NCSU Cucumber Breeding Report - 2010
Todd C. Wehner
Professor
Tammy L. Ellington
Research Specialist
Department of Horticultural Science
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-7609
Clinton Spring (Stage 3) Slicing Cucumber Trial
2010
Todd C. Wehner and Tammy L. Ellington
Experiment Design
1. A randomized complete block with 3 replications of slicer cultivars
and breeding lines (collectively referred to as cultigens) was grown.
2. Plots were single 20 ft. rows with 5 ft. alleys at each end.
3. Rows were on raised 18" beds spaced 60" apart (center to center).
4. Fertilizer consisted of 80-80-80 lb/A (N-P-K) broadcast preplant
and 30-0-0 lb/A (N-P-K) sideplaced at the 2 to 4 leaf stage.
5. Curbit was applied preemergence at the rate of 1 lb. a.i./A.
6. The trial was planted 29 April, and harvested 6 times
(Mondays and Thursdays) between 10 and 28 June.
Data Collection
1. Fruits were weighed after sorting into No.1, No.2 and cull
(nubs and crooks) grades according to U.S.D.A. standards.
2. Fruit length, diameter and weight were recorded for 3 fruit per plot.
3. Quality ratings were from 1 to 9, with 1 = worst, 9 = best.
4. Disease ratings were from 0 to 9, with 0 = no disease, 1-2 = trace,
3-4 = slight, 5-6 = moderate, 7-8 = severe, 9 = plant dead.
Results
The following cultigens performed well, and could be advanced
to the next stage:
1 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv
2 General Lee Clause-HM
3 Dasher II Mon-Seminis
4 Intimidator Mon-Seminis
Table 20. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - yield data (cultigens ranked by
cwt/A of Fancy + No. 1 grade fruit).
_________________________________________________________________________________
Yield(cwt/A) Percent Plants
Cultivar Seed Fancy Market- fancy Percent per A
Rank or line source +No.1 able +No.1 culls (x1000)
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 Cherokee 87 Check 258 476 39 28 22
2 General Lee Clause-HM 256 484 42 21 26
3 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 241 504 36 25 23
4 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 237 517 34 27 26
5 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 222 375 41 31 13
6 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 220 457 40 18 26
7 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 214 406 39 25 20
8 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 211 503 33 22 25
9 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 209 422 35 30 20
10 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 195 389 35 31 25
11 Panther BayerNunhems 172 334 40 23 18
12 Ashley Check 147 313 39 16 12
13 Marketmore76 Check 145 271 45 13 22
14 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 136 267 40 23 25
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 26 20 17 20 15
Mean 205 408 38 24 22
LSD (5%) 88 137 11 8 5
_________________________________________________________________________________
Correlation (Marketable yield with % culls) = 0.03ns
Table 21. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - earliness data (cultigens
ranked by weight of Fancy + No.1 grade fruit in harvests 1 and 2).
_________________________________________________________________________________
Cumulative fruit weight and % of
total weight (6 harvests) for harvest:
Cultivar Seed 1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5
Rank or line source Wt. % Wt. % Wt. % Wt. % Wt. %
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 84 17 276 52 351 67 416 82 462 92
2 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 75 15 240 47 320 62 387 75 494 96
3 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 21 5 226 49 286 63 332 73 402 88
4 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 11 2 195 37 315 62 398 78 479 95
5 General Lee Clause-HM 62 11 191 39 266 55 355 73 418 86
6 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 49 13 179 46 233 60 284 73 329 85
7 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 56 14 176 44 263 65 334 82 371 92
8 Cherokee 87 Check 23 5 165 34 275 58 354 74 402 84
9 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 47 11 150 35 287 68 335 79 393 93
10 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 24 6 126 34 247 66 298 79 353 94
11 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 35 11 109 41 168 66 211 79 243 91
12 Panther BayerNunhems 14 4 60 18 188 57 249 75 288 87
13 Ashley Check 13 4 48 15 146 47 232 74 272 87
14 Marketmore76 Check 0 0 3 1 63 24 144 52 226 83
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 67 58 40 22 25 13 23 6 21 5
Mean 37 8 153 35 243 59 309 75 367 89
LSD (5%) 41 8 103 13 101 12 119 8 129 8
_________________________________________________________________________________
Correlation (Marketable yield with yield in harvests 1-2) = 0.85**
Correlation (Marketable yield with % of yield in harvests 1-2) = 0.57**
Table 22. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - fruit quality data (cultigens
ranked by average quality).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Cultivar Seed Average Seed- Overall
Rank or line source quality Shape Color cell impression
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 7.9 7 8 9 8
2 Marketmore76 Check 7.7 8 8 7 8
3 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 7.4 7 8 8 7
4 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 7.2 8 8 6 8
5 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 6.7 7 7 6 7
6 Panther BayerNunhems 6.7 7 7 6 7
7 General Lee Clause-HM 6.6 7 6 6 7
8 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 6.4 7 7 6 7
9 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 6.3 7 6 5 7
10 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 5.6 6 7 5 6
11 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 5.4 6 5 4 6
12 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 5.3 6 7 4 6
13 Cherokee 87 Check 5.2 5 6 5 5
14 Ashley Check 4.7 5 5 5 4
_________________________________________________________________________________
15 CV (%) 8.9 12 15 13 10
16 Mean 6.4 7 7 6 7
17 LSD (5%) 1.0 1 2 1 1
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Quality rated 1 to 9 (1 = poor, 5 = average, 9 = excellent;
except color where 1 = white, 5 = medium green, 9 = very dark green).
Correlation (Marketable yield with average quality) = 0.01ns
Table 23. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - fruit dimensions and comments
(cultigens ranked by average quality rating).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Cultivar Seed Length Diameter Wt. Defect 1° Defect 2°
Rank or line source (inch) (inch) (lb.) 2 4 6 2 4 6
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 9.0 2.4 1.09 K K H H J K
2 Marketmore76 Check 8.6 2.3 0.99 K K K T T T
3 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 9.0 2.3 1.16 K K K M J G
4 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 8.9 2.3 1.11 K K T K H K
5 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 8.8 2.3 1.03 K T K K Y T
6 Panther BayerNunhems 9.1 2.4 1.12 K K D T T T
7 General Lee Clause-HM 8.8 2.4 1.13 K H G K T K
8 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 9.0 2.4 1.09 K G G H K K
9 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 9.6 2.5 1.32 K K M K M T
10 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 9.0 2.4 1.25 K K H O O K
11 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 8.5 2.3 0.99 H H T D T K
12 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 8.6 2.5 1.15 H H H D K D
13 Cherokee 87 Check 8.4 2.4 1.05 H M M M J H
14 Ashley Check 8.6 2.4 1.12 H H H M M M
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 5.4 5.0 11.20
Mean 8.8 2.4 1.11
LSD (5%) 0.8 0.2 0.21
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Defects were rated as follows (giving primary and secondary for each harvest):
A - wArty fruit J – RiDGed S - Separated carpels
B - Blossom end defects K - Keep(excellent) T - Tapered ends
C - Crooks excessive L - Late maturity U - Uniform green
D - Dogbone shape M - Mottled fruit V - Varicolor (dark stem
E - Early maturity N - Nubs excessive end, light blossom end)
F - Four celled O - Offtype fruit W - White fruit
G - lonG fruit P - Placental hollows X - neCKS on fruit
H - sHort fruit Q - Y - Yellow fruit
I - strIped fruit R - Reject (poor) Z - diSeased fruit
Table 24. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - sex expression and vine data
(cultigens ranked by gynoecious rating).
_________________________________________________________________________________
Early Earli-
Cultivar Seed Gyn. yield ness Vine Vine
Rank or line source ratingz (cwt/A) (%)x sizew colorw
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 7 195 37 8 8
2 Panther BayerNunhems 6 60 18 6 7
3 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 6 226 49 9 8
4 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 6 276 52 7 6
5 Cherokee 87 Check 6 165 34 7 7
6 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 6 126 34 6 7
7 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 5 179 46 8 8
8 General Lee Clause-HM 5 191 39 8 7
9 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 5 176 44 7 7
10 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 5 150 35 6 7
11 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 4 240 47 8 6
12 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 4 109 41 8 6
13 Ashley Check 3 48 15 6 7
14 Marketmore76 Check 2 3 1 7 7
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 29 40 22 11 18
Mean 5 153 35 7 7
LSD (5%) 2 103 13 1 2
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Gynoecious rating (1 = androecious, 2-3 = andromonoecious, 4-6 = monoecious,
7-8 = predominately gynoecious, 9 = gynoecious).
y Early yield is weight of Fancy+No.1 grade fruit produced in harvests 1 and 2.
x Earliness is the percent of the yield (Fancy + No.1 grade fruit)
of 6 harvests that was produced in harvests 1 and 2.
w Vine size & color are rated 1 (small or yellow green) to 9 (large or dark green)
Correlation (Marketable yield with gynoecious rating) = 0.40*
Table 25. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - disease ratings (cultigens
ranked by average disease resistance).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Cultivar Seed Downy
Rank or line source mildew
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 Marketmore76 Check 3.0
2 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 3.3
3 Panther BayerNunhems 3.7
4 Cherokee 87 Check 3.7
5 General Lee Clause-HM 3.7
6 Ashley Check 3.7
7 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 4.0
8 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 4.0
9 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 4.0
10 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 5.0
11 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 5.0
12 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 5.0
13 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 5.7
14 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 5.7
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 30.2
Mean 4.2
LSD (5%) 2.1
_________________________________________________________________________________
z Disease rated 0 to 9 (0=none, 1-2=trace, 3-4=slight, 5-6=moderate, 7-8=advanced,
9=plant dead).
Correlation (Marketable yield with disease rating) = 0.19ns
Table 26. Stage 3 spring slicer trial (Clinton) - selection indexes (cultigens
ranked by SWI1).z
_________________________________________________________________________________
Simple weighted Average rank
Cultivar Seed indexes indexes
Rank or line source SWI1 SWI2 ARI1 ARI2
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 G83xNC-62 NC StateUniv 11.0 8.6 8.3 7.4
2 G83xNC-59 NC StateUniv 10.8 8.6 6.2 5.7
3 General Lee Clause-HM 10.2 8.3 6.3 6.3
4 Dasher II Mon-Seminis 10.0 8.1 7.5 6.3
5 Intimidator Mon-Seminis 9.8 8.0 6.3 6.1
6 Cherokee 87 Check 9.4 7.7 8.7 8.1
7 G83xNC-58 NC StateUniv 9.4 7.8 5.5 6.1
8 NC-Stratford NC StateUniv 9.0 7.5 6.2 6.8
9 G83xNC-63 NC StateUniv 8.8 7.3 7.9 8.0
10 NC-Sunshine NC StateUniv 8.6 7.4 6.0 7.5
11 Panther BayerNunhems 6.9 6.0 8.3 8.8
12 Poinsett 76 Cornell Univ 6.7 5.8 10.6 9.7
13 Marketmore76 Check 5.9 5.3 6.4 7.6
14 Ashley Check 5.7 5.0 11.0 10.6
_________________________________________________________________________________
CV (%) 17.6 14.5 16.8 14.7
Mean 8.7 7.2 7.5 7.5
LSD (5%) 2.6 1.8 2.1 1.8
_________________________________________________________________________________
z SWI is simple weighted index calculated from the performance of a cultigen for
yield; earliness; fruit shape, seedcell size and overall impression; and disease
resistance. The index is calculated with 2 different methods of weighting each
trait (10 is best, 1 is worst).
ARI is the average ranking of each cultigen for yield, earliness, fruit quality
and disease resistance. The index is calculated with 2 different sets of
secondary traits added in with the primary traits (1 is best).
Correlation (Marketable yield with SWI1) = 0.94**
Correlation (Marketable yield with ARI1) = -0.40*