NCSU Cucumber Breeding Report - 2011
Todd C. Wehner
Professor
Tammy L. Ellington
Research Specialist
Department of Horticultural Science
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-7609
Pickling Cucumbers
Brinestock Evaluation
Spring (Stage 3) Pickle Trial
Todd C. Wehner and Tammy L. Ellingtonz
Department of Horticultural Science
North Carolina State University
Introduction
Cucumbers from harvests 1, 3 and 5 of the stage 3 spring pickling cucumber
trial were each placed in brine tanks at Mt. Olive Pickle Co. The tanks
were purged with nitrogen to remove excess carbon dioxide from the brine.
Methods
The cultigens (cultivars and breeding lines) were evaluated for fruit quality
(shape, external color, texture, seedcell size, and lot uniformity), firmness,
bloaters, and other defects in October. Quality was evaluated by judges from
industry: Phil Denlinger, Jimmy Davis, and Bob Quinn (Mt. Olive), John Cates
(Addis Cates Co.), Steve Apol (Toisnot), Laura Kornegay (Nash Produce), Chris
Ware (Harris Moran), and Ken McCammom (Bejo).
Fruit quality was evaluated using a rating system (that approximated letter
grades) from 1 to 9, where 9 = A+, 8 = A, 7 = A-, 6 = B+, 5 = B, 4 = B-, 3 = C,
2 = D, 1 = F. Bloaters and defects were measured as percentage of fruits with
damage in a sample of 20 grade 3B fruits. Firmness was measured by punching 10
grade 2B fruits with a Magness-Taylor tester (having a 5/16" diameter tip). All
cultigens were randomized, replicated and coded to prevent bias and provide a
measure of error variance.
Results
The cultigens are presented in order by decreasing fruit quality in Table 1, and
are ranked for resistance to bloaters and defects in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
Fruit texture and firmness rankings are in Table 4. The average quality ratings
assigned by each judge in the test are presented in Table 5, showing how lenient
each judge was relative to the others. Because of low bloater incidence, the
bloater data showed few significant differences among cultigens.
Summary
- The cultigens with best fruit quality in brinestock were EGP-410, NC-Duplin,
Nun-55505, EXP08-7814, EXP70-051, MacArthur, Treasure, CrossCountry,
NC-Danbury, Vlasstar, Excursion, PCX-112, and NC-Dawson.
- Most cultigens were bloater resistant; several were susceptible: Nun-5539.
- The firmest cultigens were Sumter, EXP70-051, EGP-410, NC-Danbury, Treasure,
Nun-55505, NC-Denton, PCX-112, NC-Duplin, and EXP08-7814.
- As usual, brinestock firmness (from the punch test) was only partially
correlated with texture (subjective rating from the judges), so the two
traits are measurements of different aspects of cucumber fruit firmness.
- Judges ranged from Apol who assigned the highest quality ratings, to
Quinn who assigned the lowest. Analysis of variance indicated significant
differences among judges for the way they rated fruit quality. However,
interaction of judge with cultigen was non-significant (the judges agreed
on which were good cultigens, and which were bad cultigens).
____________________________
z Thanks to Mt. Olive Pickle Co., Mt. Olive, N.C. for assistance in brining the
cucumbers, and for providing the facilities for evaluating the cultigens tested.
Thanks also to the personnel at the Horticultural Crops Research Station,
Clinton, N.C. for help in running the field trials.
Table 1. Brinestock evaluation - quality ratings (cultigens are ranked by
average quality).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Cultivar Seed Average Extrnal Text- Seed Uniform-
Rank or line source quality Shape color ure cell ity
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 EGP-410 EmeraldSeeds 6.7 6.5 6.6 6.8 6.8 6.9
2 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 6.6 7.0 6.6 6.4 6.0 7.0
3 Nun-55505 BayerNunhems 6.5 6.3 6.7 6.5 6.7 6.5
4 EXP08-7814 Bejo Seeds 6.4 5.6 6.6 6.9 6.5 6.3
5 EXP70-051 Bejo Seeds 6.3 6.3 6.9 6.0 6.0 6.5
6 MacArthur BayerNunhems 6.3 6.2 6.5 6.3 6.0 6.3
7 Treasure HM-Clause 6.3 6.1 5.7 6.5 6.5 6.6
8 CrossCountry HM-Clause 6.3 5.9 6.2 6.6 6.2 6.3
9 NC-Danbury NCState Univ 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.4 6.3 6.2
10 Vlasstar Mon-Seminis 6.2 5.7 6.3 6.4 6.2 6.6
11 Excursion Mon-Seminis 6.2 5.7 6.5 6.3 6.3 6.4
12 PCX-112 Baker Seeds 6.2 6.1 6.8 6.0 5.8 6.5
13 NC-Dawson NCState Univ 6.2 6.0 6.1 6.6 5.8 6.5
14 Wainwright BayerNunhems 6.2 5.9 6.1 6.4 6.2 6.5
15 Wealthy HM-Clause 6.2 6.1 6.3 6.2 5.9 6.5
16 EGP-427 EmeraldSeeds 6.2 6.0 6.6 6.1 6.0 6.3
17 NC-Davie ZeraimGedera 6.2 6.6 6.3 5.6 5.6 6.6
18 Sumter Clemson Univ 6.2 5.7 5.5 6.7 6.7 6.2
19 NC-Denton NCState Univ 6.1 5.5 6.2 6.5 5.8 6.3
20 Feisty(9464) HM-Clause 6.1 6.0 6.3 5.9 5.8 6.3
21 Lafayette BayerNunhems 6.1 5.8 6.6 5.8 5.8 6.2
22 EXP08-7851 Bejo Seeds 6.0 5.8 6.3 6.0 5.9 6.3
23 Vlaspik Mon-Seminis 6.0 5.9 6.0 6.0 5.7 6.3
24 Calypso NCState Univ 6.0 5.3 5.0 6.8 6.6 6.3
25 EXP09-2431 Bejo Seeds 5.9 5.7 6.3 5.9 6.0 5.9
26 Raleigh NCState Univ 5.9 5.5 6.0 5.8 5.9 6.3
27 Johnston NCState Univ 5.9 5.6 6.3 5.8 5.5 6.3
28 Expedition Mon-Seminis 5.9 5.5 6.2 5.8 5.5 6.2
29 Journey Mon-Seminis 5.8 5.5 6.3 5.4 5.4 6.3
30 Nun-55504 BayerNunhems 5.7 5.7 6.8 5.0 4.9 6.3
31 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 5.6 5.2 5.4 5.7 5.5 6.1
32 PCX-155 Baker Seeds 5.5 4.6 6.5 5.3 5.1 6.3
33 Nun-5539 BayerNunhems 5.5 5.6 6.5 4.7 4.7 6.0
34 HSX-2015 Hort AgSeeds 5.1 3.8 6.5 4.7 4.6 6.1
35 HSX-6022 Hort AgSeeds 4.2 3.4 5.2 3.1 3.3 6.2
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 11.4 18.9 12.7 18.8 18.3 14.3
Mean 6.0 5.7 6.2 6.0 5.8 6.3
LSD (5%) 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.5
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Quality rated 1 to 9 (9=A+, 8=A, 7=A-, 6=B+, 5=B, 4=B-, 3=C, 2=D, 1=F).
Correlation (Shape with Uniformity) = 0.58**
Correlation (Texture with Seedcell) = 0.90**
Table 2. Brinestock evaluation - percentage of fruit damaged by bloaters
(cultigens are ranked by balloon bloater resistance).
_________________________________________________________________________________
Cultivar Seed Total Honey-
Rank or line source bloaters Balloon Lens comb
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 Lafayette BayerNunhems 0 0 0 0
2 Journey Mon-Seminis 0 0 0 0
3 HSX-6022 Hort AgSeeds 0 0 0 0
4 NC-Dawson NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
5 EXP08-7814 Bejo Seeds 2 0 2 0
6 MacArthur BayerNunhems 0 0 0 0
7 Treasure HM-Clause 0 0 0 0
8 Excursion Mon-Seminis 0 0 0 0
9 EXP08-7851 Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
10 Calypso NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
11 Sumter Clemson Univ 0 0 0 0
12 NC-Denton NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
13 NC-Davie ZeraimGedera 0 0 0 0
14 HSX-2015 Hort AgSeeds 3 0 0 3
15 Johnston NCState Univ 1 1 0 0
16 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 1 1 0 0
17 CrossCountry HM-Clause 2 2 0 0
18 EXP09-2431 Bejo Seeds 2 2 0 0
19 Raleigh NCState Univ 2 2 0 0
20 Vlasstar Mon-Seminis 2 2 0 0
21 Nun-55505 BayerNunhems 3 3 0 0
22 Wealthy HM-Clause 3 3 0 0
23 Wainwright BayerNunhems 3 3 0 0
24 PCX-155 Baker Seeds 3 3 0 0
25 NC-Danbury NCState Univ 3 3 0 0
26 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 4 4 0 0
27 EGP-427 EmeraldSeeds 5 5 0 0
28 Vlaspik Mon-Seminis 5 5 0 0
29 EGP-410 EmeraldSeeds 5 5 0 0
30 PCX-112 Baker Seeds 5 5 0 0
31 Expedition Mon-Seminis 5 5 0 0
32 Feisty(9464) HM-Clause 7 7 0 0
33 Nun-55504 BayerNunhems 7 7 0 1
34 EXP70-051 Bejo Seeds 10 7 0 3
35 Nun-5539 BayerNunhems 12 12 0 0
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 183 197 1025 671
Mean 3 2 0 0
LSD (5%) 8 8 1 2
_________________________________________________________________________________
Table 3. Brinestock evaluation - percentage of fruit damaged by defects
(cultigens are ranked by resistance to defects).
_________________________________________________________________________________
Blossom-
Cultivar Seed Total Placental end Soft
Rank or line source defects hollows defects centers
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 EXP09-2431 Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
2 Nun-55505 BayerNunhems 0 0 0 0
3 EGP-427 EmeraldSeeds 0 0 0 0
4 EGP-410 EmeraldSeeds 0 0 0 0
5 EXP08-7814 Bejo Seeds 1 1 0 0
6 NC-Dawson NCState Univ 1 0 0 1
7 Sumter Clemson Univ 1 1 0 0
8 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 1 1 1 0
9 Excursion Mon-Seminis 2 1 0 1
10 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 2 0 0 2
11 Vlasstar Mon-Seminis 2 0 0 2
12 Wealthy HM-Clause 2 0 0 2
13 NC-Denton NCState Univ 2 2 1 0
14 Nun-55504 BayerNunhems 2 0 0 2
15 Treasure HM-Clause 3 1 0 2
16 CrossCountry HM-Clause 3 0 0 3
17 Vlaspik Mon-Seminis 3 0 0 3
18 Wainwright BayerNunhems 3 1 0 2
19 Calypso NCState Univ 3 1 2 1
20 Feisty(9464) HM-Clause 3 0 0 3
21 MacArthur BayerNunhems 4 1 0 3
22 Lafayette BayerNunhems 4 0 0 4
23 EXP08-7851 Bejo Seeds 4 1 0 3
24 PCX-155 Baker Seeds 5 1 0 4
25 Johnston NCState Univ 5 1 1 3
26 Journey Mon-Seminis 6 0 0 6
27 PCX-112 Baker Seeds 6 2 0 4
28 NC-Davie ZeraimGedera 7 4 1 2
29 Raleigh NCState Univ 7 2 0 5
30 NC-Danbury NCState Univ 8 3 2 2
31 Nun-5539 BayerNunhems 8 0 0 8
32 Expedition Mon-Seminis 9 2 1 7
33 HSX-2015 Hort AgSeeds 12 0 0 12
34 EXP70-051 Bejo Seeds 13 12 0 2
35 HSX-6022 Hort AgSeeds 15 0 0 15
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 99 164 439 135
Mean 4 1 0 3
LSD (5%) 7 3 2 6
_________________________________________________________________________________
Table 4. Brinestock evaluation - firmness and texture of fruit, and resistance
to bloaters and defects (cultigens are ranked by firmness).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Firm- Total
Cultivar Seed ness Text- bloaters Total Bal-
Rank or line source (lb.) ure & defects bloaters loon Defects
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 Sumter Clemson Univ 20.0 6.7 1 0 0 1
2 EXP70-051 Bejo Seeds 19.0 6.0 23 10 7 13
3 EGP-410 EmeraldSeeds 18.6 6.8 5 5 5 0
4 NC-Danbury NCState Univ 18.6 6.4 11 3 3 8
5 Treasure HM-Clause 18.6 6.5 3 0 0 3
6 Nun-55505 BayerNunhems 18.4 6.5 3 3 3 0
7 NC-Denton NCState Univ 18.0 6.5 2 0 0 2
8 PCX-112 Baker Seeds 17.9 6.0 11 5 5 6
9 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 17.7 6.4 3 1 1 1
10 EXP08-7814 Bejo Seeds 17.5 6.9 2 2 0 1
11 EGP-427 EmeraldSeeds 17.4 6.1 5 5 5 0
12 Vlaspik Mon-Seminis 17.4 6.0 8 5 5 3
13 CrossCountry HM-Clause 17.4 6.6 4 2 2 3
14 Calypso NCState Univ 17.0 6.8 3 0 0 3
15 NC-Davie ZeraimGedera 17.0 5.6 7 0 0 7
16 PCX-155 Baker Seeds 16.8 5.3 8 3 3 5
17 EXP09-2431 Bejo Seeds 16.6 5.9 2 2 2 0
18 Vlasstar Mon-Seminis 16.5 6.4 4 2 2 2
19 NC-Dawson NCState Univ 16.5 6.6 1 0 0 1
20 Wealthy HM-Clause 16.2 6.2 5 3 3 2
21 Raleigh NCState Univ 16.2 5.8 9 2 2 7
22 Johnston NCState Univ 16.1 5.8 6 1 1 5
23 Wainwright BayerNunhems 16.1 6.4 6 3 3 3
24 Excursion Mon-Seminis 16.0 6.3 2 0 0 2
25 MacArthur BayerNunhems 16.0 6.3 4 0 0 4
26 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 15.9 5.7 6 4 4 2
27 Feisty(9464) HM-Clause 15.7 5.9 10 7 7 3
28 Journey Mon-Seminis 15.6 5.4 6 0 0 6
29 EXP08-7851 Bejo Seeds 15.5 6.0 4 0 0 4
30 Lafayette BayerNunhems 15.3 5.8 4 0 0 4
31 Expedition Mon-Seminis 15.3 5.8 14 5 5 9
32 Nun-5539 BayerNunhems 14.7 4.7 20 12 12 8
33 Nun-55504 BayerNunhems 13.8 5.0 10 7 7 2
34 HSX-2015 Hort AgSeeds 13.7 4.7 14 3 0 12
35 HSX-6022 Hort AgSeeds 8.3 3.1 15 0 0 15
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 8.0 18.8 104 183 197 99
Mean 16.5 6.0 7 3 2 4
LSD (5%) 2.1 0.6 12 8 8 7
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Firmness determined by punch-testing (Magness-Taylor) 10 grade 2B fruits.
Correlation of Texture with: Firmness = 0.45**, Balloon = -0.51**
Correlation of Texture with: Honeycomb = -0.06ns, Soft centers = -0.66**
Table 5. Brinestock evaluation - quality ratings assigned by the judges
(judges are ranked by leniency).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Average External Seed Uniform-
Rank Judge quality Shape color Texture cell ity
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 Apol 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1
2 Kornegay 6.9 7.0 6.9 7.1 6.7 6.7
3 Davis 6.4 5.8 6.8 6.8 6.6 5.9
4 Denlinger 6.3 5.8 6.8 5.8 5.8 7.1
5 McCammom 5.8 5.8 6.3 5.6 5.8 5.7
6 Ware 5.7 5.4 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.6
7 Cates 5.2 4.7 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.5
8 Quinn 4.8 4.3 4.8 4.4 3.5 7.1
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Quality rated 1 to 9 (9=A+, 8=A, 7=A-, 6=B+, 5=B, 4=B-, 3=C, 2=D, 1=F).