NCSU Cucumber Breeding Report - 2004
Todd C. Wehner
Professor
Tammy L. Ellington
Agric. Res. Tech. III
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 3, 5 and 7 of the stage 3 spring pickling cucumber
trial were each placed in one brine tank 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, Lawrence Crocker, Bob Quinn, Tim Smith, and Nick
Flores (Mt. Olive), Eddie Quill, JW Jackson, and Nick Matthews (Dean Foods),
Curtiss Cates, John Cates, and Duncan Malloy (Addis Cates Co.), Steve Apol
(Toisnot), Chris Ware and Bill Rankin (Harris Moran), and Mike Cain (Sunseeds).
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.
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 Vlasstar, HMX-1477,
NC-Longhurst, Feisty, Calypso, Cross Country, NC-Davie, and Raleigh.
- Most cultigens were bloater resistant; several were susceptible: G5xNC-52,
SRQP-3100, Colt and HMX-1477.
- The firmest cultigens were NC-Lexington, G5xNC-55, Vlasstar, Calypso, and
Feisty.
- 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 Crocker who assigned the highest quality ratings, to
Cain 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 (all judges gave
good cultigens high ratings, and bad cultigens low ratings).
____________________________
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 Vlasstar(10489 Seminis 6.2 6.3 5.9 6.4 6.0 6.3
2 Classy(1477) Harris Moran 5.7 5.6 6.0 5.4 5.8 5.9
3 NC-Longhurst(P NCState Univ 5.7 5.4 5.2 5.8 6.2 6.0
4 Feisty(9464) Harris Moran 5.6 5.4 6.2 5.4 5.4 5.7
5 Calypso NCState Univ 5.6 5.3 5.4 5.7 5.7 6.0
6 CrossCountry Harris Moran 5.5 4.5 6.3 5.9 5.8 5.2
7 NC-Davie NCState Univ 5.4 5.1 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.4
8 Raleigh NCState Univ 5.4 5.1 5.8 5.4 5.2 5.4
9 SVR045-06115 Seminis 5.4 4.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.3
10 NCSU M 21 NCState Univ 5.3 4.7 5.8 5.5 5.4 5.0
11 NC-Moriah NCState Univ 5.3 4.3 5.6 5.6 5.2 5.8
12 Bejo-2582 Bejo Seeds 5.3 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2
13 NC-Linda(P NCState Univ 5.2 4.7 5.3 5.2 5.5 5.5
14 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 5.2 5.3 5.7 5.0 4.8 5.2
15 SRQP-3100 SunSeeds 5.2 4.0 5.8 5.2 5.6 5.2
16 NC-Longhurst NCState Univ 5.1 4.2 5.8 5.0 4.9 5.8
17 G5xNC-52 NCState Univ 5.1 5.1 5.8 4.4 4.7 5.6
18 Sassy(9465) Harris Moran 5.0 3.8 6.2 4.8 5.1 4.9
19 Jackson(3540) SunSeeds 5.0 4.5 6.0 4.7 4.5 5.2
20 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 4.9 4.7 3.8 5.5 5.5 5.2
21 Colt Seminis 4.9 4.1 6.0 4.8 5.0 4.8
22 Palomino Seminis 4.9 4.3 5.6 4.6 5.0 5.0
23 NC-Lexington(P NCState Univ 4.9 5.4 4.5 4.2 4.5 5.7
24 SRQP-2913 SunSeeds 4.9 4.5 6.2 4.1 4.2 5.2
25 SRQP-3129 SunSeeds 4.8 3.1 5.8 5.3 5.4 4.6
26 NC-Lexington NCState Univ 4.8 4.4 5.2 4.4 4.4 5.5
27 G5xNC-55 NCState Univ 4.7 4.2 5.8 4.6 4.5 4.7
28 NC-Merritt NCState Univ 4.7 4.4 5.7 4.1 4.0 5.4
29 SVR045-03228 Seminis 4.6 3.9 5.8 3.8 4.0 5.2
30 NC-Linda NCState Univ 4.5 3.9 5.4 3.8 3.8 5.4
31 G4xNC-53 NCState Univ 4.4 3.4 5.4 4.2 4.2 5.0
32 Johnston NCState Univ 4.4 3.4 5.8 4.1 4.2 4.2
33 G4xNC-52 NCState Univ 4.1 2.4 5.4 4.2 4.0 4.8
34 Coolgreen Seminis 4.0 3.5 5.1 3.1 3.1 5.0
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 16 25 15 29 26 22
Mean 5.1 4.5 5.6 4.9 4.9 5.3
LSD (5%) 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.5 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) = 0.76**
Correlation (Texture with Seedcell) = 0.94**
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 NC-Longhurst(P NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
2 Raleigh NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
3 NC-Linda(P NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
4 NC-Longhurst NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
5 Jackson(3540) SunSeeds 0 0 0 0
6 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 0 0 0 0
7 NC-Lexington NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
8 NC-Linda NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
9 Johnston NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
10 G4xNC-52 NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
11 Coolgreen Seminis 1 0 1 0
12 SRQP-2913 SunSeeds 1 0 1 0
13 NC-Merritt NCState Univ 1 0 1 0
14 CrossCountry Harris Moran 0 0 0 0
15 Sassy(9465) Harris Moran 0 0 0 0
16 NC-Lexington(P NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
17 G5xNC-55 NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
18 Calypso NCState Univ 1 0 1 0
19 Bejo-2582 Bejo Seeds 1 0 1 0
20 SVR045-06115 Seminis 1 0 1 0
21 NC-Davie NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
22 NCSU M 21 NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
23 Vlasstar(10489 Seminis 0 0 0 0
24 Feisty(9464) Harris Moran 0 0 0 0
25 Palomino Seminis 0 0 0 0
26 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 1 1 0 0
27 NC-Moriah NCState Univ 2 1 1 0
28 G4xNC-53 NCState Univ 1 1 0 0
29 SRQP-3129 SunSeeds 1 1 0 0
30 SVR045-03228 Seminis 1 1 0 0
31 G5xNC-52 NCState Univ 3 3 0 0
32 SRQP-3100 SunSeeds 4 4 0 0
33 Colt Seminis 5 4 1 0
34 Classy(1477) Harris Moran 5 5 0 0
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 213 249 335 .
Mean 1 1 0 0
LSD (5%) 3 2 1 .
_________________________________________________________________________________
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 NC-Longhurst(P NCState Univ 0 0 0 0
2 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 1 0 0 1
3 CrossCountry Harris Moran 1 1 0 0
4 NC-Moriah NCState Univ 1 0 0 1
5 NC-Linda(P NCState Univ 1 0 0 1
6 Calypso NCState Univ 1 1 0 1
7 Raleigh NCState Univ 2 0 0 2
8 NC-Longhurst NCState Univ 2 0 0 2
9 SVR045-06115 Seminis 2 1 0 1
10 Classy(1477) Harris Moran 2 1 0 1
11 Sassy(9465) Harris Moran 2 1 0 2
12 Vlasstar(10489 Seminis 2 2 0 0
13 Johnston NCState Univ 3 0 0 3
14 G5xNC-55 NCState Univ 3 1 0 2
15 NCSU M 21 NCState Univ 3 2 0 1
16 NC-Merritt NCState Univ 3 0 0 3
17 Jackson(3540) SunSeeds 3 0 0 3
18 SRQP-3129 SunSeeds 3 2 0 1
19 Bejo-2582 Bejo Seeds 3 1 0 3
20 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 3 2 0 1
21 G4xNC-53 NCState Univ 3 1 0 2
22 NC-Lexington NCState Univ 4 0 0 4
23 SRQP-3100 SunSeeds 4 2 0 2
24 NC-Linda NCState Univ 4 0 0 4
25 NC-Lexington(P NCState Univ 4 1 0 4
26 NC-Davie NCState Univ 5 2 0 3
27 G5xNC-52 NCState Univ 5 1 0 3
28 Colt Seminis 5 3 0 1
29 Feisty(9464) Harris Moran 5 3 1 1
30 Palomino Seminis 7 3 0 3
31 G4xNC-52 NCState Univ 7 0 0 7
32 SVR045-03228 Seminis 7 0 0 7
33 SRQP-2913 SunSeeds 9 0 0 9
34 Coolgreen Seminis 11 0 0 11
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 99 159 1010 119
Mean 3 1 0 3
LSD (5%) 6 2 0 5
_________________________________________________________________________________
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 NC-Lexington NCState Univ 20.6 4.4 4 0 0 4
2 G5xNC-55 NCState Univ 20.4 4.6 3 0 0 3
3 Vlasstar(10489 Seminis 20.2 6.4 3 0 0 2
4 Calypso NCState Univ 19.4 5.7 2 1 0 1
5 Feisty(9464) Harris Moran 19.4 5.4 5 0 0 5
6 NCSU M 21 NCState Univ 19.3 5.5 3 0 0 3
7 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 19.2 5.5 1 0 0 1
8 Palomino Seminis 18.8 4.6 7 0 0 7
9 NC-Longhurst NCState Univ 18.8 5.0 2 0 0 2
10 NC-Duplin NCState Univ 18.8 5.0 4 1 1 3
11 Johnston NCState Univ 18.6 4.1 3 0 0 3
12 NC-Lexington(P NCState Univ 18.6 4.2 4 0 0 4
13 NC-Longhurst(P NCState Univ 18.1 5.8 0 0 0 0
14 SVR045-06115 Seminis 18.0 5.7 3 1 0 2
15 Bejo-2582 Bejo Seeds 18.0 5.4 4 1 0 3
16 NC-Davie NCState Univ 17.9 5.6 5 0 0 5
17 Raleigh NCState Univ 17.8 5.4 2 0 0 2
18 Colt Seminis 17.8 4.8 10 5 4 5
19 CrossCountry Harris Moran 17.8 5.9 1 0 0 1
20 G4xNC-53 NCState Univ 17.6 4.2 4 1 1 3
21 SRQP-3129 SunSeeds 17.4 5.3 4 1 1 3
22 SRQP-3100 SunSeeds 16.8 5.2 8 4 4 4
23 NC-Moriah NCState Univ 16.7 5.6 2 2 1 1
24 NC-Merritt NCState Univ 16.6 4.1 4 1 0 3
25 Sassy(9465) Harris Moran 16.4 4.8 2 0 0 2
26 G5xNC-52 NCState Univ 16.3 4.4 7 3 3 5
27 G4xNC-52 NCState Univ 16.1 4.2 7 0 0 7
28 NC-Linda NCState Univ 16.0 3.8 4 0 0 4
29 NC-Linda(P NCState Univ 15.6 5.2 1 0 0 1
30 Jackson(3540) SunSeeds 15.3 4.7 3 0 0 3
31 Classy(1477) Harris Moran 15.2 5.4 7 5 5 2
32 SVR045-03228 Seminis 14.9 3.8 9 1 1 7
33 SRQP-2913 SunSeeds 14.4 4.1 10 1 0 9
34 Coolgreen Seminis 10.3 3.1 12 1 0 11
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 7.8 29 97 213 249 99
Mean 17.4 4.9 4 1 1 3
LSD (5%) 7 3 2 6
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Firmness determined by punch-testing (Magness-Taylor) 10 grade 2B fruits.
Correlation of Texture with: Firmness = 0.32**, Balloon = -0.09ns
Correlation of Texture with: Honeycomb = ????ns, Soft centers = -0.68**
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 Crocker 5.8 5.5 6.7 4.9 6.1 5.9
2 Smith 5.5 5.2 5.9 5.3 5.2 6.2
3 Jackson 5.4 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.6 6.0
4 Rankin 5.4 4.9 6.1 5.3 5.3 5.3
5 Denlinger 5.3 4.7 6.1 5.1 5.0 5.6
6 Quill 5.3 4.2 6.3 5.1 5.2 5.8
7 Cates,C 5.3 5.5 6.0 4.8 4.8 5.4
8 Apol 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
9 Flores 5.2 4.2 5.4 5.2 5.1 5.9
10 Matthews 5.1 4.8 5.7 5.7 4.9 4.4
11 Malloy 4.8 4.7 5.2 4.6 4.8 4.7
12 Quinn 4.7 3.9 5.3 4.0 3.3 7.0
13 Ware 4.7 3.8 5.5 5.4 5.0 3.7
14 Cates,J 4.5 3.3 4.8 4.3 5.3 4.9
15 Cain 3.6 3.3 4.3 3.2 3.5 3.7
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Quality rated 1 to 9 (9=A+, 8=A, 7=A-, 6=B+, 5=B, 4=B-, 3=C, 2=D, 1=F).