 b-d

10 a

Floralina

2221 a-d

1762 ab

381 e-j

78 d-h

21 a-d

6.8 a-d

3 a

HA 3057

2186 a-d

1509 ab

523 b-g

153 b-e

24 a-d

6.6 b-d

0 a

RFT 0417

2130 a-d

1803 ab

288 g-k

39 gh

19 a-d

7.0 a-d

5 a

Solar Set

2110 a-d

1343 b

569 a-f

197 ab

28 a-c

5.8 d

5 a

RFT 6153

2036 a-d

1688 ab

304 g-k

44 f-h

21 a-d

7.0 a-c

5 a

Agriset 761

2006 a-d

1408 b

436 c-h

162 b-d

30 ab

6.7 a-d

8 a

HA 3028

1907 b-d

1481 ab

296 g-k

130 b-g

32 a

6.6 b-d

0 a

RFT 0252

1867 cd

1661 ab

174 jk

31 gh

24 a-d

7.6 ab

3 a

SVR 1405037

1862 cd

1688 ab

147 k

27 h

25 a-d

7.1 a-c

3 a

Sanibel

1788 cd

1244 b

457 c-h

87 c-h

31 ab

6.8 a-d

0 a

SVR 1440598

1737 d

1505 ab

199 i-k

33 gh

22 a-d

7.1 a-c

3 a

1Carton = 25 lbs. Acre = 8712 lbf. Grading belt hole sizes: X-Large = no belt, > 2.75"; Large = 2.75" - 2.51"; Medium = 2.5" - 2.26"; and Cull < 2.25".
2By weight.
3Tomato yellow leaf curl virus.
4Mean separation in columns by Duncan’s multiple range test, 5% level.

 (Maynard - Vegetarian 01-12)

 

Sensory Evaluation of Cantaloupe Varieties in North Florida

Melon is a generic term that refers to the fruits of Cucumis melo L. plants, including muskmelons (often incorrectly referred to as cantaloupe) and Galia melons (Simonne et al, 1998). Muskmelons have orange flesh and are categorized as eastern or western type, based on the fruit netting and sutures. The netting is the network of cork-like marks that cover the rind. Sutures are the meridian lines that divide the rind into several sections. Fruits of eastern-type varieties are round, have a large seed cavity, and weigh five to seven pounds each. Their rind show distinctive sutures, with variable levels of netting. In contrast, western-type varieties have oval-shaped fruits weighing three to four pounds each. Their sutureless rind is covered with a coarse netting. Galia melons, at maturity, have yellow rind covered with a light net, green flesh with banana-like aroma.

Currently, eastern-type muskmelons are mainly produced in Georgia, South Carolina and the mid-west, while western-type muskmelons are grown in California, Arizona, and Texas (NASS, 2001). The U.S. field production of Galia melons is extremely small. Despite favorable growing conditions, current cantaloupe acreage in North Florida does not exceed 1,500 acres, and state-wide acreage is estimated at 3,000 acres. While recommendations for cultural practices and variety selection of melons are available, limited information is available on how differently these types taste, and how consumer would rate them one compared to the other. Therefore, the objectives of this study was to determine and compare consumer preference of eastern-type and western-type cantaloupes, and Galia melons grown in North Florida.

In the Spring of 2001, six melons varieties were grown at the North Florida Research and Education Center - Suwannee Valley following recommended practices (Table 1). Melons were harvested at the full-slip stage the day before the taste test, cut into bite-size pieces, and refrigerated overnight. Soluble solids level was measured using a hand-held refractometer on six melon pieces selected randomly from each variety.

The sensory evaluation was conducted following recommendations of the American Society for Testing Materials [ASTM] (1981) on June 4. Twilight field day participants (commercial vegetable growers, gardeners, and Extension personnel) voluntarily participated in the test. In a quiet seated area, panelists were provided with a plate containing six melon samples coded with random three-digit numbers, a glass of water, a data collection form, and a pen. Panelists were first asked to provide age group and gender. The first question instructed panelists to provide the names of melon varieties they are familiar with. They were then asked to taste and evaluate the samples for crunchiness, sweetness, flavor, and overall preference. Panelists recorded their scores on a 90 mm long, unstructured line for each attribute. Descriptors were written on both ends to give directions of the scale (Fig. 1). On the left side of the lines, terms were associated with unsatisfactory scores such as ‘extremely dislike’ or ‘bland’, whereas on the right side of the lines, terms given were associated with favorable scores (full scale) such as ‘extremely like’ or ‘musky’. Numeric scores were taken by measuring with a ruler the distance between the left side of the line and the panelist mark on the line.

Demographic and sensory data were analyzed using analyses of variance and Duncan’ multiple range test (SAS 2000). Sensory scores were also compared for melon types using orthogonal contrasts ‘eastern-type vs. western- type’ and ‘muskmelons vs. Galia melons’.

Means scores for each attribute and each sample were calculated by adding all the panelists’ response and divided by the total number of panelists. Then melons varieties were ranked from the first to the last one for each sensory attribute, where the higher mean score represented the better rating and the lower mean score represented the less favorable rating. In case of two-way tie at rank n, both samples were ranked as n+(1/2). Next rank was n+2 (Simonne et al., 1999). The variety having the lowest score received the highest rank. The overall rating was evaluated by adding, for each variety, the ranks of all four attributes. The sum of ranks was called the Overall Rank Sum Index (ORSI).

Panel makeup. A total of 50 data collection forms was correctly filled and was used in the statistical analysis. The panel was comprised of 22 males, 13 females, and 15 forms did not report gender. Age distribution was 1 panelist in the 0-9 years-old group, 0 in the 10-19 group, 6 in the 20-29 group, 10 in the 30-39 group, 9 in the 40-49 group, 8 in the 50-59 group, and 6 in the 60-69 group. Age group was not reported on 10 forms.

Effect of demographic data on sensory scores. Panelist age did not significantly affect crunchiness (p-value = 0.33 ), flavor (p-value = 0.07), sweetness (p-value = 0.18), and overall preference (p-value = 0.24). Gender effect was not significant for flavor (p-value = 0.07), sweetness (p-value = 0.10), and overall preference (p-value = 0.15), but was significant for crunchiness (p-value = 0.01). Crunchiness ratings (mm) were 44a, 38b, and 30c for unreported gender, male, and female, respectively.

Effect of variety and type on sensory scores. Because of the orientation of the unstructured lines, low ratings represent undesirable or low ratings, while high ratings represent desirable, attractive ratings. The lowest and highest possible ratings were 0 and 90 mm, respectively. The median value for all ratings was 45 mm.

Variety significantly affected crunchiness, flavor, sweetness, and overall preference (all p-values = 0.01). ‘Hi-Mark’ and ‘Mission’ had significantly higher crunchiness scores than all the other entries except ‘Odyssey’'. Crunchiness scores for ‘Athena’ (29 mm), ‘Inbar’ (38 mm), and ‘Passport’ (18 mm) were well below the 45 mm median value. ‘Athena’, ‘Inbar’ and ‘Odyssey’ tended to have higher flavor ratings than ‘Mission’ and ‘Passport’. The lowest flavor rating (‘Passport’, 42 mm) was close to the median 45 mm value, suggesting that panelists perceived favorably the flavor of all varieties. ‘Inbar’, ‘Odyssey’, and ‘Athena’ had significantly higher sweetness ratings than the other entries. The lowest sweetness rating (‘Passport’, 44 mm) was close to the median 45 mm value, suggesting that panelists perceived favorably the sweetness of all varieties. ‘Athena’ and ‘Odyssey’ tended to have the highest overall preference rating (63 mm and 58 mm, respectively), while ‘Hi-Mark’ and ‘Passport’ had significantly lower ones (43 mm, and 36 mm, respectively). This analysis made separately for each variety shows that no one single variety was perceived as the best for all the attributes.

The ORSI ranged between 9 for ‘Odyssey’ to 24 for ‘Passport’. Because of the orientation of the rankings, low ORSI values were desirable, while high ones were not. ORSI values for ‘Odyssey’, ‘Athena’, and ‘Inbar’ were numerically close (9, 10 and 11, respectively). These three varieties were the overall best rated ones.

Effect of types on sensory scores. All the p-values associated with both contrasts (‘eastern-type vs western type’ and ‘muskmelon vs Galia melon’) were significant, except that of the contrast ‘muskmelon vs Galia melon’ for sweetness. Mean flavor, sweetness and overall preference were higher for the eastern type, while mean crunchiness was higher for the western type. The Galia type rated lowest for all attributes, because of the low ratings received by ‘Passport’. These results are rather surprising as Galia melons are known for their attractive, typical flavor.

In conclusion, this panel of 50 members found significant differences among the four major sensory components of small melons (crunchiness, sweetness, flavor, and overall preference). Different varieties were best rated for different attributes. When all sensory scores were pooled together using ranking procedures, ‘Athena’ and ‘Odyssey’ were the most preferred varieties, while ‘Passport’ was the least preferred. When varieties of the same types were analyzed together, panelists preferred eastern melons over western and Galia melons. These results suggest that growers should consider planting a small acreage of specialty melons such as the Galia-type along with the more traditional eastern-type.

References:

ASTM, 1981. Guidelines for the selection and training of sensory panel members. ASTM Special Technique Publication 758. American society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa, 2-32

NASS. 2001. National Agricultural Statistic Service. Vegetables. July 2001. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/.

SAS Institute, 2000, SAS/STAT Guide for personal computer. Carry, NC

Simonne, E., 1999. Commercial varieties of small melons. Circ. ANR-1159, Ala. Coop. Ext. Sys., Auburn Univ., Ala.

Simonne, E., A. Simonne, and R. Boozer. 1999. Yield, Ear, Characteristic, and consumer acceptance of selected white sweet corn varieties in the southeastern united states. HortTechnology. 11(3):289-293.

Table 1. Type, flesh color, and seed source of selected melon varieties.

Variety

Type

Flesh color

Seed Source

Odyssey (Sun-7119)

Eastern

Orange

Sunseeds

Athena

Eastern

Orange

Novartis

Passport

Galia

Green

Johnny’s

Inbar

Galia

Green

D. Palmer Seed

Hi-Mark

Western

Orange

Seminis

Mission

Western

Orange

Seminis

 

Table 2. Sensory scores and raking of melons varieties grown in Florida (2001).

 

Crunchiness

Flavor

Sweetness

Overall Preference

ORSI

Final
Rank

Variety

Score
(mm)

Rank

Score
(mm)

Rank

Score
(mm)

Rank

Score
(mm)

Rank

Total

Eastern type

                   

Athena

29c

5

62a

1

60a

3

63a

1

10

2nd

Sun-7119

41ab

3

58ab

2

61a

2

58ab

2

9

1st

Mean

35B

 

60A

 

61A

 

61A

     

Western type

                   

Hi-Mark

49a

1

47cd

5

47b

5

43d

5

16

5th

Mission

48a

2

52bc

4

50b

4

48cd

4

14

4th

Mean

48A

 

49B

 

49B

 

46B

     

Galia type

                   

Inbar

38b

4

57ab

3

62a

1

55bc

3

11

3rd

Passport

18d

6

42d

6

44b

6

36e

6

24

6th

Mean

28C

 

49B

 

53B

 

46B

     

Contrasts:

                   

Eastern vs. Western

0.01

 

0.01

 

0.01

 

0.01

     

Galia vs muskmelon

0.01

 

0.03

 

0.54

 

0.01

     

 

Fig 1. Data collection form used to record sensory scores of cantaloupe varieties

Sensory Data Evaluation for Cantaloupe

NO NAME PLEASE                                          Gender (Circle One)      M       F

Circle your age: 1-9   10-19    20-29    30-39    40-49    50-59     60-69    70-79    80-89

What varieties of Cantaloupe do you now? (Please list)

Sample # ________

Sweetness: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

not sweet                                                                           very sweet

Crunchiness: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

not crunchy                                                                 very crunchy

Flavor: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bland                                                                                     flavorful (musky)

Overall Preference:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

extremely dislike                                       extremely like

Sample#________

Sweetness:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

not sweet                                                                           very sweet

Crunchiness:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

not crunchy                                                                 very crunchy

Flavor:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  bland                                                                             flavorful (musky)

Overall Preference-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            extremely dislike                                              extremely like

Authors: Amy Simonne, Sandrine Cazaux, Bob Hochmuth, Suzanne Stapleton, Eric Simonne, Wayne Davis, David Studstill, and Merry Taylor

A. Simonne and Cazaux are assistant professor and exchange student, respectively, Department of Family, Youth and Community Sciences; Hochmuth, Stapleton and Davis are multi-county agents and senior ag assistant, respectively, North Florida Research and Education Center -Suwannee Valley; E. Simonne and Studstill are assistant professor and biological scientist, respectively, Horticultural Sciences Department; Taylor is a County Extension Director and FCS Extension Agent, Suwannee County.

Acknowledgment: The authors wish to recognize and thank the Suwannee County Family and Consumer Science Volunteers who diligently helped conduct the test. This sensory evaluation protocol was approved under the IRB 2001-770.

 (Simonne - Vegetarian 01-12)

Extension Vegetable Crops Specialists

Daniel J. Cantliffe
Professor and Chairman, Horticultural Sciences Department
Mark A. Ritenour
Assistant Professor, postharvest

Timothy E. Crocker
Professor, deciduous fruits and nuts, strawberry

Ronald W. Rice
Assistant Professor, nutrition
John Duval
Assistant Professor, strawberry
Steven A. Sargent
Professor, postharvest
Chad Hutchinson
Assistant Professor, vegetable production
Eric Simonne
Assistant Professor and editor, vegetable nutrition
Elizabeth M. Lamb
Assistant Professor, production
William M. Stall
Professor, weed control
Yuncong Li
Assistant Professor, soils
James M. Stephens (retired)
Professor, vegetable gardening
Donald N. Maynard
Professor, varieties
Charles S. Vavrina
Professor, transplants
Stephen M. Olson
Professor, small farms
James M. White (retired)
Associate Professor, organic farming

Related Links:
University of Florida
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Horticultural Sciences Department
Florida Cooperative Extension Service
North Florida Research and Education Center - Suwannee Valley

FastCounter by LinkExchange
This page is maintained by Susie Futch.... if you have any questions or comments, contact me at
zsf@mail.ifas.ufl.edu.