NCSU Cucumber Breeding Report - 2005
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, Lisa Muller, and Nick
Flores (Mt. Olive), Eddie Quill and JW Jackson (Dean Foods), John Cates and
Duncan Malloy (Addis Cates Co.), Steve Apol (Toisnot), and Chris Ware
(Harris Moran).
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 Bejo-2640, Danbury,
Bejo-2762, Bejo-2759, HMX-5405, LB 1, Duplin, Bejo-2327, Bejo-2331, Fancipak,
NC-74, and Pershing.
- Most cultigens were bloater resistant; several were susceptible: Coolgreen,
M 27, Vlaspik, Bush Whopper II, and Denton.
- The firmest cultigens were Bejo-2331, NC-74, HMX-5406, HMX-5405, LB 1,
Fancipak, Pershing, Calypso, LB 9, Bejo-2772, Bejo-2327, and Sumter.
- 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 Denlinger who assigned the highest quality ratings, to
Ware 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 Bejo-2640 Bejo Seeds 5.8 5.7 5.7 6.0 5.4 6.0
2 Danbury(74x21) NC State 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.4 6.0
3 Bejo-2762 Bejo Seeds 5.8 5.6 5.8 5.9 5.5 5.9
4 Bejo-2759 Bejo Seeds 5.7 5.4 5.7 5.9 5.9 5.5
5 HMX-5405 HarrisMoran 5.5 5.3 5.6 5.6 5.4 5.8
6 LB 1 Baker Seeds 5.5 5.5 5.9 5.3 4.8 5.9
7 Duplin(56x57) NC State 5.5 5.8 5.9 5.1 4.6 6.0
8 Bejo-2327 Bejo Seeds 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.7 5.7
9 Bejo-2331 Bejo Seeds 5.5 4.8 5.1 5.7 5.7 5.9
10 Fancipak Seminis 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.3 4.9 5.8
11 NC-74 NC State 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.3 4.7 5.7
12 Pershing Nunhems 5.3 5.0 5.9 5.3 5.0 5.3
13 Advance(2582) Bejo Seeds 5.2 4.8 5.2 5.5 5.2 5.3
14 NUN-5513 Nunhems 5.2 5.2 5.6 4.9 4.8 5.5
15 Dawson(G5x52) NC State 5.2 4.9 5.5 5.1 4.9 5.5
16 Davie(54x55) NC State 5.2 5.6 5.9 4.6 4.3 5.5
17 LB 9 Baker Seeds 5.2 5.2 5.8 4.6 4.6 5.5
18 HMX-5406 HarrisMoran 5.1 4.4 5.3 5.7 5.2 5.1
19 Bejo-2772 Bejo Seeds 5.1 4.6 4.8 5.6 5.2 5.5
20 Johnston NC State 5.1 4.7 5.7 5.0 4.9 5.4
21 Expedition Seminis 5.1 4.9 5.5 4.8 4.9 5.4
22 Calypso NC State 5.1 4.9 5.2 5.2 4.8 5.4
23 NUN-5512 Nunhems 5.1 5.2 5.9 4.2 4.4 5.5
24 Crispina Nunhems 5.0 5.1 5.5 4.8 4.2 5.2
25 Sumter ClemsonUniv 4.9 4.2 4.6 5.2 5.2 5.5
26 Dixon(74x27) NC State 4.9 4.7 5.3 4.5 4.8 5.2
27 Journey Seminis 4.8 4.2 5.4 4.8 4.5 4.9
28 Lexington66x69 NC State 4.7 3.9 4.9 5.1 4.4 5.4
29 Denton(G5x55) NC State 4.7 4.5 5.3 4.5 4.2 5.1
30 Raleigh NC State 4.6 4.4 5.4 4.3 4.1 5.0
31 M 27 NC State 4.6 4.4 4.8 4.4 4.3 5.2
32 Ballerina Nunhems 4.6 4.4 5.1 4.4 3.9 5.1
33 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.1 5.3
34 Vlaspik Seminis 4.5 4.2 5.3 3.8 4.1 5.2
35 Longhurst68x69 NC State 4.5 4.2 5.6 3.6 3.8 5.2
36 LonghurstParth NC State 4.5 3.9 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.8
37 Bush WhopperII Parks Seed 4.5 2.9 5.5 4.3 4.2 5.3
38 M 21 NC State 4.4 4.3 5.2 4.0 3.8 5.0
39 SVR0450-6143 Seminis 4.3 3.8 5.2 4.2 3.9 4.6
40 LexingtonParth NC State 4.3 4.4 3.8 4.2 4.1 4.9
41 Ballerina(Prth Nunhems 4.2 3.9 4.5 4.4 3.8 4.3
42 Crispina(Prth) Nunhems 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 3.5 4.5
43 Picklebush Burpee 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.8 3.5 5.2
44 Moriah(71x73) NC State 3.9 3.3 4.6 3.8 3.2 4.8
45 Merritt(70x72) NC State 3.9 3.0 4.5 3.9 3.6 4.5
46 Coolgreen Seminis 3.9 3.7 4.8 3.0 3.0 5.1
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 18 25 23 26 29 21
Mean 4.9 4.6 5.2 4.8 4.5 5.3
LSD (5%) 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
_________________________________________________________________________________
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) = 0.78**
Correlation (Texture with Seedcell) = 0.93**
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 Danbury(74x21) NC State 0 0 0 0
2 Fancipak Seminis 0 0 0 0
3 Advance(2582) Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
4 HMX-5406 HarrisMoran 0 0 0 0
5 Crispina Nunhems 0 0 0 0
6 Journey Seminis 0 0 0 0
7 Lexington66x69 NC State 0 0 0 0
8 LexingtonParth NC State 0 0 0 0
9 Ballerina Nunhems 1 0 1 0
10 Sumter ClemsonUniv 0 0 0 0
11 Bejo-2772 Bejo Seeds 1 0 0 1
12 Bejo-2331 Bejo Seeds 1 0 1 1
13 Merritt(70x72) NC State 1 0 0 1
14 Ballerina(Prth Nunhems 2 0 0 2
15 Johnston NC State 0 0 0 0
16 Bejo-2327 Bejo Seeds 1 1 0 0
17 NUN-5513 Nunhems 1 1 0 0
18 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 1 1 0 0
19 Duplin(56x57) NC State 1 1 0 0
20 Dawson(G5x52) NC State 1 1 0 0
21 Raleigh NC State 1 1 0 0
22 Crispina(Prth) Nunhems 1 1 0 0
23 Davie(54x55) NC State 1 1 0 0
24 LonghurstParth NC State 2 2 0 0
25 Bejo-2759 Bejo Seeds 2 2 0 0
26 Picklebush Burpee 2 2 0 0
27 Bejo-2640 Bejo Seeds 4 2 1 0
28 Calypso NC State 2 2 0 0
29 NUN-5512 Nunhems 3 3 0 0
30 LB 1 Baker Seeds 3 3 0 0
31 Expedition Seminis 3 3 0 0
32 Bejo-2762 Bejo Seeds 3 3 0 0
33 SVR0450-6143 Seminis 5 3 1 0
34 NC-74 NC State 3 3 0 0
35 Longhurst68x69 NC State 4 4 0 0
36 M 21 NC State 5 4 1 0
37 Dixon(74x27) NC State 4 4 0 0
38 LB 9 Baker Seeds 4 4 0 0
39 HMX-5405 HarrisMoran 4 4 0 0
40 Pershing Nunhems 4 4 0 0
41 Moriah(71x73) NC State 8 5 3 0
42 Coolgreen Seminis 7 7 0 0
43 M 27 NC State 7 7 0 0
44 Vlaspik Seminis 8 8 0 0
45 Bush WhopperII Parks Seed 9 9 0 0
46 Denton(G5x55) NC State 10 10 0 0
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 152 154 546 651
Mean 3 2 0 0
LSD (5%) 6 6 1 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 Danbury(74x21) NC State 0 0 0 0
2 Advance(2582) Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
3 Journey Seminis 0 0 0 0
4 Bejo-2772 Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
5 Bejo-2331 Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
6 Crispina(Prth) Nunhems 0 0 0 0
7 Bejo-2759 Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
8 Bejo-2640 Bejo Seeds 0 0 0 0
9 Johnston NC State 0 0 0 0
10 Dawson(G5x52) NC State 0 0 0 0
11 LonghurstParth NC State 1 0 0 1
12 Lexington66x69 NC State 1 0 0 1
13 Sumter ClemsonUniv 1 1 0 0
14 Bejo-2327 Bejo Seeds 1 0 0 1
15 NUN-5513 Nunhems 1 0 0 1
16 Bejo-2762 Bejo Seeds 1 1 0 0
17 Dixon(74x27) NC State 1 1 0 0
18 Calypso NC State 2 2 0 0
19 NC-74 NC State 2 0 0 1
20 Pershing Nunhems 2 0 0 2
21 M 27 NC State 2 1 0 1
22 Fancipak Seminis 2 0 0 2
23 HMX-5406 HarrisMoran 2 0 0 2
24 Expedition Seminis 2 1 0 1
25 HMX-5405 HarrisMoran 3 0 0 3
26 Crispina Nunhems 3 0 0 3
27 LexingtonParth NC State 3 0 0 3
28 Ballerina(Prth Nunhems 3 0 0 3
29 NUN-5512 Nunhems 4 0 0 4
30 Bush WhopperII Parks Seed 4 3 0 1
31 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 4 0 0 4
32 Raleigh NC State 4 0 0 4
33 SVR0450-6143 Seminis 5 0 0 5
34 Duplin(56x57) NC State 5 1 0 4
35 Davie(54x55) NC State 5 1 0 4
36 M 21 NC State 5 0 0 5
37 Ballerina Nunhems 6 0 0 6
38 Merritt(70x72) NC State 6 0 0 6
39 Denton(G5x55) NC State 6 1 0 5
40 LB 1 Baker Seeds 6 1 0 5
41 Longhurst68x69 NC State 7 0 0 7
42 LB 9 Baker Seeds 7 3 0 3
43 Vlaspik Seminis 8 0 0 8
44 Moriah(71x73) NC State 9 0 0 9
45 Picklebush Burpee 12 0 0 12
46 Coolgreen Seminis 17 0 0 17
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 124 317 1174 139
Mean 3 0 0 3
LSD (5%) 7 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 Bejo-2331 Bejo Seeds 19.8 5.7 1 1 0 0
2 NC-74 NC State 19.7 5.3 5 3 3 2
3 HMX-5406 HarrisMoran 18.6 5.7 2 0 0 2
4 HMX-5405 HarrisMoran 18.5 5.6 7 4 4 3
5 LB 1 Baker Seeds 18.4 5.3 9 3 3 6
6 Fancipak Seminis 18.1 5.3 2 0 0 2
7 Pershing Nunhems 18.0 5.3 6 4 4 2
8 Calypso NC State 17.8 5.2 4 2 2 2
9 LB 9 Baker Seeds 17.4 4.6 11 4 4 7
10 Bejo-2772 Bejo Seeds 17.4 5.6 1 1 0 0
11 Bejo-2327 Bejo Seeds 17.3 5.5 2 1 1 1
12 Sumter ClemsonUniv 17.2 5.2 1 0 0 1
13 Vlaspik Seminis 17.2 3.8 16 8 8 8
14 LexingtonParth NC State 17.0 4.2 3 0 0 3
15 Expedition Seminis 17.0 4.8 5 3 3 2
16 Danbury(74x21) NC State 17.0 5.8 0 0 0 0
17 Bejo-2762 Bejo Seeds 16.9 5.9 4 3 3 1
18 Ballerina(Prth Nunhems 16.9 4.4 5 2 0 3
19 NUN-5513 Nunhems 16.8 4.9 2 1 1 1
20 Johnston NC State 16.5 5.0 1 0 0 0
21 Journey Seminis 16.5 4.8 0 0 0 0
22 Dixon(74x27) NC State 16.4 4.5 5 4 4 1
23 SVR0450-6143 Seminis 16.4 4.2 9 5 3 5
24 Bejo-2759 Bejo Seeds 16.3 5.9 2 2 2 0
25 Bejo-2640 Bejo Seeds 16.2 6.0 4 4 2 0
26 NUN-5512 Nunhems 16.2 4.2 6 3 3 4
27 Ballerina Nunhems 16.1 4.4 7 1 0 6
28 Crispina(Prth) Nunhems 15.9 4.2 1 1 1 0
29 Lexington66x69 NC State 15.8 5.1 1 0 0 1
30 Raleigh NC State 15.7 4.3 5 1 1 4
31 Duplin(56x57) NC State 15.5 5.1 6 1 1 5
32 Davie(54x55) NC State 15.5 4.6 6 1 1 5
33 Denton(G5x55) NC State 15.5 4.5 16 10 10 6
34 M 21 NC State 15.4 4.0 10 5 4 5
35 Wis.SMR 18 Univ. Wis. 15.2 4.4 5 1 1 4
36 Advance(2582) Bejo Seeds 15.1 5.5 0 0 0 0
37 Merritt(70x72) NC State 15.0 3.9 7 1 0 6
38 Crispina Nunhems 15.0 4.8 3 0 0 3
39 Longhurst68x69 NC State 14.8 3.6 11 4 4 7
40 LonghurstParth NC State 14.5 4.6 2 2 2 1
41 Dawson(G5x52) NC State 14.3 5.1 2 1 1 0
42 Moriah(71x73) NC State 14.1 3.8 17 8 5 9
43 Bush WhopperII Parks Seed 13.5 4.3 13 9 9 4
44 Picklebush Burpee 13.1 3.8 14 2 2 12
45 M 27 NC State 12.5 4.4 9 7 7 2
46 Coolgreen Seminis 9.8 3.0 23 7 7 17
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 8 26 111 152 154 124
Mean 16.2 4.8 6 3 2 3
LSD (5%) 2.0 0.6 11 6 6 7
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Firmness determined by punch-testing (Magness-Taylor) 10 grade 2B fruits.
Correlation of Texture with: Firmness = 0.34**, Balloon = -0.43ns
Correlation of Texture with: Honeycomb = -0.04ns, Soft centers = -0.56**
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 Denlinger 6.5 6.2 7.0 6.3 5.8 7.1
2 Apol 5.9 5.6 6.1 5.6 6.0 6.1
3 Flores 5.2 4.9 5.5 4.9 5.0 5.6
4 Muller 5.0 5.0 5.7 5.6 3.9 5.0
5 Malloy 4.9 5.0 5.2 4.6 4.7 5.0
6 Quinn 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.0 3.2 7.1
7 Jackson 4.6 4.0 4.9 4.8 4.4 4.7
8 Cates 4.5 3.9 4.8 4.3 4.7 5.0
9 Quill 4.5 3.7 4.9 4.1 4.4 5.2
10 Crocker 4.2 4.7 4.3 4.2 3.8 4.3
11 Ware 3.9 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.1 3.6
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Quality rated 1 to 9 (9=A+, 8=A, 7=A-, 6=B+, 5=B, 4=B-, 3=C, 2=D, 1=F).