Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for Compiled by Elizabeth T. Maynard

Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for 2009 Compiled by Elizabeth T. Maynard

Table of Contents Sources of Vegetable Seeds...7 Bean New York State 2008 Processing Snap Bean Cultivar Trial Report Large-Sieve Bean, 4-Sieve Bean, Whole Bean (New York) James Ballerstein and Stephen Reiners...13 Beet Beet Variety Evaluation (Kentucky) John Strang, Amy Poston Lentz, Chris Smigell, Pam Sigler, Kenny Seebold, Darrell Slone, and John Snyder...47 Cucumber Downy Mildew Susceptibility of Cucumber Varieties, New York 2008 (New York) Margaret T. McGrath, George M. Fox, and Sandra Menasha...53 Eggplant 2009 Eggplant Variety Trial in Central Missouri (Missouri) Sanjun Gu and Theresa Blank...57 Leek Leek Cultivar Evaluations for West Virginia, 2009 (West Virginia) Lewis W. Jett...61 Muskmelon and Specialty Melon Evaluation of Muskmelon Varieties for Production in Southwest Indiana, 2009 (Indiana) Shubin K. Saha and Daniel Egel...63 Muskmelon Cultivar Trial 2009 (Iowa) Vince Lawson...67 Powdery Mildew Resistant Cantaloupe Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 (New York) Margaret T. McGrath, George M. Fox, and Sandra Menasha...71 Onion Evaluation of 21 Sweet Onion Cultivars in Southwest Michigan (Michigan) Ron Goldy and Virginia Wendzel...75 Micro-rate Application Timings for Weed Control in Onion Great Bend, ND, 2009 (North Dakota) James R. Loken and Harlene Hatterman-Valenti...78 Pepper 2009 DSAC Pepper Variety Trial (Illinois) J.D. Kindhart, Bronwyn Aly, and Elizabeth Wahle...81 Bell Pepper Evaluation for Resistance to Phytophthora Blight (Phytophthora capsici) (Illinois) M. Babadoost...83 3

2009 Green Pepper Cultivar Evaluation (Ohio) Bob Precheur, Rick Callendar, Herminio Perez and Jose Reyes...85 Pumpkin Pumpkin Variety Performance With and Without Treatment for Powdery Mildew in Northern Indiana, 2009 (Indiana) Elizabeth Maynard...87 Powdery Mildew Resistant Pumpkin Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 (New York) Margaret T. McGrath, George M. Fox, and Sandra Menasha...96 Pumpkin Cultivar Evaluation in Ohio 2009 (Ohio) Bob Precheur, Jim Jasinski, Mac Riedel, and Landon Rhodes...101 Pumpkin Cultivar Evaluations for West Virginia, 2009 (West Virginia) Lewis W. Jett...104 Squash Yield of 12 Zucchini and Three Yellow Squash Selections in Southwest Michigan (Michigan) Ron Goldy and Virginia Wendzel...107 Powdery Mildew Resistant Acorn-type Winter Squash Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 (New York) Margaret T. McGrath, George M. Fox, and Sandra Menasha...110 Powdery Mildew Resistant Butternut Squash Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 (New York) Margaret T. McGrath, George M. Fox, and Sandra Menasha....115 Powdery Mildew Resistant Zucchini and Yellow Summer Squash Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 (New York) Margaret T. McGrath, George M. Fox, and Sandra Menasha...119 Sweet Corn 2009 DSAC Sweet Corn Trial (Illinios) J.D. Kindhart, Bronwyn Aly, and Elizabeth Wahle...123 Sweet Corn Hybrid Disease Nursery 2009 (Illinois) Jerald Pataky, Marty Williams, Mike Meyer, Bryan Warsaw, and Jim Moody...126 Sugar-enhanced Sweet Corn Culitvar Evaluation for Northern Indiana, 2009 (Indiana) Elizabeth Maynard...145 Supersweet Sweet Corn Cultivar Evaluation for Northern Indiana, 2009 (Indiana) Elizabeth Maynard...151 Corn Earworm Control Study 2009 (Iowa) Vince Lawson and Henry G. Taber...156 Sweet Corn Cultivar Trial 2009 (Iowa) Vince Lawson...160 N.Y.S. 2008 Processing Sweet Corn Variety Replicated and Observation (su and supersweet Types) Trial Summary (New York) James Ballerstein and Stephen Reiners...163 4

Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation 2009 (Ohio) Mark Koenig and Matt Hofelich...193 Sugar-enhanced Sweet Corn Evaluations for West Virginia, 2009 (West Virginia) Lewis W. Jett...213 Tomato Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region (Ohio) Jim Jasinski...215 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Illinois (Illinois) Bronwyn Aly and Elizabeth Wahle...218 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Indiana (Indiana) Ben Alkire...221 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Michigan (Michigan) Hannah Stevens...226 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Minnesota (Minnesota) Vince Fritz...232 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary New York (New York) Judson Reid...239 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Columbus, Ohio (Ohio) Elaine Grassbaugh...244 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Piketon, Ohio (Ohio) Brad Bergefurd and Thom Harker...247 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary S. Charleston, Ohio (Ohio) Jim Jasinski and Bob Precheur...249 2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania) Mike Orzolek...254 2009 Tomato Cultivar Trial for Southern Illinois (Illinois) J.D. Kindhart, Bronwyn Aly, and Elizabeth Wahle...256 Tomato Cultivar Demonstration Trial, Fournie Farms, Collinsville, IL, 2007 (Illinois) Elizabeth Wahle, Bronwyn Aly, and J.D. Kindhart...258 5

Fresh Market Tomato Variety Performance in 2009 (Kentucky) Timothy Coolong, Janet Pfeiffer, Darrell Slone, and Amy L Poston...262 Performance of New Vegetable Pepper and Tomato Cultivars Grown in Northwest Ohio 2009 (Ohio) Elaine Grassbaugh, Mark Bennett, and Matt Hofelich...266 Plant Population and Cultivar Selections for Optimum Yield in Processing Tomatoes 2009 (Ohio) Mark Bennett, Elaine Grassbaugh, and Matt Hofelich...271 Rootstock Effects on Yield of Grafted 'Celebrity' Tomato in Ohio in 2009 (Ohio) Matthew D. Kleinhenz, David M. Francis, Michelle Young and Troy Aldrich...274 Watermelon 2009 Seedless Watermelon Variety Trials in Central and Southwest Missouri (Missouri) Timothy Reinbott, Jay Chasm, David Trinklein, and Sanjun Gu...279 Authors Addresses...283 6

Seed Code AC Sources of Vegetable Seeds* Seed Company Name and Address Abbott and Cobb, Inc., PO Box 307, Trevose, PA 19053-0307; (800) 345-SEED; www.abbottcobb.com ACR Alf Christianson Seed Company, PO Box 98, Mount Vernon, WA 98273; (360) 336-9727; www.chriseed.com AT American Takii, Inc., 301 Natividad Road, Salinas, CA 93906; (831) 443-4901; www.takii.com BC Baker Creek Heirloom Seeds, 2278 Baker Creek Road, Mansfield, MO 65704; (417) 924-8917; http://rareseeds.com Bas Basso Seeds, Monteverde 3390, 1852 Burzaco, Buenos Aires, Argentina; (54) 11 4299 0880; Fax: (54) 11 4238 3527; www.basso-seed.com BE Bejo Seeds, Inc., 1972 Silver Spur Place, Oceano, CA 93445; (805) 473-2199; www.bejoseeds.com BHN BHN Seed, PO Box 3267, Immokalee, FL 34142; (239) 352-1100; Fax: (239) 352-1981; www.bhnseed.com BS Bodger Seed Ltd., 1800 North Tyler Ave., South El Monte, CA 91733; www.bodger.com BU Burpee, 300 Park Ave., Warminster, PA 18991; www.burpee.com CS Chesmore Seed Co., PO Box 8363, St. Joseph, MO 64508 CE/CEN Centest Seeds, 23017 Rte. 173, Harvard, IL 60033 CF CO Cliftons Seed Co., 2586 NC 43 West, Faison, NC 28341; www.cliftonseed.com Cook s Garden Seed, PO Box 5010, Hodges, SC 29653; www.cooksgarden.com CN Corona Seeds, Inc., 590-F Constitution Ave., Camarillo, CA 93012; (805) 388-2555; Fax: (805) 445-8344; www.coronaseeds.com CR Crookham Co., PO Box 520, Caldwell, ID 83606; www.crookham.com DM Del Monte USA, Agric. Research, PO Box 89, Rochelle, IL 61068 DP D. Palmer Seed Co., 8269 South Highway 95 (at Mile Post 35), Yuma, AZ 85365; Fax: (928) 341-8496; www.dpalmerseed.com DR DeRuiter Seeds, Inc., 13949 W. Colfax Ave, Building #1, Suite 220, Lakewood, CO 80401; (303) 274-5511; Fax: (303)-274-5514; www.deruiterusa.com DVG Dutch Valley Growers, Inc., PO Box 304, South Holland, IL 60473; Fax: (708) 333-1029; www.dutchvalleygrowers.com Continued on next page 7

Seed Code EV EW Sources of Vegetable Seeds* (continued) Seed Company Name and Address Evergreen Seeds, Evergreen YH Enterprises, PO Box 17538, Anaheim, CA 92817; (714) 637-5769; www.evergreenseeds.com East/West Seed International Ltd., No. 50/1 Moo 2, Sainoi-Bang Bua Thong Road, Amphur Sainoi, Nonthaburi 11150, Thailand; www.eastwestseed.com EX Express Seed, 51051 U.S. Highway 20, Oberlin, OH 44074; (800) 774-2259; Fax: (440) 774-2728; www.expressseed.com EZ Enza Zaden, PO Box 7, 1600 AA, Enkhuisen, Netherlands 02280-15844; www.enzazaden.com FC Fedco Seeds, PO Box 520, Waterville, ME 04903; (207) 873-7333; www.fedcoseeds.com GI Gary Ibsen, TomatoFest, P.O. Box 628, Little River, CA 95456; www.tomatofest.com GG General Mills/Green Giant, Agric. Res., 1201 N. 4 th St., LeSueur, MN 56058 GU Gurney s Seed and Nursery Co., PO Box 4178, Greendale, IN 47025-4178; (513) 354-1491; www.gurneys.com HM Harris Moran Seed Company, PO Box 4938, Modesto, CA 95352; (209) 579-7333; Fax: (209) 527-5312; www.harrismoran.com HMO High Mowing Organic Seeds, 76 Quarry Road, Wolcott, VT 05680; (802) 472-6174; www.highmowingseeds.com HR/H Harris Seeds, 60 Saginaw Drive, Box 22960, Rochester, NY 14692; (800) 514-4441; Fax: (716) 442-9386; www.harrisseeds.com HL Hollar & Co., Inc., PO Box 106, Rocky Ford, CO 81067; www.hollarseeds.com HO Holmes Seed Co., 2125 46 th St., N.W., Canton, OH 44709; (330) 492-0123; www.holmesseed.com HZ Hazera Seed, Ltd., PO Box 1565, Haifa, Israel; www.hazerainc.com IFS Illinois Foundation Seeds, PO Box 722, Champaign, IL 61824-0722; (217) 485-6260; Fax: (217) 485-3687; www.seedgenetics.com J Jordan Seeds, Inc., 6400 Upper Afton Road, Woodbury, MN 55125; (651) 738-3422; www.jordanseeds.com JS Johnny s Selected Seeds, Foss Hill Road, Albion, ME 04910-9731; (877) 564-6697; www.johnnyseeds.com Continued on next page 8

Seed Code Sources of Vegetable Seeds* (continued) Seed Company Name and Address JU Jung Seed and Nursery, Randolph, WI 53957; (800) 297-3123; www.jungseed.com KU Known-You Seed Co., LTD., 26 Chung Cheng 2nd Road, Kauhsiung, Taiwan 80271; www.knownyou.com LS Long & Sweet LLC, PO Box 502, 516 N. 5 th Street, Lafayette, IN 47902; (765) 420-9606 MM Mesa Maize, Inc., PO Box 250, 202 Industrial Ave., Olathe, CO 81425; www.mesamaize.com MCS Morgan County Seeds, 18761 Kelsay Road, Barnett, MO 65011; (573) 378-2655; www.morgancountyseeds.com NH/NU Nunhems Seed, 1200 Anderson Corner Road, Parma, ID 83660; (800) 733-9505; www.nunhemsusa.com NC North Carolina State University, 2016 Fanning Bridge Road, Fletcher, NC 28732 NMSU New Mexico State University Seed Certification, PO Box 30003, Las Cruces, NM 88003; (575) 646-4125; seedcertification.nmsu.edu NS New England Seed Co., 3580 Main St., Hartford, CT 06120; (800) 825-5477; www.neseed.com NZ OR Hybrid Seed Company New Zealand Ltd., PO Box 8068, The Terrace, Wellington, New Zealand; www.hybridseed.co.nz Orsetti Seed Co. Inc., 2301 Technology Parkway, PO Box 2350, Hollister, CA 95024-2350; (831) 636-4822; http://orsettiseeds.com OS L.L. Olds Seed Co., PO Box 7790, Madison, WI 53707-7790 OUT Outstanding Seeds, 354 Center Grange Road, Monaca, PA 15061; (800) 385-9254 P PA/PK Pacific Seed Production Co., 94904 Highway 99 E, PO Box 85, Junction City, OR 97448; (800) 547-8004; www.forbesseed.com/pacificseedproduction.htm Park Seed Co., 1 Parkton Ave., Greenwood, SC 29647-0002; www.parkseed.com PG The Pepper Gal, PO Box 23006, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33307-3006; www.peppergal.com PT Pinetree Garden Seeds, PO Box 300, New Gloucester, ME 04260; www.superseeds.com PL Pure Line Seeds, Inc., Box 8866, Moscow, ID; www.purelineseed.com Continued on next page 9

Seed Code PV Sources of Vegetable Seeds* (continued) Seed Company Name and Address Pop Vriend Seeds BV, PO Box 5, 1619ZG Andijk, The Netherlands; (+3122)859-1462; www.popvriendseeds.com R Reed s Seeds, 3334 N.Y.S. Rt. 215, Cortland, NY 13045-9440 RI/RSP Rispens Seeds, Inc., 1357 Dutch American Way, Beecher, IL 60401; (888) 874-0241; www.rispensseeds.com RU Rupp Seeds, Inc., 17919 Co. Rd. B, Wauseon, OH 43567; (800) 700-1199; www.ruppseeds.com SK/SAK Sakata Seeds America, Inc., PO Box 880, Morgan Hill, CA 95038-0880; (408) 778-7758; www.sakata.com SC Scott Seeds, 4876 N. Road H., Vale, OR 97918; (541) 473-3246 S Seeds Trust, PO Box 596, Cornville, AZ 86325; (928) 649-3315; www.seedstrust.com SW/SDW Seedway, Inc., 99 Industrial Road, Elizabethtown, PA 17022; (800) 952-7333; Fax: (800) 645-2574; www.seedway.com SM, Sem SnRv/SN R Seminis Inc., 2700 Camino del Sol, Oxnard, CA 93030; http://us.seminis.com Snowy River Seed Coop, Ltd., Princes Hwy, Orbost, VIC, Australia 3888; (03) 5154 1878 SO Solar Seed Inc., 302 South C St., Eustis, FL; (352) 357-5065 SVR/SE Seneca Vegetable Research, 5267 Flat St., Hall, NY 14463; (585) 526-7044; Fax: (585) 526-7045 SR Shamrock Seed Co., 3 Harris Place, Salinas, CA 93901; (408) 771-1500; Fax: (408) 771-1517 SI/SG Siegers Seed Co., 13031 Reflections Drive, Holland, MI 49424; (800) 962-4999; www.siegers.com SWS Southwestern Seeds, PO Box 11449, Casa Grande, AZ 85230; (520) 836-7595; Fax: (520) 836-0117; www.southwesternseed.com ST Stokes Seeds, Inc., PO Box 548, 737 Main St., Buffalo, NY 14240; www.stokeseeds.com SY/RG/R OG Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Rogers Brands, 600 North Armstrong Place (83704), PO Box 4188, Boise, ID 83711-4188; (208) 322-7272; Fax: (208) 378-6625; www.rogersadvantage.com Continued on next page 10

Seed Code Sources of Vegetable Seeds* (continued) Seed Company Name and Address TR Territorial Seed Company, PO Box 157, Cottage Grove, OR 97424; www.territorialseed.com TGS Tomato Growers Supply, PO Box 2237, Fort Myers, FL 33902; www.tomatogrowers.com TW Twilley Seeds Co., Inc., PO Box 65, Trevose, PA 19047; www.twilleyseed.com UG United Genetics, 8000 Fairview Road, Hollister, CA 95023; (831) 636-4882; Fax: (831) 636-4883 www.unitedgenetics.com UA US Agriseeds, 3424 Roberto Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401; (805) 547-9391; Fax: (805) 547-9395; www.usagriseeds.com US US Seedless, 325 E. Walnut St., Perkasie, PA 18944; (877) 332-7733; www.usseedless.com VL Vilmorin Inc., 2551 North Dragoon, 131 Tucson, AZ 85745; (520) 884 0011; Fax: (520) 884 5102; www.vilmorin.com WI Willhite Seed Co., PO Box 23, Poolville, TX 76076; (800) 828-1840; Fax: (817) 599-5843; www.willhiteseed.com WN Western Seed Americas Inc., 303 South Collins St., Plant City, FL 33563; (813) 759-6404; www.westernseed-usa.com WP Wood Prairie Farm, 49 Kinney Road, Bridgewater, ME 04735; (800) 829-9765; www.woodprairie.com ZG Zeraim NAFTA Inc., 3101 SW 34th Ave., #905, PMB 195, Ocala, FL 34474; (979) 200-1876; Fax: (979) 27-9504; www.zeraimgedera.com *We would like to express our appreciation to the seed companies that provided seeds and support for these Midwest Vegetable Trials. 11

12

New York State 2008 Processing Snap Bean Cultivar Trial Report: Large-Sieve Bean, 4-Sieve Bean, Whole Bean James Ballerstein, Research Support Specialist, Horticultural Sciences Stephen Reiners, Associate Professor, Horticultural Sciences New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University, Geneva, New York Procedure and Materials Location: NYS Agricultural Research Farm, fields 23 and 25, Geneva Soil type: Lima silt loam Planting dates: Large-sieve bean: May 23; 4-sieve bean: June 3; Whole bean: June 13 Row width: 30 inches Row length: 40 feet In-row spacing: 1 5/8 inches (6-8 plants/ft.) Conventional Tillage Fertilizer: 300#/A of 10-5-10 with Zn and Mn (The 4-sieve planting was planted in a field that had high residual N due to an alfalfa rotation.) Herbicide: Treflan preplant, Dual post plant Insecticide: Capture (potato leaf hoppers) Planter: Two-Row Monosem Vacuum Planter Plot size: One row, four replications (replicated entries); one row, two replications (observation entries) The objective of this trial was to compare a number of green and wax snap bean varieties for yield and other quality characteristics. This was accomplished in cooperation with the snap bean processors in New York and Ontario, Canada in an attempt to find new, higher quality, and disease-resistant varieties that are adapted to our climate and soil conditions. A demonstration field day was held on August 21 to view all entries planted on June 26. For both replicated and observation entries, yield of five feet per replication was obtained by pulling the plants and hand picking them. Multiple harvests were made to plot yield increase and also seed size increase. An FMC snipper and grader were used to snip and grade the harvested pods. Each replicated entry was processed (canned and frozen) for later evaluation by the processors and seedsmen. Comments from this cutting are not included in the report. Good soil conditions and acceptable temperatures resulted in uniform emergence. Moisture levels were adequate. Cooler, wet conditions at harvest resulted in a large harvests at acceptable seed sizes. White mold was just beginning to cause problems when drier weather resumed. See the weather summary (Table 8) for a breakdown of temperatures and precipitation over the growing season. 13

Please direct any questions to: Jim Ballerstein NYSAES 630 West N. Street, Hedrick Hall Geneva, NY 14456-0462 (315) 787-2223 jwb2@cornell.edu We wish to thank the NYS Vegetable Research Council and Association, Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers, and cooperating seed companies for their financial support of the project. We also wish to thank Mr. Michael Gardinier and Mr. Roger Ward of Farm Fresh First, and Mr. Jeff Johnson of Seneca Foods for their assistance in planning the trials. Special thanks to Mrs. Wilma Kean, Russell Harris, Matt Reiners, Josh Decker, Nick Schessl, Ms. Chelsea DeBoldt, and Ms. Sarah Huelik for their assistance in day-to-day operations. 14

Table 1. Processing snap bean cultivar list. Cultivar Seed Source Large-Sieve Beans Hystyle (std) HM rep Titan (std) Seminis rep HMX 5101 HM rep HMX 7115 HM rep Huntington Rogers rep Pensacola Rogers rep (SB4355) Weapon (804) Seminis rep GB 5050-3 Pure Line rep BSC841 Brotherton rep BSC 846 Brotherton rep Foremost Brotherton rep Caprice HM rep EX0860 Seminis obs BSC8617 Brotherton obs 3- to 4-Sieve Beans Caprice (std) HM HMX 5105 HM rep HMX 6107 HM rep HMX 7112 HM rep HMX 7118 HM rep Sahara HM rep Embassy Rogers rep Rockport Rogers rep Bullion (693) Seminis rep GB 5060-2 PureLine rep GB 4940 PureLine rep BSC 847 Brotherton rep BSC 864 Brotherton rep Orlando Crites M rep SB 4352 Rogers rep Paloma Nunhems rep Cultivar Seed Source 3-to 4-Sieve Beans (cont.) Speedy Nunhems obs Ursus Nunhems obs Boone HM obs HMX 7111 HM obs HMX7113 HM obs Hickok HM obs EX0898 Seminis obs EX0916 Seminis obs EX0856 Seminis obs EX0808 Seminis obs EX0954 Seminis obs EX0858 Seminis obs Whole Bean Types Pike (6108) HM rep Crockett HM rep Stayton Rogers rep Masai (std) Rogers rep Molly Nunhems rep Xantos Nunhems rep EX 1267 Seminis rep SWB-1A Pure Line rep Banga (std) Seminis rep Pix Seminis rep Serin Seminis rep Golden Child Seminis rep Koala Crites M rep Kylian Crites M rep Polder Vilmorin rep Cruiser Vilmorin rep EX0852 Seminis Ob EX0962 Seminis Ob Soleil Vilmorin Ob 15

Table 2. Large-sieve green beans (in order of maturity). Planting date: May 23, 2008. Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 %2- sieve %3- sieve %4- sieve %5- sieve %7- sieve %2-4- sieve 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 5-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Weapon Seminis 56 969 10 19 53 18 0 82 80 97 7.3 5.4 Weapon Seminis 58 1,023 7 11 45 29 8 63 90 115 7.2 6.9 Weapon Seminis 60 1,077 6 7 41 34 13 53 106 121 7.4 7.8 BSC 846 Brotherton 56 969 17 17 49 17 0 83 85 102 6.2 6.3 BSC 846 Brotherton 58 1,023 10 17 48 18 7 75 99 117 6.0 7.8 BSC 846 Brotherton 60 1,077 8 10 48 27 7 66 104 121 6.7 9.5 BSC 8617 Brotherton 56 969 20 37 39 4 0 96 89 107 5.7 5.0 BSC 8617 Brotherton 58 1,023 15 27 53 5 0 94 94 112 6.3 7.4 BSC 8617 Brotherton 60 1,077 8 24 57 10 1 89 91 110 5.6 8.6 GB 5050-3 Pure Line 58 1,023 22 16 40 18 4 79 81 108 4.1 4.3 GB 5050-3 Pure Line 60 1,077 12 14 36 27 11 62 88 114 5.5 6.6 GB 5050-3 Pure Line 62 1,118 11 13 42 24 10 66 80 102 4.6 6.2 Foremost Brotherton 58 1,023 14 8 25 33 20 47 63 85 6.8 5.6 Foremost Brotherton 60 1,077 10 6 19 34 31 35 70 88 6.5 6.5 Foremost Brotherton 62 1,118 6 5 20 32 37 32 74 90 6.0 9.0 EX 0860 Seminis 58 1,023 14 26 56 4 1 95 76 91 7.2 5.9 EX 0860 Seminis 60 1,077 7 14 67 10 1 89 87 106 6.8 7.2 EX 0860 Seminis 62 1,118 10 11 59 20 0 79 84 108 6.1 7.5 Hystyle HM 59 1,051 10 10 52 25 2 73 76 91 6.5 7.7 Hystyle HM 61 1,098 11 11 45 28 6 67 80 94 5.6 7.9 Hystyle HM 63 1,138 5 8 49 33 5 62 84 105 6.3 9.6 Titan Seminis 59 1,051 12 16 57 13 1 86 80 94 6.4 6.2 Titan Seminis 61 1,098 14 16 52 16 1 82 79 100 6.6 7.4 Plants Per Foot T/A 16

Table 2 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 %2- sieve %3- sieve %4- sieve %5- sieve %7- sieve %2-4- sieve 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 5-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Titan Seminis 63 1,138 9 13 56 17 5 78 84 102 6.4 8.2 HMX 5101 HM 59 1,051 9 10 54 23 4 72 83 104 6.4 9.0 HMX 5101 HM 61 1,098 9 12 47 26 6 68 84 102 6.2 10.2 HMX 5101 HM 63 1,138 5 9 44 34 8 59 85 106 6.3 11.3 Huntington Rogers 59 1,051 15 15 51 16 3 81 75 95 5.4 5.6 Huntington Rogers 61 1,098 14 12 47 23 4 73 82 93 6.1 8.0 Huntington Rogers 63 1,138 6 6 43 37 7 56 86 103 6.4 9.7 HMX 7115 HM 60 1,077 22 12 46 19 1 79 67 84 5.7 4.4 HMX 7115 HM 61 1,098 19 14 40 26 1 72 66 81 5.6 4.4 HMX 7115 HM 63 1,138 16 10 37 34 2 64 69 90 4.6 5.5 Pensacola Rogers 60 1,077 18 8 28 32 14 54 78 94 7.2 6.1 Pensacola Rogers 62 1,118 10 6 25 33 27 41 79 101 6.0 8.6 Pensacola Rogers 64 1,151 5 5 22 34 33 33 86 106 5.7 9.6 Caprice HM 60 1,077 17 20 57 5 1 94 77 100 7.6 6.8 Caprice HM 62 1,118 15 19 55 9 2 89 84 106 6.9 7.6 Caprice HM 64 1,151 7 17 65 11 0 89 94 111 7.7 9.0 BSC 841 Brotherton 61 1,098 30 23 36 10 1 89 78 96 5.3 5.5 BSC 841 Brotherton 63 1,138 28 22 39 9 2 89 84 101 6.2 7.4 BSC 841 Brotherton 65 1,173 20 25 45 10 0 90 87 106 4.5 5.9 Notes on next page Plants Per Foot T/A 17

Table 2 (continued) Cultivar: Data is based on four replications for entries in the replicated study and two plots for observation entries. Harvest sample was from five feet of row. Seed Source: Abb.&Cobb=Abbott & Cobb; Brotherton=Brotherton Seed Co.; Crites M.=Crites Moscow Growers; HM=Harris Moran; Pure Line Seeds; Rogers=Syngenta Seeds-Rogers Brand; Seminis=Seminis Vegetable Seeds-Processor Division Days to Harvest: The number of days from planting until harvest. Multiple harvests were made. Degree Days Base 50: The number of heat degree day units from planting until harvest. % 2-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 2-sieve pods. % 3-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 3-sieve pods. % 4-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 4-sieve pods. % 5-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 5-sieve pods. % 7-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 6-sieve pods. % 2-4-sieve: This was the sum of the 2-4-sieve percentages. 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 4-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. 5-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 5-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. Plants per Foot: Desired population was 6-7 plants per foot. T/A: The yield from the harvest sample (prior to being snipped) extrapolated to a per acre basis. 18

Table 3. Plant and pod characteristics for large-sieve beans. Cultivar Plant Ht. (in.) Plant Width (in.) Plant Habit Rating Pod Color (raw) Rating Unsnipped Pod Length (in.) Pod Shape Rating Pod Location Rating Pod Straight. Rating Weapon 17 19 3.5 MG 5.0-5.5 R M-H 3.5-4 BSC 846 16 19 2.5 DG 5.75-6.5 R M-H 3 BSC8617 16 23 2.25 M-DG 5-5.25 Sl C M-H 3.5 GB 5050-3 16 20 3 MG 5.5-6.0 R-Sl C M 3.5 Foremost 17 20 3 MG 5.75-6.25 R-O M-H 3.5 EX0860 16 20 2.75 DG 5-5.25 R-O M-H 4 Hystyle (std) 18 21 3 MG 5-5.5 R-Sl C M-H 3.5 Titan (std) 18 21 3.5 M-DG 5.25-5.75 Sl C M 3.5-4 HMX 5101 17 21 2.5 M-DG 5.5-6.0 R-Sl C M-H 4 Huntington 17 20 3.25 M-DG 5.5-6.0 R-Sl C M-H 3.5 HMX 7115 18 20 3.75 DG 5.5-6.0 R M-H 3.5-4 Pensacola 18 22 3.5 MG 5.25-5.75 R M-H 3.5 Caprice 18 20 3.25 M-DG 5.0-5.5 R M-H 3.5-4 BSC841 17 21 3.25 DG 5.5-6.0 R M-H 3.5 Plant Ht. (in.): The average plant height at harvest in inches. Plant Width (in.): The average plant width at harvest in inches. Plant Habit Rating: 5=very erect plant, 3= acceptable, 1=totally recumbent plant. Pod Color (raw) Rating: DG=dark green, MG=medium green, LG=light green. Unsnipped Pod Length (in.): The average length of the largest pods in inches. Pod Shape Rating: R=round, CR=creased, O=oval Pod Location Rating: H= pods high on the plant, M=pods located in the center of the plant canopy, L=pods touching the ground. Pod Straight. Rating: 5=very straight, 3= acceptable, 1=very curved or twisted. Additional Comments Large-Sieve Beans Weapon Early maturity, large-sieve bean; uniform plant stand, good plant habit, round, medium green pods (5-5.5 inches long); good pod straightness, good yield. BSC 846 Early maturity, large-sieve bean; good, uniform plant stand; plant habit a bit recumbent, Oregon Blue Lake pod type; long, round pods; very good yield. BSC 8617 Early to midseason maturity, large-sieve bean; plant stand was a bit less than the 6-7 plants per foot optimum; plants a bit recumbent; medium to dark green, round to creased pods; good yield. GB 5050-3 Midseason maturity, large-sieve bean; plant stand less than optimum which affected yield; seedling emergence was not as uniform as most others; medium green, round to slightly creased, long pods. 19

Foremost Midseason maturity, large-sieve bean; uniform, good plant stand; high percentage of large-sieve pods; medium green, round to oval, long pods, very good yield. EX 0860 Midseason maturity, good, uniform plant stand; lower percentage of large-sieve beans (a large 4- sieve bean more than true large-sieve type); dark green, straight, round to oval pods; good yield. Hystyle Large-sieve standard, mainseason maturity; good, uniform plant stand; medium green, round to slightly creased pods; very good yield. Titan Large-sieve standard, mainseason maturity; good plant habitj; good plant stand and uniform emergence; probably could have been harvested one more time to increase percentage of 5-sieve pods; straight, medium to dark green, slightly creased pods; good yield. HMX 5101 Large-sieve bean, main season maturity; plant habit a bit recumbent; good plant stand and uniform emergence; medium to dark green, straight, long, round to creased pods; very good to excellent yield. Huntington Large-sieve bean, main season maturity; decent plant stand and good emergence; medium to dark green, long, round to slightly creased pods; Japanese beetles seemed to prefer it compared to most others; very good yield. HMX 7115 Large-sieve bean, main season to late maturity but seems to hold very well in the field; I think I misjudged maturity and picked it too early; plant stand was less than optimum which affected yield; nice, dark green, round, long, straight pods. Pensacola Large-sieve bean with high percentage of large-sieve pods, main season maturity; plant stand not quite as uniform as most others; good plant habit; medium green, round pods, very good yield. Caprice Normally considered a 4-sieve bean (processor representatives requested we plant it in the largesieve bean trial to compare it against others), main season maturity; good plant stand and uniform emergence; medium to dark green, round, straight pods; very good yield. BSC 841 Large-sieve bean, main season maturity; plant stand and emergence were less than optimum, which may have affected yield; dark green, long, round pods. Snap Bean Descriptions Provided by the Seed Source (Large Beans) Weapon (EX 0804) Seminis: 54 days to maturity, 65 % 1- to 4-sieve, 35% 5- to 6-sieve; pod length: 5.5 inches; medium green pod color; BCMV, BCTV (R) BBS (IR); heavy pod set under broad range of conditions; plant architecture assures an efficient harvest. 20

BSC 846 Brotherton: Hystyle type. BSC 8617 Brotherton: large bean; mid- to early maturity; straight, 5.5-inch 5-sieve, medium green pods. GB 5050-3 Pure Line: large-sieve Hystyle type. Foremost Brotherton: earlier than Hystyle by about two days; has a larger, longer, and straighter pod than Hystyle; noted for good flavor; seed development is slow so the harvest window is quite long. EX0860 Seminis: large-sieve bean. Hystyle Harris Moran: early to midseason; 56 days to maturity; 5.5-inch pod length; full-sieve class (can go 40-60% five-sieve); excels in the regular season but is also an outstanding fall variety; potential for high yields; concentrated pod set; slow seed development; persistent green gene; fleshy pods; lodge-free plants; suitable for machine harvest; resistance to Curly Top and BCMV (I gene), tolerance to Brown Spot, Golden Mosaic, and leafhopper toxins; compare to Envy and True Blue. Titan (403) Seminis: 58 days to maturity; 5.6-inch pod length; large-sieve bean (60-40% sieve split); intermediate resistance to bacterial brown spot; medium dark pod color; improved processed pod quality. HMX 5101 Harris Moran: 54 days to maturity; 55% 4-sieve and under, 45% 5-sieve. Huntington Rogers: 56 days to maturity; 5-sieve Blue Lake type; smooth, straight pods; very erect plant with beans off the ground; good yielder that has demonstrated tolerance to the Midwest virus complex, IR to Bacterial Brown Spot, HR to Bean Common Mosaic; picks very clean with a good percentage of the beans without stems; leaves tend to show some bronzing at maturity with no affect to yield; early results from Geneva CMV trial shows limited yield reduction from CMV infection. HMX 7115 Harris Moran: 56 days to maturity; medium dark, large-sieve bean; 50% 5-sieve; holds well. Pensacola (SB4355) Rogers: 54 days to maturity; 5-sieve (close to 50% 5-sieve), 6-inch pod; HR to BCMV. Caprice (HMX 0944) Harris Moran: 56 days to maturity; 65% 4-sieve pods; upright plant habit; even set; straight, dark green pods; tolerates BBS and common blight; sets well in high fertility; has shown some degree of virus tolerance. 21

BSC 841 Brotherton: full-season, large-sieve bean; mid-dark color; 5 1/2-inch pods set high in the plant. 22

Table 4. 3- to 4-sieve yield data (in order of maturity). Planting date: June 3, 2008. Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve % 5- sieve 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot Speedy Nunhems 54 1,084 36 32 31 0 65 80 8.2 6.9 Speedy Nunhems 56 1,126 21 31 46 2 75 92 7.2 8.4 Speedy Nunhems 58 1,168 10 20 69 0 80 100 7.1 10.1 HMX 5105 HM 55 1,107 42 46 12 0 68 77 7.4 6.9 HMX 5105 HM 57 1,149 25 48 27 0 84 87 7.4 8.9 HMX 5105 HM 59 1,190 16 45 39 0 90 100 7.2 9.6 HMX 6107 HM 55 1,107 58 28 14 0 53 61 7.1 6.0 HMX 6107 HM 57 1,149 40 31 29 0 60 68 7.2 7.4 HMX 6107 HM 59 1,190 19 35 46 0 67 84 6.6 8.9 HMX 6107 HM 61 1,235 12 28 60 0 85 92 7.1 10.3 HMX 7112 HM 55 1,107 42 40 18 0 60 68 6.7 6.6 HMX 7112 HM 57 1,149 19 38 43 0 66 75 7.3 8.7 HMX 7112 HM 59 1,190 10 30 60 0 79 86 6.5 9.3 HMX 7112 HM 61 1,235 8 20 72 0 82 100 7.0 10.9 Sahara HM 55 1,107 46 44 9 0 56 65 7.3 7.2 Sahara HM 57 1,149 28 52 20 0 69 76 7.7 8.5 Sahara HM 59 1,190 18 54 28 0 85 90 8.1 9.3 GB 4940 Pure Line 55 1,107 31 38 31 0 67 78 5.4 6.8 GB 4940 Pure Line 57 1,149 13 32 56 0 68 94 5.6 8.6 GB 4940 Pure Line 59 1,190 9 23 68 0 82 107 6.6 10.0 Paloma Nunhems 55 1,107 56 38 5 0 71 82 8.2 7.2 T/A 23

Table 4 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve % 5- sieve 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot Paloma Nunhems 57 1,149 38 50 13 0 88 97 8.1 8.3 Paloma Nunhems 59 1,190 29 50 21 0 89 102 8.3 9.7 EX0916 Seminis 55 1,107 59 36 5 0 64 67 8.3 6.7 EX0916 Seminis 57 1,149 37 52 11 0 67 79 8.5 8.0 EX0916 Seminis 59 1,190 25 46 28 0 71 80 8.4 8.3 EX0916 Seminis 61 1,235 18 44 38 0 81 91 8.0 8.7 EX0856 Seminis 55 1,107 49 39 13 0 62 71 7.3 7.9 EX0856 Seminis 57 1,149 33 56 12 0 66 77 8.3 9.7 EX0856 Seminis 59 1,190 21 51 28 0 83 95 8.2 9.4 EX0808 Seminis 55 1,107 73 24 3 0 59 67 6.6 6.0 EX0808 Seminis 57 1,149 46 43 10 0 64 76 8.3 8.0 EX0808 Seminis 59 1,190 35 48 17 0 75 89 8.1 9.1 EX0954 Seminis 55 1,107 25 35 40 0 59 80 7.6 7.0 EX0954 Seminis 57 1,149 9 23 69 0 75 97 8.2 8.2 EX0954 Seminis 59 1,190 6 14 67 13 94 100 8.3 9.3 EX0858 Seminis 55 1,107 53 38 9 0 70 80 6.8 6.2 EX0858 Seminis 57 1,149 30 54 16 0 67 87 7.5 7.3 EX0858 Seminis 59 1,190 16 49 35 0 89 100 6.5 8.4 SB 4352 Rogers 56 1,126 17 26 56 2 66 81 5.9 7.8 SB 4352 Rogers 58 1,168 10 13 77 0 73 91 6.2 8.7 SB 4352 Rogers 60 1,213 6 8 86 0 78 101 6.0 10.0 T/A 24

Table 4 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve % 5- sieve 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot HMX 7118 HM 56 1,128 56 31 13 0 54 61 6.7 6.8 HMX 7118 HM 58 1,168 25 37 38 0 54 67 7.1 9.3 HMX 7118 HM 60 1,213 14 26 60 0 62 80 7.5 10.0 HMX 7118 HM 62 1,253 10 21 70 0 71 85 7.3 11.3 Embassy Rogers 56 1,128 10 19 62 9 69 83 6.0 7.9 Embassy Rogers 58 1,168 8 12 79 0 75 98 5.5 8.1 Embassy Rogers 60 1,213 6 10 83 0 86 118 6.2 10.2 Rockport Rogers 56 1,128 62 36 2 0 60 n/a 7.5 6.7 Rockport Rogers 58 1,168 53 44 4 0 71 79 6.7 5.0 Rockport Rogers 60 1,213 35 54 11 0 77 83 6.7 8.0 Orlando Crites M 56 1,126 33 41 26 0 52 60 7.1 5.8 Orlando Crites M 58 1,168 14 39 47 0 61 67 7.9 7.5 Orlando Crites M 60 1,213 8 23 69 0 67 75 7.9 8.9 Orlando Crites M 62 1,253 7 19 75 0 71 85 8.1 9.5 HMX 7111 HM 56 1,128 50 38 12 0 56 67 7.6 7.5 HMX 7111 HM 58 1,168 29 39 32 0 54 76 7.1 8.5 HMX 7111 HM 62 1,253 11 23 66 0 87 89 7.9 11.8 HMX 7113 HM 56 1,128 46 35 19 0 60 67 7.0 6.6 HMX 7113 HM 58 1,168 27 40 34 0 60 73 6.7 8.5 HMX 7113 HM 60 1,213 10 28 62 0 85 94 7.2 10.0 Hickok HM 56 1,128 50 34 16 0 60 67 7.6 6.2 T/A 25

Table 4 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve % 5- sieve 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot Hickok HM 58 1,168 29 44 27 0 73 80 7.6 7.8 Hickok HM 60 1,213 17 34 49 0 74 93 7.8 8.9 EX0898 Seminis 56 1,128 53 33 14 0 60 65 7.4 5.2 EX0898 Seminis 58 1,168 19 38 43 0 70 80 7.1 6.9 EX0898 Seminis 60 1,213 8 20 72 0 72 87 7.7 7.0 EX0898 Seminis 62 1,253 8 15 77 0 80 96 6.9 7.2 Boone HM 57 1,149 94 5 1 0 67 n/a 7.5 4.3 Boone HM 59 1,190 66 34 0 0 65 n/a 7.4 5.3 Boone HM 61 1,235 69 28 2 0 77 n/a 7.7 6.4 Boone HM 63 1,271 15 29 55 0 61 84 8.4 10.6 Bullion Seminis 57 1,149 36 47 16 0 72 78 7.6 7.9 Bullion Seminis 59 1,190 16 43 41 0 69 83 7.9 9.2 Bullion Seminis 61 1,235 12 29 59 0 85 99 8.1 10.3 GB 5060-2 Pure Line 57 1,149 45 35 21 0 83 94 6.7 7.7 GB 5060-2 Pure Line 59 1,190 25 29 46 0 81 95 7.3 9.4 GB 5060-2 Pure Line 61 1,235 20 23 58 0 89 101 7.1 9.4 Caprice HM 57 1,149 44 28 27 0 54 63 6.6 7.1 Caprice HM 59 1,190 20 30 50 0 62 74 7.4 9.4 Caprice HM 61 1,235 12 20 68 0 68 84 7.4 10.3 BSC 847 Brotherton 57 1,149 20 38 42 0 75 78 6.6 8.4 BSC 847 Brotherton 59 1,190 12 30 58 0 76 92 6.8 9.4 T/A 26

Table 4 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve % 5- sieve 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot BSC 847 Brotherton 61 1,235 10 25 66 0 94 106 6.8 9.6 BSC 864 Brotherton 57 1,149 29 35 36 0 56 67 7.0 6.2 BSC 864 Brotherton 59 1,190 13 23 64 0 66 78 6.8 7.6 BSC 864 Brotherton 61 1,235 9 15 75 0 64 82 6.5 9.0 Ursus Nunhems 58 1,168 29 39 32 0 69 79 8.5 5.6 Ursus Nunhems 60 1,213 22 29 48 0 68 91 7.5 6.5 Ursus Nunhems 62 1,253 18 27 54 0 82 98 8.6 9.5 Cultivar: Data is based on four replications for entries in the replicated study and two plots for observation entries. Harvest sample was from five feet of row. Seed Source: Abb.&Cobb=Abbott & Cobb; Brotherton=Brotherton Seed Co.; Crites M.=Crites Moscow Growers; HM=Harris Moran; Pure Line Seeds; Rogers=Syngenta Seeds-Rogers Brand; Seminis=Seminis Vegetable Seeds-Processor Division Days to Harvest: The number of days from planting until harvest. Multiple harvests were made. Degree Days Base 50: The number of heat degree day units from planting until harvest. % 2-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 2-sieve pods. % 3-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 3-sieve pods. % 4-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 4-sieve pods. % 5-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 5-sieve pods. 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 3-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 4-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. Plants per Foot: Desired population was 6-7 plants per foot. T/A: The yield from the harvest sample (prior to being snipped) extrapolated to a per acre basis. T/A 27

Table 5. Plant and pod characteristics for 3- to 4-sieve type beans. Cultivar Plant Ht. (in.) Plant Width (in.) Plant Habit Rating Pod Color (raw) Rating Unsnipped Pod Length (in.) Pod Shape Rating Pod Location Rating Pod Straight. Rating Speedy 14 23 1.7 MG 4.75-5.5 R H 3 HMX 5105 16 20 3 DG 5-5.75 R M-H 3 HMX 6107 15 20 2.5 MG 5.5-6 R M-H 3.5-4 HMX 7112 16 20 3.2 DG 5.5-5.75 R M-H 3.5 Sahara 16 19 3.4 VDG 5-5.5 R-SL O M-H 3.5 GB 4940 14 23 1.9 M-DG 6-6.5 R M-H 3.5-4 Paloma 14 20 2 M-DG 4.5-5 R M-H 3.5-4 EX0916 14 20 2.2 M-DG 5-5.5 R-CR H 3.5-4 EX0856 15 22 2.2 DG 4.75-5.25 R H 4 EX0808 15 21 2.2 DG 4.25-4.75 R H 4 EX0954 14 21 2 DG 5-5.5 R-Sl CR H 4 EX0858 15 20 2.5 DG 5-5.5 R H 4 SB 4352 15 20 2.2 M-DG 5.25-5.75 R-Sl CR M-H 3.5-4 HMX 7118 16 20 3 DG 5-5.25 R-SL O M-H 3.5-4 Embassy 15 21 2.5 VDG 5.25-5.75 R-CR M-H 2.5 Rockport 15 21 2.6 DG 4.5-4.75 R M-H 4-4.5 Orlando 15 21 2.7 M-DG 4.75-5.5 R-CR M-H 4 HMX 7111 15 21 2.7 VDG 5-5.5 R H 4 HMX7113 16 20 3.2 DG 5.5-6.25 R M-H 3-3.5 Hickok 14 20 2 VDG 4.75-5.75 R H 3.5-4 EX0898 17 20 2.7 MG 5.25-5.75 R-Sl CR H 3.5-4 Boone 18 22 3 VDG 5-5.75 R H 3.5 Bullion 17 22 2.9 DG 4.75-5.5 R M-H 3.5-4 GB 5060-2 14 20 2.2 MG 4.75-5.5 R-O M-H 3.5-4 Caprice (std) 16 22 2.7 DG 5.25-5.75 R M-H 4 BSC 847 15 22 2 MG 5.75-6.5 R M-H 3.5 BSC 864 17 22 2.9 MG 5-5.5 R-Sl CR M-H 3.5 Ursus 19 23 3 M-DG 5.25-5.75 R-O H 4 Plant Ht. (in.): The average plant height at harvest in inches. Plant Width (in.): The average plant width at harvest in inches. Plant Habit Rating: 5=very erect plant, 3= acceptable, 1=totally recumbent plant. Habit ratings may have been affected by high residual N due to alfalfa rotation. Pod Color (raw) Rating: DG=dark green, MG=medium green, LG=light green. (uncooked). Unsnipped Pod Length (in.): The average length of the largest pods in inches. Pod Shape Rating: R=round, CR=creased, O=oval. Pod Location Rating: H= pods high on the plant, M=pods located in the center of the plant canopy, L=pods touching the ground. Pod Straight. Rating: 5=very straight, 3= acceptable, 1=very curved or twisted. 28

Additional Comments (3- to 4-sieve) There was high residual nitrogen in this field as it had been in an alfalfa rotation. This affected plant habit and most likely yield. Speedy 4-sieve bean; early maturity; very good plant stand and uniform emergence; plant habit quite recumbent; medium green, round pods located high on the plant; very good to excellent yield. HMX 5105 A 3- to 4-sieve bean; early maturity; decent plant habit; good plant stand and uniform emergence; dark green, round pods; pods curved at the spur end; older pods lighter color; very good to excellent yield. HMX 6107 A solid 4-sieve bean; midseason maturity; plant habit a bit recumbent; good plant stand and uniform emergence; medium green, long, round, straight pods; it appeared that pods exposed to the sun were darker color, very good yield. HMX 7112 A solid 4-sieve bean; midseason maturity; good plant habit; good plant stand and uniform emergence; dark green, long, round pods (very uniform length); very good yield. Sahara A 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; good plant habit; good plant stand and uniform emergence; very dark green, uniform, round to slightly oval pods; pods have a bit of a curve at the spur end; lots of blossoms on the plant at harvest; very good yield. GB 4940 A solid 4-sieve bean; midseason maturity; poor plant habit; plant stand a bit less than optimum; good emergence; attractive; medium to dark green, very long, round, straight pods; very good yield. Paloma A 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; poor plant habit; excellent plant stand and uniform emergence; medium to dark green, round, straight, uniform pods; very good yield. EX 0916 A 3- to 4-sieve bean; midseason maturity; plant habit recumbent; excellent plant stand and uniform emergence; medium to dark green, straight, attractive, uniform, round to creased pods found high on the plant; very good yield. EX 0856 A 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; recumbent plant habit; excellent plant stand and good emergence; dark green, round, straight, uniform, attractive pods found high on the plant; very good yield. EX 0808 A 2- to 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; recumbent plant habit; very good plant stand and good emergence; shorter, dark green, uniform, round, straight, attractive pods found high on the plant; very good yield. 29

EX 0954 A solid 4-sieve bean; midseason maturity; recumbent plant habit; excellent plant stand and good emergence; dark green, round to slightly creased, straight pods found high on the plant; very good yield. EX 0858 A 3- to 4-sieve bean; midseason maturity; good plant stand and emergence; dark green, round, straight pods found high on the plant (very similar pods as 0856 but not as uniform); good yield. SB 4352 Almost totally a 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; recumbent plant habit; adequate plant stand and good emergence; medium to dark green, round to slightly creased, straight pods; very good yield. HMX 7118 A solid 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; decent plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; dark green, very uniform length, round to slightly oval, straight pods; very good to excellent yield. Embassy Almost totally a 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; adequate plant stand and good emergence; gnarled, rough-looking pods; very dark green, round to creased pods; very good yield. Rockport A 3-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; good plant stand and emergence; dark green, round, very straight, uniform, attractive pods; very good yield. Orlando A solid 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; very good plant stand and emergence; medium to dark green, straight, round to creased, uniform, attractive pods; very good yield. HMX 7111 A 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; very good plant stand and emergence; attractive; uniform, very dark green, round, straight pods found high on the plant; excellent yield. HMX 7113 A 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; decent plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; long, dark green, round pods; very good yield. Hickok A 3- to 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; recumbent plant habit; excellent plant stand and emergence; very dark green, straight, round pods found high on the plant; very good yield. EX 0898 A solid 4-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; decent plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium green, straight, round to slightly creased pods found high on the plant; good yield. 30

Boone A 4-sieve bean; main season maturity; good plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; very dark green, round pods found high on the plant; very good yield (need to wait for this one to size up). Bullion A 4-sieve bean; main season maturity; decent plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; dark green, round, straight pods; very good yield. GB 5060-2 A 4-sieve bean; main season maturity; recumbent plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium green, round to oval, straight pods; very good yield. Caprice Our 4-sieve standard; main season maturity; very good plant stand and emergence; dark green, round, straight pods; very good yield. BSC 847 A 4-sieve bean; main season maturity; recumbent plant habit; good plant stand and emergence; medium green, long, round pods; very good yield. BSC 864 A solid 4-sieve bean; main season maturity; decent plant habit; good plant stand and emergence; medium green, round to slightly creased pods; very good yield (possibly could have harvested this one more time). Ursus A 3- to 4-sieve bean; main season to late maturity; decent plant habit, excellent plant stand and good emergence; attractive, uniform, medium to dark green, round to oval, straight pods located high on the plant; very good yield (need to wait for this one to size up to make yield). Snap Bean Descriptions Provided by the Seed Source (3- to 4-sieve type) Speedy Nunhems: 3- to 4-sieve. HMX 5105 Harris Moran: early maturity; 52 days to maturity; medium dark. HMX 6107 Harris Moran: 55 days to maturity; medium dark. HMX 7112 Harris Moran: 53 days to maturity; medium. Sahara Harris Moran: 54 days to maturity; dark green. GB 4940 Pure Line: 3- to 4-sieve. 31

Paloma Nunhems. EX0916 Seminis. EX0856 Seminis: 3- to 4-sieve mix. EX0808 Seminis. EX0954 Seminis. EX 0858 Seminis/ SB 4352 Rogers: new 4-sieve medium dark variety with very good yield potential. Straight, smooth pods; fairly erect plant with most pods off the ground; no disease information yet. HMX 7118 Harris Moran: 56 days to maturity; medium-dark green. Embassy Rogers: 54 days to maturity; upright bush; excellent seed qualtity; 5.5-inch pod length; 4- to 5- sieve size, 20% 1- to 3-sieve, 60% 4-sieve, 20% 5-sieve; dark green pod color; excellent freezing quality; HR for BCMV; highly resistant to Brown Spot. Rockport (SB 4327) Rogers: 54 days to maturity; 4.75 pod length; mostly 3-sieve with a few 4-sieve; short pods; excellent yield and pod color; straight pods; will set under hot conditions; HR BCMV, IR to Brown Spot and Curly Top. Orlando Crites Moscow: cut bean market; medium late maturity (61 days) with straight dark green pods suitable for processing or fresh market; uniform, round pods; good plant habit with pods high on the plant; 5.5-inch pod length; 85% 4-sieve and 15% 5-sieve; slow seed. HMX 7111 Harris Moran: 55 days to maturity; dark green. HMX 7113 Harris Moran: 56 days to maturity; medium green. Hickok Harris Moran: 54 days to maturity; medium green. EX0898 Seminis: 4-sieve. 32

Boone (HMX 4953) Harris Moran: 58 days to maturity; very dark green pods; 80% 3-sieve and under; 20% 4-sieve (Dandy type). Bullion (EX 0693) Seminis: cut bean, 40% 4-sieve, 40% 3-sieve. GB 5060-2 Pure Line: 4-sieve. Caprice (HMX 0944) Harris Moran: 56 days to maturity; 65% 4-sieve pods; upright plant habit; even set; straight, dark green pods; tolerates BBS and common blight; sets well in high fertility; has shown some degree of virus tolerance. BSC 847 Brotherton: mid- to early 3- to 4-sieve bean; 6-inch pods; mid-dark color. BSC 864 Brotherton: full-season; 4- to 5-sieve bean; 5- to 5 1/2-inch pods; mid-dark in color, set high on an upright plant. Ursus Nunhems: 3- to 4-sieve. 33

Table 6. Whole bean type (in order of maturity). Planting date: June 13, 2008. Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve 2-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot Stayton Rogers 54 1,056 99 1 0 71 n/a 7.2 5.7 Stayton Rogers 56 1,100 99 1 0 73 n/a 7.4 6.2 Stayton Rogers 58 1,130 94 6 0 78 103 7.3 6.7 Koala Crites M 54 1,056 96 4 0 58 n/a 5.8 4.6 Koala Crites M 56 1,100 94 6 0 71 n/a 5.7 5.7 Koala Crites M 58 1,130 89 11 0 72 87 6.5 7.5 Pike HM 54 1,056 87 13 0 51 61 7.8 4.4 Pike HM 56 1,100 75 25 0 54 65 8.0 4.9 Pike HM 58 1,130 50 49 0 62 53 7.3 6.1 Pike HM 60 1,161 37 63 0 58 83 7.0 7.4 Molly Nunhems 54 1,056 77 23 0 58 77 7.0 3.9 Molly Nunhems 56 1,100 61 39 0 65 78 6.9 4.6 Molly Nunhems 58 1,130 70 21 8 66 79 7.0 5.1 Molly Nunhems 60 1,161 40 44 16 62 84 7.0 6.8 SWB-1A Pure Line 54 1,056 99 1 0 55 n/a 6.6 3.2 SWB-1A Pure Line 56 1,100 97 3 0 66 n/a 7.2 4.9 SWB-1A Pure Line 58 1,130 98 2 0 75 74 7.8 5.2 SWB-1A Pure Line 60 1,161 93 7 0 68 89 7.3 6.4 Polder Vilmorin 54 1,056 100 0 0 60 n/a 7.4 2.7 Polder Vilmorin 56 1,100 99 1 0 72 n/a 7.7 4.0 Polder Vilmorin 58 1,130 98 2 0 72 90 7.4 5.0 T/A 34

Table 6 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve 2-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot Polder Vilmorin 60 1,161 90 10 0 76 92 7.9 6.0 EX0962 Seminis 54 1,056 64 36 0 50 63 7.0 4.7 EX0962 Seminis 56 1,100 57 43 0 61 74 7.0 5.3 EX0962 Seminis 58 1,130 46 54 0 62 78 8.0 7.0 EX0962 Seminis 60 1,161 38 62 0 68 77 8.0 8.2 Kylian Crites M 55 1,078 100 0 0 57 n/a 6.5 5.3 Kylian Crites M 57 1,117 100 0 0 62 n/a 7.3 6.1 Kylian Crites M 59 1,147 99 1 0 63 n/a 7.5 7.1 Kylian Crites M 61 1,174 93 6 0 66 83 7.4 7.9 Crockett HM 55 1,078 88 12 0 50 55 6.4 2.2 Crockett HM 57 1,117 93 7 0 53 65 7.0 3.1 Crockett HM 59 1,147 62 36 1 56 70 6.9 3.8 Crockett HM 61 1,174 44 47 9 61 72 6.8 4.9 Masai Rogers 55 1,078 100 0 0 61 n/a 6.3 2.2 Masai Rogers 57 1,117 100 0 0 64 n/a 6.2 2.8 Masai Rogers 59 1,147 94 6 0 68 82 6.0 3.8 Masai Rogers 61 1,174 93 7 0 69 86 6.8 5.3 Xantos Nunhems 56 1,100 100 0 0 58 80 6.4 4.0 Xantos Nunhems 58 1,130 100 0 0 62 n/a 7.1 5.1 Xantos Nunhems 60 1,161 100 0 0 63 n/a 6.7 5.6 Xantos Nunhems 62 1,188 100 0 0 64 n/a 6.9 6.7 T/A 35

Table 6 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve 2-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot EX 1267 Seminis 56 1,100 83 17 0 52 65 6.4 2.8 EX 1267 Seminis 58 1,130 92 8 0 57 70 7.3 3.3 EX 1267 Seminis 60 1,161 63 37 0 55 69 7.2 3.8 EX 1267 Seminis 62 1,188 60 40 0 52 71 7.4 4.4 Banga Seminis 56 1,100 100 0 0 59 n/a 6.5 4.8 Banga Seminis 58 1,130 100 0 0 64 n/a 7.6 6.6 Banga Seminis 60 1,161 100 0 0 71 n/a 7.7 6.5 Banga Seminis 62 1,188 100 0 0 73 n/a 8.1 7.1 Pix Seminis 56 1,100 99 1 0 61 n/a 5.9 2.8 Pix Seminis 58 1,130 97 3 0 70 n/a 4.8 2.7 Pix Seminis 60 1,161 80 20 0 67 90 5.8 4.3 Pix Seminis 62 1,188 76 24 0 73 95 6.7 5.7 EX0852 Seminis 56 1,100 79 21 0 77 104 8.0 6.5 EX0852 Seminis 58 1,130 64 36 0 81 98 8.0 7.8 EX0852 Seminis 60 1,161 51 49 0 82 101 7.0 8.5 EX0852 Seminis 62 1,188 38 54 8 79 107 9.0 9.0 Cruiser Vilmorin 58 1,130 86 14 0 60 73 7.3 3.8 Cruiser Vilmorin 60 1,161 80 20 0 59 76 6.8 4.2 Cruiser Vilmorin 62 1,188 79 21 0 65 86 6.9 5.7 T/A 36

Table 6 (continued) Cultivar Seed Source Days to Harvest Degree Days Base 50 % 2- sieve % 3- sieve % 4- sieve 2-Sieve Seed Length (mm) 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm) Plants per Foot Wax Golden Child Seminis 55 1,078 85 15 0 59 68 7.8 4.8 Golden Child Seminis 57 1,117 82 18 0 63 88 7.4 5.7 Golden Child Seminis 59 1,147 71 29 0 71 92 7.1 6.9 Golden Child Seminis 61 1,174 56 44 0 75 93 7.7 8.0 Soleil Vilmorin 56 1,100 95 5 0 59 79 5.0 2.8 Soleil Vilmorin 58 1,130 86 14 0 61 78 7.0 6.3 Soleil Vilmorin 60 1,161 74 26 0 68 85 6.0 7.2 Soleil Vilmorin 62 1,188 58 42 0 66 91 7.0 7.8 Serin Seminis 56 1,100 100 0 0 73 n/a 6.6 3.6 Serin Seminis 58 1,130 100 0 0 73 n/a 7.3 4.7 Serin Seminis 60 1,161 100 0 0 74 n/a 7.1 5.7 Serin Seminis 62 1,188 100 0 0 78 n/a 8.0 6.7 Cultivar: Data is based on four replications for entries in the replicated study and two plots for observation entries. Harvest sample was from five feet of row. Seed Source: Abb.&Cobb=Abbott & Cobb; Brotherton=Brotherton Seed Co.; Crites M.=Crites Moscow Growers; HM=Harris Moran; Pure Line Seeds; Rogers=Syngenta Seeds-Rogers Brand; Seminis=Seminis Vegetable Seeds-Processor Division Days to Harvest: The number of days from planting until harvest. Multiple harvests were made. Degree Days Base 50: The number of heat degree day units from planting until harvest. % 2-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 2-sieve pods. % 3-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 3-sieve pods. % 4-sieve: Pods were snipped and graded after harvest. This was the percentage of 4-sieve pods. 2-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 2-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. 3-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 3-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. 4-Sieve Seed Length (mm): One seed from ten 4-sieve pods were collectively measured in millimeters as a maturity index. Plants per Foot: Desired population was 6-7 plants per foot. T/A: The yield from the harvest sample (prior to being snipped) extrapolated to a per acre basis. T/A 37

Table 7. Plant and pod characteristics for whole bean type beans. Cultivar Plant Ht. (in.) Plant Width (in.) Plant Habit Rating Pod Color Rating (raw) Unsnipped Pod Length (in.) Pod Shape Rating Pod Location Rating Pod Straight. Rating Stayton 18 21 4 MG 5.5-6 R-O M-H 4-4.5 Koala 18 20 4 M-DG 4.25-4.75 O H 4-4.5 Pike 19 20 3.5 DG-VDG 5-5.5 R M-H 4 Molly 18 19 4.5 M-DG 4.5-5 R-O M-H 4 SWB-1A 19 18 4.5 M-DG 4.5-5.25 R H 4 Polder 17 20 4 MG 4.25-4.75 R-O H 4-4.5 EX0962 18 20 4 M-DG 4.25-4.75 R M-H 4-4.5 Kylian 19 20 3.5-4 M-DG 4.5-5 R-O H 4-4.5 Crockett 20 19 3.5-4 DG-VDG 5.5-6 R M-H 3.5-4 Masai (std) 19 19 4.5 MG 4-4.5 R-O M-H 4 Xantos 18 18 5 M-DG 4.5-5 R M-H 4 EX 1267 21 21 4 DG 4.5-5 R H 3.5-4 Banga (std) 17 20 4 M-DG 4.5-5 R H 4.5 Pix 19 18 5 M-DG 4.25-4.75 R-O M-H 4-4.5 EX0852 18 20 4 M-DG 4.75-5.25 R M-H 4 Cruiser 20 19 4 MG 5.5-6 R-O M-H 3.5-4 Wax Golden Child 18 19 4 WAX 4.25-4.5 R-O M 4 Soleil 20 25 3 WAX 4.75-5.75 O M-H 3.5-4 Serin 17 18 4 WAX 4.5-5.25 R-O L-H 4 Plant Ht. (in.): The average plant height at harvest in inches. Plant Width (in.): The average plant width at harvest in inches. Plant Habit Rating: 5=very erect plant, 3= acceptable, 1=totally recumbent plant. Pod Color Rating (raw): DG=dark green, MG=medium green, LG=light green. (uncooked). Unsnipped Pod Length (in.): The average length of the largest pods in inches. Pod Shape Rating: R=round, CR=creased, O=oval. Pod Location Rating: H= pods high on the plant, M=pods located in the center of the plant canopy, L=pods touching the ground. Pod Straight. Rating: 5=very straight, 3= acceptable, 1=very curved or twisted. Additional Comments Whole Bean and Wax Type Stayton A 2-sieve bean; early to midseason maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; long, medium green, uniform, very straight, round to oval pods; very good yield. Koala A 2-sieve bean; early to midseason maturity; erect plant habit; good to very good plant stand and emergence; medium to dark green, uniform, very straight, oval pods located high on the plant; very good yield. 38

Pike A 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; good plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; dark to very dark green, uniform, round, straight pods; very good yield. Molly A 2- to 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; very erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium to dark green, uniform, round to oval, straight pods; lots of blossoms at harvest; very good yield. SWB-1A A 2-sieve bean; midseason maturity; very erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium to dark green, round, straight pods located high on the plant; very good yield. Polder A 2-sieve bean; midseason maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium green, round to oval, very straight pods located high on the plant; very good yield. EX 0962 A 3-sieve bean; midseason maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium to dark green, round, very straight pods; very good yield. Kylian A 2-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; good to very good plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; uniform, medium to dark green, round to oval, very straight pods located high on the plant; very good yield. Crockett A 2- to 3-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; good to very good plant habit; good to very good plant stand and emergence; dark green to very dark green, long, round pods (lots of blossoms at harvest); decent yield. Masai A 2-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; very erect plant habit; good plant stand and very good emergence; short, uniform, medium green, round to oval straight pods (lots of blossoms at harvest); decent yield. Xantos A 2-sieve bean (my smallest grader is a 2-sieve, this is a very petite bean); mid- to main season maturity; excellent plant habit; good to very good plant stand and emergence, medium to dark green, round, straight pods (lots of blossoms at harvest); very good yield. EX 1267 A 2- to 3-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; dark green, round pods located high on the plant (lots of blossoms at harvest); did not yield as well as it has in past years. 39

Banga A 2-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; medium to dark green, round, very straight pods located high on the plant; very good yield. Pix A 2-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; excellent plant habit; good plant stand and emergence; uniform, medium to dark green, round to oval, very straight pods (lots of blossoms and small pins at harvest); good yield. EX 0852 A 3-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; erect plant habit; excellent plant stand; very good emergence; medium to dark green, round, straight pods; very good to excellent yield. Cruiser A 2-sieve bean; main season maturity; erect plant habit; good to very good plant stand and emergence; medium green, long, round to oval, straight pods; could have been picked one more time which probably would have increased yield (need to wait that extra day or two for this one to be ready). Wax Beans Golden Child A 2- to 3-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; light yellow, round to oval, uniform, straight pods located in the middle of the plant; very good yield. Soleil A 2- to 3-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; acceptable plant habit; good to very good plant stand and emergence; golden yellow, long, oval, straight pods; very good yield. Serin A 2-sieve bean; mid- to main season maturity; erect plant habit; very good plant stand and emergence; yellow to golden yellow, round to oval, straight pods; some pods touch the ground; good to very good yield. Snap Bean Descriptions Provided by the Seed Source (Whole Beans and Wax Type) Pike (HMX 6108) Harris Moran: 55 days to maturity; 3-sieve type with very few 4-sieve (80% 3-sieve); dark green pods. Stayton Rogers: early maturity; 2-3-sieve bean with pod length of 5-5.5 inches. Molly Nunhems: 2-3 seive bean. SWB 1A PureLine: 2-3-sieve bean. 40

Koala Crites Moscow: medium to late maturity; 570 heat units (10C used as base) whole; 2-3-sieve bean; medium green; pod length 12 cm; R for BCMV; R for Halo Blight and Anthacnose. Polder Vilmorin: late season maturity; whole bean type (1-2-sieve). EX 0962 Seminis. Kylian Crites Moscow: 59 days to maturity (early); 4.25-inch pod length; medium dark green, round, straight pods, 85% 2-sieve, 15% 1-sieve; high yield potential and excellent plant habit; exceptional seedling vigor and an ability to emerge from cool soils; easy and clean picking; excellent heat tolerance; resistances to Common Bean Mosaic Virus, Anthracnose, and Halo Blight. Crockett (HMX 4956) Harris Moran: 58 days to maturity; 100% 3-sieve and smaller (80 % 2-sieve); dark green pods (Masai type). Masai Rogers: - 55 days to maturity; a very small, straight podded, whole pack that yields well; pod smooth at prime; slightly fast seed development; excellent bush habit that can be planted in narrow rows; 3.9-inch pods; 2- to 3-sieve size; medium green pod color; standard in Europe where this French gourmet style was popularized; tender, flavorful pods averaging in the 2- to 3- sieve range set in the upper half of Masai's upright, small-leaf bush Xantos Nunhems: 1 sieve bean. EX 1267 Seminis: Banga type with a little taller plant; 2-sieve (80% 2-sieve)10.5 mm pod length; medium green pods; very good broad adaptation. Banga (1265) Seminis: whole bean type is slightly small sieve break out (2-sieve type) than Cadillac, which has exhibited a lot of flexibility in harvest as a 2 or 2/3 short (10cm) pod type; compliments Cadillac very well in product lineup. Pix Seminis: 57 days to maturity (1,326 heat units); 67% 1-2-sieve, 33% 3-sieve; 4.0-inch medium dark green pods; resistance to Anthracnose, intermediate resistance to BBS, HB, and rust. EX 0852 Seminis. Cruiser Vilmorin: strong vigor at emergence; good plant structure that is upright until harvest; average height is 20 inches; straight, round, fleshy pods that are 12-12.5 cm long; dark green, smooth, and shiny without string or fiber; 70 % 2-sieve, 30% 3-sieve; high resistance to BCMV (virus 1), 41

high resistance with the ARE gene for anthracnose, high resistance to Halo Blight, intermediate resistance to Common or fuscous blight (Xap). Golden Child Seminis: 55 days to maturity; 70% 1-2-sieve, 30% 3-sieve; yellow, 3.8-inch pods. Soleil Vilmorin: wax whole bean; 56 days to maturity; 90% 2-sieve, 10% 3-sieve; 4-inch pod length; Anthracnose, Halo Blight, and Brown Spot tolerant. Serin Seminis: small-sieve wax. Table 8. Weather summary. Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units May 2008 23 56 42 49 0 0 0 0 24 61 47 54 0.03 0.03 4 4 25 65 48 56.5 0 0.03 6.5 11 26 75 49 62 0 0.03 12 23 27 83 59 71 0 0.03 21 44 28 64 38 51 0 0.03 1 45 29 59 41 50 0 0.03 0 45 30 72 46 59 0 0.03 9 54 31 72 53 62.5 0.13 0.16 12.5 66 June 2008 1 77 55 66 0.38 0.54 16 82 2 63 52 57.5 0.02 0.56 7.5 90 3 76 56 66 0 0.56 16 106 4 72 58 65 0.04 0.6 15 121 5 73 60 66.5 0 0.6 16.5 137 6 82 64 73 0.01 0.61 23 160 7 94 73 83.5 0 0.61 33.5 194 8 89 68 78.5 0 0.61 28.5 222 9 87 71 79 0.11 0.72 29 251 10 93 66 79.5 0 0.72 29.5 281 11 89 58 73.5 0.3 1.02 23.5 304 12 80 55 67.5 0 1.02 17.5 322 13 76 56 66 0 1.02 16 338 Continued on next page 42

Table 8 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units June 2008 (continued) 14 88 63 75.5 0.05 1.07 25.5 363 15 74 62 68 0.04 1.11 18 381 16 83 59 71 0.35 1.46 21 402 17 79 55 67 0.06 1.52 17 419 18 65 50 57.5 0.11 1.63 7.5 427 19 66 49 57.5 0.3 1.93 7.5 434 20 66 55 60.5 0.12 2.05 10.5 445 21 72 53 62.5 0.01 2.06 12.5 457 22 80 58 69 0.22 2.28 19 476 23 77 58 67.5 0.38 2.66 17.5 494 24 76 57 66.5 0 2.66 16.5 510 25 73 55 64 0 2.66 14 524 26 81 62 71.5 0 2.66 21.5 546 27 80 65 72.5 0 2.66 22.5 568 28 82 64 73 0.06 2.72 23 591 29 83 68 75.5 0.02 2.74 25.5 617 30 81 60 70.5 0.87 3.61 20.5 637 July 2008 1 78 60 69 0.41 4.02 19 656 2 76 52 64 0 4.02 14 670 3 82 57 69.5 0 4.02 19.5 690 4 73 52 62.5 0.21 4.23 12.5 702 5 74 51 62.5 0.02 4.25 12.5 715 6 78 54 66 0 4.25 16 731 7 84 64 74 0 4.25 24 755 8 87 66 76.5 0 4.25 26.5 781 9 90 69 79.5 0 4.25 29.5 811 10 81 60 70.5 0.01 4.26 20.5 831 11 77 58 67.5 0.01 4.27 17.5 849 12 72 59 65.5 0.13 4.4 15.5 864 13 89 64 76.5 0.01 4.41 26.5 891 14 77 58 67.5 0.95 5.36 17.5 908 Continued on next page 43

Table 8 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units July 2008 (continued) 15 79 54 66.5 0 5.36 16.5 925 16 80 59 69.5 0 5.36 19.5 944 17 86 63 74.5 0.2 5.56 24.5 969 18 84 66 75 0.07 5.63 25 994 19 87 72 79.5 0 5.63 29.5 1,023 20 87 69 78 0.69 6.32 28 1,051 21 85 67 76 0.53 6.85 26 1,077 22 79 62 70.5 0.14 6.99 20.5 1,098 23 78 63 70.5 0.9 7.89 20.5 1,118 24 77 63 70 0.06 7.95 20 1,138 25 68 58 63 0.51 8.46 13 1,151 26 81 63 72 0 8.46 22 1,173 27 82 64 73 0.09 8.55 23 1,196 28 78 64 71 0 8.55 21 1,217 29 79 63 71 0 8.55 21 1,238 30 79 59 69 0.05 8.6 19 1,257 31 81 63 72 0 8.6 22 1,279 August 2008 1 82 64 73 0 8.6 23 1,302 2 80 64 72 0.11 8.71 22 1,324 3 75 62 68.5 0.12 8.83 18.5 1,343 4 72 63 67.5 0 8.83 17.5 1,360 5 79 56 67.5 0 8.83 17.5 1,378 6 82 62 72 0.43 9.26 22 1,400 7 80 63 71.5 0 9.26 21.5 1,421 8 76 59 67.5 0 9.26 17.5 1,439 9 69 57 63 1.27 10.53 13 1,452 10 75 58 66.5 0.4 10.93 16.5 1,468 11 74 54 64 0.24 11.17 14 1,482 12 70 56 63 0.13 11.3 13 1,495 13 73 55 64 0.07 11.37 14 1,509 14 75 55 65 0.11 11.48 15 1,524 Continued on next page 44

Table 8 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units August 2008 (continued) 15 75 57 66 0 11.48 16 1,540 16 75 56 65.5 0 11.48 15.5 1,556 17 77 62 69.5 0 11.48 19.5 1,575 18 79 60 69.5 0 11.48 19.5 1,595 19 83 58 70.5 0.16 11.64 20.5 1,615 20 65 49 57 0 11.64 7 1,622 45

46

Beet Variety Evaluation John Strang, Amy Poston Lentz, Chris Smigell, Pam Sigler, Kenny Seebold, Darrell Slone, and John Snyder, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40546 Twenty-three beet varieties were evaluated in a replicated trial for their performance under Kentucky conditions. These included red, golden, and one white beet variety. Materials and Methods Varieties were seeded in the field on May 29 at the Horticulture Research Farm in Lexington. One hundred seeds (beet balls) were planted in each 20-foot long plot. Rows were 22 inches apart. Each treatment was replicated four times in a randomized complete block design. Fifty pounds per acre of nitrogen as ammonium nitrate was applied to the plot. No fungicides, insecticides, or herbicides were used in this trial. Ten beets from each replication were evaluated for uniformity of size, uniformity of shape, and exterior appearance. One beet from each replication was evaluated for soluble solids content and for flavor (raw) by two evaluators. Soluble solids were measured with a refractometer on a -inch diameter core taken with a cork borer horizontally through the midsection of the beet. Juice was extracted using a garlic press. Raw beet flavor was determined from a slice at the center of each beet. Foliage disease evaluations were made on August 19. Cooking Process Roots Beet roots were roasted for 45 minutes in a 400 F convection oven. Cooled beets were peeled and sliced for sampling. Attempts were made to select beet roots that were similar in size. Beet roots were evaluated by four to five evaluators for appearance and flavor. Cooking Process Greens Beet greens (leaves from each beet) were sautéed in teaspoon of canola oil over medium heat (5 on a scale of 1-9) until wilted. One half-cup of water was added to the greens and covered. Greens were simmered until tender. The leaves of the beets varied in volume of greens produced, leaf texture, and stalk size. Because of the variations, cooking time varied for each variety. The greens with larger stalks would have been more appealing if prepared as Swiss Chard (dice stalks and sauté before adding leaves). Beet greens were evaluated while warm. Two evaluators rated the cooked greens for appearance and flavor. Those greens receiving a score of 2 were considered bitter and the rating was not based on the stem texture. Results and Discussion The 2009 growing season was cool and abnormally wet. Beets were harvested at diameters of 1.5 to 3 inches. Harvest and evaluation data for the replicated trial are in Table 1 and data for whole plant appearance and cooked beets and greens are in Table 2. Merlin, Red Ace, Kestrel, and Detroit Supreme had high rankings and were the best red beets in terms of cooked appearance and flavor for both roots and greens. Excalibur and Red Titan were notable for beet root roasted flavor. Solo, the highest ranked variety in the trial, and Touchstone Gold had high ratings for cooked greens appearance and flavor. Solo, Excalibur, Merlin, Red Ace, Kestrel, and Red Cloud had some of the best raw taste evaluations (Table 1). Raw beets are used in salads and should not be bitter. Taunus was the best cylindrical shaped beet. The cylindrical beets were noted to cook more evenly than globe shaped beets and provided a uniform size and shape when sliced. 47

Uniformity is desirable in beets that are sliced for canning. Touchstone Gold was the best golden beet. Golden beets are notable for having poor germination percentages and Touchstone Gold tended to have a higher germination rating than the other two golden varieties. Chioggia is an older variety that is notable for its red and white zoning and Blankoma was the one white beet in the trial. The wet season contributed to the development of the Cercospora foliage disease (Table 1). The golden beets, Blankoma, Bulls Blood, Chioggia, Detroit Supreme, Taunus, Cylindra, and Early Wonder had some of the lowest Cercospora ratings. However, the white, golden beets, Chioggia, Taunus, and Moneta all were observed to have higher levels of Pseudomonas bacterial leaf spot, which is not shown in the tables. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the following persons for their hard work and assistance in the successful completion of this trial: David Abell, Matthew Anderson, Jessica Ballard, Travis Baney, Sean Bessin, Jessica Cole, Jessica Dye, Ethan Glidewell, Thomas Iorio, Keith Kral, Ellen Meyer, Dave Lowry, Julie Pfeiffer, Kirk Ranta, Kiefer Shuler, Chie Togami, Joseph Tucker, Bonka Vaneva, William Waun, David Wayne, and Sarah Yates. Seed companies listed in Table provided seed. 48

Table 1. Beet variety ranking, germination, disease rating and root characteristics. Cultivar Days Maturity Seed Source Ranking 1 Germination (1-200) 2,4 Cercospora Disease Rating (0-10) 3,4 Uniformity of Size (1-5) 5 Uniformity of Shape (1-10) 6 Exterior Appearance (1-5) 5 Sugar (%) 4 Taste raw (1-5) 5 Solo 49 SW 47.5 76.8 defghi 2.6 cdefg 4.1 7.0 3.7 10.2 abcde 4.3 Excalibur 60 SI 46.6 155 a 3.4 ab 3.1 7.3 3.8 10.7 abc 4.3 Merlin 55 RU 46.5 79.5 cdefgh 2.5 defg 3.6 7.3 4 10.4 abcd 4 Red Ace 53 RU 45.6 93.3 bcd 2.6 cdefg 3.5 6.3 3.6 9.7 bcdefg 4.1 Taunus 65 SW 45.4 65.8 ghij 2 ghi 3.4 8.8 4.5 8.1 ghi 3.3 Kestrel 53 RU 45.2 80.8 cdefg 2.9 bcde 3.1 7.3 4 9.7 bcdefg 4.6 Red Titan 52-54 SI 44.4 158.5 a 3.6 a 3.5 6.8 4.1 11.5 a 4.1 Red Cloud 53 SW 44.4 100.8 bc 2.8 bcdef 3.8 6.5 3.9 11.2 ab 4.2 Ruby Queen 60 RU 42.5 77.3 defghi 2.6 cdefg 3.3 7.0 3.5 9.7 abcdef 3.9 Eagle 54 ST 42.1 71.8 efghi 2.3 efgh 3.4 5.5 3.3 9.3 cdefgh 3.9 Touchstone Gold 60 SW 41.9 58.8 hij 0.4 k 3.3 6.3 3.8 7.6 hi 3 Detroit Supreme 59 ST 40.8 70.3 fghi 1.6 hig 4.0 4.0 2.5 8.5 efghi 2.6 Cylindra 60 BU 39.4 90.3 bcdef 2 ghi 3.0 6.8 3.3 8.3 ghi 3.6 Warrior 57 CF 39.3 82.8 bcdefg 3.1 abcd 4.1 6.8 3.3 10.1 abcde 3.3 Blankoma 55 JS 39.3 92.8 bcde 0.4 k 3.4 5.8 3.2 10.1 abcde 3.6 Bull s Blood 60 RU 38.8 57 ij 1 jk 2.5 5.5 2.8 7.7 hi 2.1 Chioggia 60 RU 38.6 76.8 defghi 1.5 ij 3.8 7.0 3.5 10.9 abc 2.9 Detroit Dk Red 59 BU 38.4 97.3 bcd 2.6cdefg 4.0 6.3 3.1 8.8 defghi 2.8 Early Wonder 52 RU 37.5 66.8 ghi 2 ghi 3.5 6.8 2.6 9.2 cdefgh 2.6 Burpee Golden 60 RU 36.4 30.8 k 0.5 k 2.8 6.5 3.7 7.3 i 2.6 Moneta 60 SW 36.3 30.3 k 2.1 fghi 3.9 5.3 2.9 7.8 hi 2.7 Red Heart 58 BU 35.9 102.8 b 3.3 abc 3.4 3.8 2.6 9.4 bcdefgh 3.6 Golden Beet 65 SI 34.9 45.3 jk 0.4 k 2.9 3.7 2.6 7.7 hi 2.9 1 Ranking based on summation of Table 1 and 2 data. The Cercospora disease rating is subtracted from the total ranking and the germination number is not included. 2 Germination based on Planting 100 beet balls, each normally containing more than one seed. Solo and Moneta are monogerm and contain one seed. 3 Cercospora disease rating: 0=no disease; 10=complete blighting. 4 Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Waller-Duncan multiple range test LSD P=0.05). 5 Rating: 1=poor; 5=excellent. 6 Rating based on number of beets out of 10 with a uniform shape. 49

Table 2. Beet appearance and cooked beet and greens evaluations. Variety Appearance Whole Uncooked Beets and Greens (1-5) 1 Appearance Sliced Roasted (1-5) 1 Flavor Roasted (1-5) 1 Greens Appearance Cooked (1-5) 1 Greens Flavor Cooked (1-5) 1 Comments 2 Solo 5 4.5 3.3 4 4 V dk interior, not bitter, early maturing, monogerm, excellent cooked greens, globe shape Excalibur 5 4.5 4.3 3.5 3.5 OP, V firm, sweet, dk interior, uniform shape, excellent cooked, not bitter Merlin 3 4 4.2 4 4.5 V firm dk interior, not bitter, smaller size, uniform shape, excellent cooked beets and greens Red Ace 5 4.4 3.6 4 4 V. dark interior, not bitter, excellent cooked greens, globe shape Taunus 5 4.3 3.5 3.5 3 OP, V dk red interior, not bitter, cylindrical shape, smooth skin Kestrel 3 4.4 4 4 4 V sweet, dk interior, excellent roasted, not bitter, globe shape Red Titan 4 4.5 4 3 2.5 V attractive dk interior, V sweet raw and cooked, slightly bitter, globe shape Red Cloud 4 3.8 2.8 3.5 3.5 V dk attractive interior, round shape, not bitter Ruby Queen 4 4.4 2.8 3.5 3 V dk interior, uniform shape, slight bitterness Eagle 5 4 4 3 3 V dk interior, irregular shape, small size, not bitter, excellent roasted Touchstone Gold 2 4.3 3.5 4 4.5 OP, overall best golden beet, excellent cooked greens, not bitter, round shape Detroit Supreme 4 4.3 4.5 4 4 OP, V dk interior, irregular shape, excellent cooked beets and greens Cylindra 2 3.8 3.6 3 4 OP, dk interior, cylindrical shape, variable size, not bitter, excellent cooked greens Warrior 2 3.6 3.2 3 3 V firm dk interior, not bitter, maroon tops, globe shape Blankoma 1 3.8 2.8 3 3 OP, white beet, slightly bitter, dk spots on skin, round to slightly conical Bull s Blood 5 4 3.2 4 3 OP, dk maroon greens, flattened globe shape Chioggia 1 3.8 2.2 3 2 OP, attractive purple and white interior zoning, some bitterness, globe shape Detroit Dark Red 2 4 4 3 3 OP, industry standard, V dk interior, excellent flavor roasted, slight bitterness Early Wonder 4 3.8 3 2 2 OP, some bitterness, flattened globe shape 1 Appearance and flavor 1=poor, 5=excellent. Roots were rated by four or five evaluators and greens were rated by two evaluators for consumer appeal. 2 Comments on bitterness refer to the raw taste evaluation in Table 1. OP refers to open pollinated varieties all others are hybrid; V= very and dk = dark. Continued on next page 50

Table 2 (continued) Variety Appearance Whole Uncooked Beets and Greens (1-5) 1 Appearance Sliced Roasted (1-5) 1 Flavor Roasted (1-5) 1 Greens Appearance Cooked (1-5) 1 Greens Flavor Cooked (1-5) 1 Comments 2 Burpee Golden 3 3.2 2.8 3 2 OP, not bitter, round shape Moneta 3 4 2.8 3 3 OP, V dk interior, monogerm, not bitter, round shape Red Heart 3 3.4 3 3.5 3.5 V dk interior, not bitter, elongated globe shape Golden Beet 2 4 3.5 3 3 OP, irregular shape, not bitter, round shape 1 Appearance and flavor 1=poor, 5=excellent. Roots were rated by four or five evaluators and greens were rated by two evaluators for consumer appeal. 2 Comments on bitterness refer to the raw taste evaluation in Table 1. OP refers to open pollinated varieties all others are hybrid; V= very and dk = dark. 51

52

Downy Mildew Susceptibility of Cucumber Varieties, New York 2008 Margaret T. McGrath, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 George M. Fox, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 Sandra Menasha, Cornell Cooperative Extension-Suffolk County, NY Downy mildew has been a major problem in Long Island cucurbit crops, especially cucumbers, since a new pathogen strain appeared in the United States around 2004. Impact has been great especially for organic producers because they do not use synthetic fungicides and their customers want a continuous supply of cucumbers into the fall, which they have not been able to do because downy mildew has been killing their plants. Most cucumber varieties have resistance to the old strain of the pathogen. This resistance provides limited suppression of the new strain, but there is a lot of variation among varieties, based on results from variety evaluations conducted at North Carolina State University. Slicer and pickling-type cucumber varieties were selected for testing that have exhibited relatively low susceptibility to downy mildew, compared to other varieties, in cucumber evaluations conducted at NCSU since 2005. The evaluations in Long Island were conducted as a component of an integrated management program for organically produced cucumber by regularly applying an OMRI-listed botanical oil plus a copper fungicide. The oil used was Organocide, which has 5% sesame oil. Materials and Methods Cucumber was seeded on August 11 and transplanted on August 22 into bare ground in a field with Haven loam soil at the Long Island Horticultural Research and Extension Center in Riverhead. A late planting date was used to increase the likelihood of downy mildew developing during the experiment. Organic production practices were used. On August 20, Pro-Gro 5-3-4 organic fertilizer at 1,000 lbs/a was spread over the rows to be planted and then incorporated by disking. Neptune s Harvest hydrolyzed fish emulsion fertilizer (0.094 fl oz in 6 fl oz water) was poured into the transplant hole before planting. On September 12 plants were side-dressed with Bio-Diversity 8-2-8 organic fertilizer at 375 lbs/a and then cultivated to incorporate. Weeds were controlled by cultivating and hand weeding as needed. Drip irrigation was used as needed to supplement rainfall. Plots consisted of two 12-foot rows spaced 34 inches apart each with six plants at 24-inch spacing. A randomized complete block design with four replications was used for all three experiments. Organocide at 1 oz/gal + Kocide 3000 at 1 lb/a were applied on September 3, 11, 18, and October 4 using a tractor-mounted boom sprayer operated at 100 psi and 96 gal/a (D5-25 hollow cone nozzles spaced 17 inches apart). Downy mildew severity was assessed on October 2 and 9 by estimating incidence of symptomatic leaves and then rating average severity on the affected leaves. These measurements were used to estimate canopy severity. Marketable fruit and culls were harvested on October 2 and 13. 53

Average monthly high and low temperatures ( F) were 79/63 in August, 75/61 in September, and 63/47 in October. Rainfall (inches) was 3.76, 8.34, and 3.18 for these months, respectively. Results and Discussion Downy mildew symptoms were first seen on September 22, eight days after three days of rain and 10 days before the first rating date. Conditions for downy mildew development were favorable because of rain and long, heavy dew periods that are common during late summer to fall where the experiment was conducted. Rain fell over four days starting with 3 inches on September 27. Temperatures were unusually cool during fall 2008, thus few fruit developed and the experiment was terminated due to poor plant growth. Among the pickling-type varieties, Straight Eight was significantly more severely affected by downy mildew than the other varieties (Calypso, Feisty, Jackson Classic, Wainwright Classic, and Sassy; see Table 1). Straight Eight is an old variety with no genes for resistance to downy mildew. The other five varieties evaluated were bred to have resistance to the pathogen strains that dominated the pathogen population before 2004. This resistance is a common feature of modern varieties. It provided a very high degree of control, with near immunity to the old pathogen strains. No difference in downy mildew suppression was detected among the other varieties. Calypso and Feisty have generally exhibited better suppression than other varieties in several evaluations conducted at North Carolina State University since 2005. This experiment has documented that the old resistance still provides some suppression of downy mildew. Control was 84-94% based on canopy severity compared to Straight Eight. This high level of control likely is partly due to greater efficacy of fungicides when applied to resistant varieties. No significant differences were detected among the slicer varieties evaluated, all of which have resistance to the old pathogen strains (Table 2) No significant differences were detected among the varieties in downy mildew incidence or severity. On October 9 the incidence of leaves with symptoms was 34-51% and the severity of downy mildew symptoms on these leaves was 5-15%. Dasher II, Poinsett 76, and Stonewall were less severely affected by downy mildew than Marketmore 76 in several evaluations conducted at North Carolina State University since 2005. General Lee, a variety commonly grown on Long Island, was also tested. Acknowledgments This project was funded by the Friends of Long Island Horticulture Grant Program. Seed was donated by the companies listed in Tables 1 and 2. Pesticides were donated by Organic Laboratories and DuPont Crop Protection. 54

Table 1. Downy mildew incidence and severity for pickling-type cucumber varieties. Variety Downy Mildew Assessments z Seed Severity on Canopy Source y Incidence Affected Leaves Severity Oct. 2 Oct. 9 Oct. 2 Oct. 9 Oct. 9 Calypso FC 37.5 b x 43.3 b 24.4 b 7.0 b 3.0 b Feisty HM 37.5 b 53.8 b 32.5 b 12.0 b 6.1 b Jackson Classic NU 35.0 b 46.3 b 25.0 b 14.3 b 6.0 b Wainwright Classic NU 38.8 b 52.5 b 21.3 b 12.3 b 6.3 b Sassy HM 35.0 b 52.5 b 21.3 b 16.5 b 8.4 b Straight Eight NC 65.0 a 82.5 a 47.5 a 65.0 a 52.4 a P-value 0.0018 0.0042 0.005 0.0004 0.0002 z Percent leaf tissue with symptoms of downy mildew was estimated and severity was assessed for the affected leaves. Canopy severity was calculated from these values. y FC=Fedco, HM=Harris Moran, NC=North Carolina State University, and NU=Nunhems. x Mean separation letters are included although values are not statistically different from each other (Fisher s Protected LSD, P=0.05). Table 2. Downy mildew incidence and severity for slicer cucumber varieties. Variety Downy Mildew Assessments z Seed Canopy Incidence Severity on Affected Leaves Source y Severity Oct. 2 Oct. 9 Oct. 2 Oct. 9 Oct. 9 Dasher II SI 30.0 34.3 23.8 9.8 3.3 bc x Poinsett 76 NC 30.0 38.3 20.0 8.8 3.3 bc Stonewall HM 35.0 51.3 32.5 12.5 6.3 ab HMX 7421 HM 28.8 36.3 16.3 5.0 1.8 c HMX 4453 HM 36.3 48.8 30.0 15.0 8.4 a General Lee HM 32.5 45.0 23.8 10.5 4.8 abc Marketmore 76 FC 40.0 46.3 25.6 8.5 3.8 bc P-value 0.2032 0.13 0.1626 0.1416 0.072 z Percent leaf tissue with symptoms of downy mildew was estimated and severity was assessed for the affected leaves. Canopy severity was calculated from these values. y FC=Fedco, HM=Harris Moran, NC=North Carolina State University, and SI=Siegers. x Mean separation letters are included although values are not statistically different from each other (Fisher s Protected LSD, P=0.05). 55

Table 3. Fruit quality assessments for cucumber varieties compared in 2008. Variety Fruit Quality Assessments z Color Shape Appearance Overall Marketability Dasher II 5 5 5 5 HMX 4453 5 4 4 4 Stonewall 5 5 5 5 Calypso 5 5 5 5 Feisty 4 5 5 5 Sassy 5 5 5 5 Jackson Classic 5 5 4 4 Wainwright Classic 5 5 5 5 z 1-5 rating scale; 5=best. Cucumber Variety Fruit Descriptions and Assessments Dasher II: dark green, medium length HMX 4453: variable shape, little to small Stonewall: curved, some bumps, dark green glossy Calypso: very wide (fat), some light green streaks Feisty: wide, dark green with light yellow at end Sassy: very dark green, longer bumpy Jackson Classic: short, fat, smooth Wainwright Classic: bumpy slight curve narrow at one end 56

2009 Eggplant Variety Trial in Central Missouri Sanjun Gu and Theresa Blank, Lincoln University, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 This paper reports the 2009 evaluation of 13 eggplant varieties in Central Missouri. Materials and Methods Thirteen eggplant cultivars were chosen for this trial (Table 1) based on the preliminary evaluation of 20 varieties in 2008. Cultivars Lavender Touch and Snowy were not included in the trial because of seed shortages. Seeds were sowed in the Dickson Research Greenhouse on April 14. Transplants were planted on June 1 at the Lincoln University Carver Farm located in Jefferson City, Missouri. The soil type was Elk silt loam, with 1.1% organic matter and a ph of 6.1. Transplants were treated with Marathon II before planting. No pesticides were applied to the transplants in the field. Plants were spaced out 6 feet x 2 feet in the field. A marigold plant was planted between two cultivars and at each end of a row. Trickle-irrigation under black plastic mulch was used to water and fertigate plants. Fertigation was done with soluble 20N-20P-20K fertilizer at the rate of 200ppm N on June 29, July 9, July 31, and August 25. The excessive rainfall in the growing season prevented application of more fertilizers. The experiment was a completely randomized design with four replications. There were nine plants within an application. Harvesting was mostly done on Mondays and Thursdays. Fruit harvested before August 1 was regarded as early fruit. We stopped harvesting on September 22, as the cold temperatures hit Central Missouri earlier than usual in the fall of 2009. Data were analyzed with SAS 9.1 using the Mixed model for variance analyses and multiple comparisons. Significance was determined at the P 0.05 level. Results and Discussions All varieties performed well in the field despite the excessive precipitation and abnormally cool summer temperatures in Central Missouri. Consequently, there was not much need for supplemental irrigation. Disease and insect damages were minor throughout the growing season. Flea beetle damage was more severe towards the end of the season. Tomato fruit worms and blossom end rot were observed on several occasions. Of all cultivars (Table 1), Mangan bloomed much earlier than any others, while Black Beauty and Rosa Bianca flowered much later. It showed that Mangan, Clara, Orient Charming, and Twinkle were early varieties, and that Black Beauty, Florida Market, Machiaw, and Rosa Bianca were late varieties (Table 1). There were significant differences on yield and number of fruit. Early yields of Clara, Classic, White Tango, Italian Galine, and Beatrice were higher than some early varieties, such as Mangan, Orient Charming, and Twinkle, largely because of the size of fruit (Table 2). The exception was White Tango, which had fruit clusters bearing more fruit. The weight of single fruit was consistent with that from last year. The number of fruit also differed significantly between cultivars. White Tango and Machiaw had much more fruit than other cultivars. The total yields of Beatrice, Italian Galine, Classic, Clara, and White Tango were higher than the rest of cultivars. Cultivars with low total yields were Mangan, Orient Charming, and Machiaw (Table 2 57

and Figure 1). The yield of the eggplants was at the low side of our research plot, partially due to the relatively low organic matter content in soil. Some additional observations: Machiaw: appearance is OK. If not harvested in a timely manner, fruit would continue to grow and probably be too large to be marketable. The eating quality was not too good, kind of rubbery. Mangan: skin color was not glossy. The fruit was prone to injury and to developing brown blemishes. Insects punctured fruit easily. It was a super early variety. Dancer: produced consistently beautiful fruit. Rosa Bianca: fruit quality tended to diminish as the season progressed. It had good flavor. Tango and Clara: both had white fruit with thin skins. Needed to be careful with harvesting as fruit tended to develop brown blotches, scratches, and small holes. Twinkle: smaller, globe-shaped fruit with purple and white striped skin. Fruit had lots of seeds. Orient Charming: Asian type, long fruit. Other varieties: seemed to have very few problems. Conclusion Cultivars Beatrice, Italian Galine, and Clara (white) were as good as Classic. Black Beauty, Dancer, Rosa Bianca, and Florida Market would be also good choices for commercial eggplant growers. Magan should be used for early season farmers markets. Orient Charming will be a good cultivar for Asian customers. Twinkle, with its purple stripe, would be a good choice for home gardens and farmers markets. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank undergraduate students Keniesha Jones, Marcia Woolery and Kimberly Fowler for their assistance. 58

Table 1. Chronological data of 2009 eggplant variety trial in central Missouri. Cultivar Seed Source Seeding Transplanting First Flower Flowering (50%) First Harvest Last Harvest Mangan JS 4/14 6/1 6/22 6/26 7/12 9/22 Beatrice JS 4/14 6/1 6/29 7/4 7/16 9/22 Clara JS 4/14 6/1 6/25 6/28 7/16 9/22 Classic MCS 4/14 6/1 6/29 6/30 7/16 9/22 Dancer JS 4/14 6/1 6/29 6/30 7/16 9/22 Italian Galine JS 4/14 6/1 6/29 6/30 7/16 9/22 Orient Charm JS 4/14 6/1 6/25 6/29 7/16 9/22 White Tango JS 4/14 6/1 6/25 6/30 7/16 9/22 Twinkle PK 4/14 6/1 6/25 6/28 7/16 9/22 Black Beauty MCS 4/14 6/1 7/6 7/8 7/23 9/22 Florida Market MCS 4/14 6/1 6/29 7/5 7/23 9/22 Machiaw JS 4/14 6/1 6/29 7/3 7/23 9/22 Rosa Bianca JS 4/14 6/1 7/6 7/9 7/23 9/22 Table 2. 2009 eggplant variety trial in central Missouri: yield and number of fruit 1. Cultivar No. of Fruit (lb) Before Aug. 1 2 No. of Fruit Total Yield (lb) Before Aug. 1 Total Yield (lb) Beatrice 16 bcd 121 bcdef 16.1 abcd 77.6 a Italian Galine 23 b 125 bcdef 16.6 ab 68.2 ab Classic 24 b 119 bcdef 17.8 ab 68.2 ab Clara 26 b 111 cdef 20.8 a 62.5 ab White Tango 48 a 208 a 17.7 ab 61.4 ab Black Beauty 7 cd 90 def 7.5 efg 59.1 b Dancer 17 bcd 143 bc 10.0 cdef 56.6 b Florida Market 6 d 86 ef 6.4 fg 56.3 b Rosa Bianca 3 d 80 f 3.5 g 50.8 bc Twinkle 24 b 134 bcd 10.8 bcdef 50.5 bc Mangan 22 bc 97 cdef 8.4 efg 36.0 cd Orient Charming 42 a 121 bcdef 12.5 abcd 32.6 cd Machiaw 16 bcd 162 ab 3.4 g 29.6 d 1 Data of nine eggplants. Spacing: 6feet x 2feet. 2 Numbers followed by a same letter are not significantly different (p 0.05). 59

Figure 1. 2009 eggplant variety trial in central Missouri: accumulative yield (lb) Note: Yield data are from nine eggplants spacing out 6 feet x 2 feet. 60

Leek Cultivar Evaluations for West Virginia, 2009 Lewis W. Jett, State Extension Vegetable Specialist West Virginia University, 2102 Agriculture Sciences Building, Morgantown, WV 26506 Introduction Leeks (Allium ampeloprosum var. porrum) are a mild vegetable in the onion family and are becoming very popular at local farmers markets across West Virginia. West Virginia has a climate well-suited to growing leeks with mild spring and summer temperatures. The objective of this evaluation was to examine leek varieties suitable for direct marketing in West Virginia. Materials and Methods Leek seeds were planted in 50-cell pro trays on April 15, 2009. Eight weeks later (June 10) the transplants were hand-planted in 10-foot-long plots on a farm in central West Virginia. Each transplant was spaced 6 inches between plants resulting in approximately 20 plants/plot. Each cultivar was replicated three times. Prior to planting, dairy manure compost (2 lbs/ ft 2 ) was applied to the site and tilled in. No additional fertilizer was applied. Drip irrigation was used to supplement rainfall. The leeks were subsequently mulched with straw to control weeds. Mulch was raked around the base of the plants to blanch the stalks. Harvest commenced in mid- September. Results King Richard and Lincoln were both excellent, uniform leek cultivars with high yield and quality (Table 1). The stalks of these two cultivars were straight, tall, and easy to blanch. Table 1. Marketable yield and quality characteristics of leek cultivars. Cultivar Seed Source Marketable Weight/Stem (ounces) Comments American Flag Fedco 5.6 Open-pollinated variety. Bandit JS 6.0 Winter-hardy leek cultivar. Bleu de Solaize Fedco 5.8 Long, straight dark green foliage. Heirloom variety. King Richard JS 8.5 Excellent quality and yield. Very upright. Lincoln JS 9.1 Very large, upright stem. Early maturity. Pandora JS 6.4 Dark blue-green foliage. Upton JS 5.9 Blue-green foliage. Very uniform. Mean 4.4 Standard error 0.7 61

62

Evaluation of Muskmelon Varieties for Production in Southwest Indiana, 2009 Shubin K. Saha 1 and Daniel Egel 2 1 Vegetable Extension Specialist, Horticulture and Landscape Architecture Department Purdue University, Southwest Purdue Agricultural Center, Vincennes, IN, 47591 2 Plant Pathologist, Botany and Plant Pathology Department Purdue University, Southwest Purdue Agricultural Center, Vincennes, IN, 47591 Introduction Annually, production of muskmelons in the state of Indiana for the past decade has been valued at an average of $8.9 million, harvested from 2,800 acres (USDA, 2008). Muskmelons are an important crop economically for the state of Indiana and Indiana ranks fifth among U.S. states producing muskmelons behind only California, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia (USDA, 2008). One of the most important choices for producers is selecting a variety that has desirable traits including high yield, resistance to biotic/abiotic diseases and disorders, good internal qualities (such as firmness and soluble solids content), and good external qualities (such as coloration, netting, and ridging). The objective of this experiment was to evaluate newly available cultivars and various experimental breeding lines from numerous seed companies to assess adaptability to growing in the climate in southwestern Indiana. Materials and Methods The experiment was established on April 23, 2009, when seeds of each variety were sown in 52 cell seedling flats for transplant growth and development in the greenhouse. A total of 20 cultivars and experimental breeding lines were utilized for this trial and were transplanted into the field on May 19, 2009. The experimental design was that of a randomized complete block with three replications. Experimental plot dimensions were 55 feet in length and 4 feet in width. Rows were spaced on 6-foot centers and plants were spaced 2.5 feet apart in row with a total of 22 plants per plot. Plants were grown in a typical plasticulture vegetable system utilizing a raised bed with black plastic mulch in conjunction with drip tape for irrigation supplementation when rainfall was insufficient. All fertilizer applications were pre-plant including 350 lbs. (46-0-0), 100 lbs. (0-0-60), and 200 lbs. of pelletized lime. Plants were harvested 12 times from July 13 to August 7, and each fruit was harvested and weighed. Additionally fruits from each variety were evaluated for numerous quality characteristics including percent soluble solids, size, shape, uniformity, flavor, netting, ridges, rind thickness, seed cavity size, and pressure. Yield data was analyzed by Fisher s least significant difference test using SAS statistical programs (SAS Institute, Cary, NC.) Results Relative to previous seasons, the overall yields of varieties this past summer were greatly reduced and yields ranged from 9.4 to 17.3 tons/acre. Compare these results to 2007, when yields ranged from 20.9 to 26.5 tons/acre (Gunter et al., 2007). Numerically, the top five producing varieties based on tons/acre were Don Juan, 05H40, E1030, 05H15, and UG 4505 at 17.3, 16.4, 15.9, 15.7, and 15.0 respectively (Table 1). Hundredweight per acre followed the same trend and the five varieties previously mentioned had the greatest amount (Table 1). Individual average 63

fruit weight was greatest at 8.5 lbs. and lowest at 3.4 lbs. in SSX1029 and ACX1085TMX respectively. Although Don Juan had the greatest yield relative to other varieties, it was one with the lowest level of soluble solids at 5.5% (brix), which by most standards would be unacceptable from the perspective of quality (Table 2). Some of the higher yielding varieties that did have acceptable levels of soluble solids included E1030, Minerva, and Athena at levels of 11.2%, 11%, and 11% respectively (Table 2). The varieties receiving the highest flavor rating of 4.1 were Fantasista and Sarah s Choice, although they were in the mid-range of total yield. Of the top five yielding varieties, UG4505 had the highest flavor rating at 3.3 (Table 2). Acknowledgements The authors would like to extend their appreciation to the following individuals for all their help and assistance with the completion of the variety trials this year: Dennis Nowaskie, Bill Davis, Angie Thompson, Sara Hoke, and Brenda Nowaskie. Table 1. Muskmelon yields, summer 2009. Variety Seed Company Yield Cwt/Acre Yield Tons/Acre Average Fruit Weight (lbs) Fruit No./Acre Don Juan UG 346.2 17.3 a z 6.6 5,236 05H40 SE 328.1 16.4 ab 7.2 4,532 E1030 TAK 319.0 15.9 abc 5.9 5,412 05H15 SE 314.3 15.7 abcd 7.7 4,004 UG 4505 UG 299.5 15.0 abcde 4.7 6,204 Minerva RG 295.5 14.8 abcde 8.4 3,520 SSX 1029 SK 294.0 14.7 abcde 8.5 3,432 Eclipse RU 286.2 14.3 abcde 6.3 4,532 E1029 TAK 281.6 14.1 abcdef 5.2 5,412 Fantasista TAK 264.3 13.2 abcdefg 4.4 5,984 Athena SY 258.7 12.9 bcdefg 5.1 5,104 E1023 TAK 243.0 12.1 cdefg 5.2 4,664 Ariel (RML 0409) SY 236.0 11.8 defg 5.8 4,092 ACR 215TM AC 235.5 11.8 defg 5.2 4,840 E1016 TAK 230.6 11.5 efg 4.8 4,796 Sarah's Choice JS 224.2 11.2 efg 4.1 5,500 Aphrodite SY 201.2 10.1 fg 4.3 4,620 ACX 1004XEA AC 194.9 9.7 g 5.1 3,784 ACX 1085TMX AC 191.7 9.6 g 3.4 5,588 07H128 SE 187.0 9.4 g 3.7 5,016 z Mean yield in tons/acre separated by Fisher s least significant difference (P 0.05). Means with the same letter are not significantly different. 64

Table 2. Muskmelon fruit quality, summer 2009. Name Seed Company Size q % SS r Shape s Uniformity t Flavor u Netting v Ridges w Rind x Seed Cavity y Don Juan UG L 5.50 Ov 2 1.5 2 1 1 S 0.8 05H40 SE L 7.00 Ob 2 1.3 1 2 2 S 1.3 E1030 TAK S/M 11.20 Rd 2 3.2 3 2 1 S 3.5 05H15 SE L 6.50 Ov 2 2.8 1 1 3 S 1.9 UG 4505 UG M 6.00 Rd 3 3.3 3 0 1 S 1.8 Minerva RG VL 11.00 Ov 1 2.1 2 2 3 M 2.6 SSX 1029 SK VL 8.50 Ov 3 2.6 2 1 2 M 1.3 Eclipse RU M/L 9.00 Rd 3 3.1 3 1 2 S 1.1 E1029 TAK M 9.00 Ov 2 3.5 2 2 1 S 2.1 Fantasista TAK M 9.00 Ob 1 4.1 3 3 1 S 2.3 Athena SY M/L 11.00 Ov 2 4.0 2 1 3 M 1.7 E1023 TAK M 10.50 Ob 3 3.9 2 2 2 M 1.9 Ariel SY L 9.50 Rd/Ob 1 2.5 3 1 2 M 1.2 ACR 215TM AC M 8.50 Rd 2 3.5 1 1 1 M 1.3 E1016 TAK S 9.00 Ob 3 3.8 2 1 2 S 2.7 Sarah's Choice JS S 9.70 Rd 3 4.1 1 1 2.5 S 1.7 Aphrodite SY L 9.20 Ov 3 3.5 2 1 3 M 2.1 ACX 1004XEA AC S/M 10.00 Ov 3 3.5 3 1 2 S 4.4 ACX 1085 AC S 12.40 Ov 2 3.7 2 2 1 M 1.4 07H128 SE S 8.50 Rd 3 2.8 1 1 2 S 2.2 q Size: S=small, M=medium, L=large, VL= very large. r %SS: percent soluble solids. Higher values related to higher sugar content in the fruit. s Shape: Ov=oval, Ob=oblong, Rd=round. t Uniformity (1-3): 1=not uniform, 2=average, 3=highly uniform/ u Flavor (1-5): 1=extremely poor, 2=poor, 3=average, 4=good, 5=excellent/ v Netting (1-3): 1=low, 2=moderate, 3=heavy. w Ridges (0-3): 0=not present, 1=small, 2=medium, 3=large. x Rind (1-3): 1=thin, 2=moderate, 3=thick. y Seed Cavity: S=small, M=medium, L-large, VL= very large. z Pressure: firmness of the flesh of the melon. Higher values are associated with higher firmness. Pressure z (lbs/in 2 ) 65

Literature Cited Gunter, C.C., M.K. Lang, D. Nowaskie, and A. Thompson. 2007. Eastern muskmelon trials for southwestern Indiana, 2007, pp. 13-15. In E. Maynard (ed.). Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for 2007. United States Department of Agriculture, 2008. National Agricultural Statistics Service. Vegetables 2008 Summary. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/vegesumm/vegesumm-01-28-2009.pdf. 66

Muskmelon Cultivar Trial 2009 Vince Lawson, Iowa State University Muscatine Island Research Farm Fruitland, Iowa 52749 Introduction The 2009 melon trial evaluated 11 muskmelon and three specialty cultivars to determine approximate maturity dates, relative yield levels and fruit quality when grown under Iowa conditions. To better evaluate the cultivars replicated plots were established at two locations providing different growing environments. Several cultivars performed well at both locations and compared favorably to the standards. Materials and Methods Planting and Plot Design The trial was planted in the greenhouse on April 21 in 72-cell trays, one seed per cell. Fourweek-old plants were transplanted to the field on May 22 in trial plots at two locations. The soil type in Field I was light-colored coarse sand and melons were grown on raised beds that were covered with black plastic mulch and fertigated with drip lines. Field S-3 provided dark-colored, fine-textured, loamy sand with 3.5% organic matter and plots were grown in a conventional bare ground cultural system with overhead irrigation. A randomized complete block design with two replications was used at both locations. A plot consisted of eight plants spaced 28 inches apart in rows seven feet apart. Fertility and Irrigation Water was applied as needed by irrigation to supplement rainfall. Fertility guidelines described in Midwest Vegetable Production Guide for Commercial Growers (FG-600) were followed. Pest Control Strategy, Sandea, and Poast herbicides were used to control weeds. Cucumber beetles were controlled with Furadan 4F at planting and foliar applications of Mustang Max or Sevin XLR during the growing season. Wet, humid weather necessitated more fungicide spraying than normal to control leaf blights and downy mildew. Fungicide products were rotated and included Bravo Weather Stik, Dithane, Kocide 2000, Quadris, and Ranman. Results and Discussion In spite of a growing season that was cooler and wetter than normal, yields were generally decent and fruit quality (as judged by flavor and percentage of soluble solids) was good for most cultivars. The two plot locations provided different growing environments. Field S-3 with its dark-colored, heavy soil was constantly moist or wet and much weedier. Field I, where black plastic mulch and trickle irrigation was used, produced more vigorous vine growth and earlier harvesting by at least a week (Table 1). Yields were higher too, the trial average for Field I was 2.7 fruit per plant and an average fruit weight of 6.1 lbs., while the trial average for Field S-3 was 2.3 fruit per plant and an average fruit weight of 5.5 lbs. However, relative cultivar performance was similar at both locations and data were combined for Tables 2, 3, and 4. Marketable yield was not significantly different among the top performers. Aphrodite, Athena, and Eclipse were the standard cultivars in this evaluation. Several trial cultivars consistently 67

performed well and compared favorably with the standards including Atlantis, Ariel, Strike, Home Run, and Grand Slam. Generally, fruit from these cultivars had round to oval shapes with well-developed netting and very little or no ribbing. The fruit flesh was usually sweet and flavorful but firm enough to provide some leeway in harvest timing and shelf life. Crescent Moon and Halona produced ribbed fruit and soft, juicy flesh that is desired by some homegrown markets but both had quality problems noted in Table 4. The specialty melons Courier, Galia Max, and Sensation were interesting and produced some high quality, delicious fruit. They seemed to have good disease resistance, no vine wilt or unusual leaf blights were observed, and good yield potential, but were somewhat particular about growing conditions causing fruit cracking. Photographs of trial cultivars are posted on our Web site: http://mirdf.ag.iastate.edu. Table 1. Melon trial averages for Field I and Field S-3, Muscatine Island Research Farm. Location DTH 1 Weight Avg. Fruit (lbs.) Yield (lbs./plant) Fruit/Pla nt Fruit/A Yield (lbs./a) Field I Coarse sand, trickle irrigation, black mulch Field S-3 Dark loamy sand, overhead irrigation 78 6.1 15.9 2.7 7,216 43,116 86 5.5 12.4 2.3 6,224 33,600 1 Days to harvest from transplanting on May 22. Harvest Field I: July 27-August 15; Field S-3: August 9-25. 68

Table 2. Seed source, days to harvest and fruit yield of cultivars, Field I and S-3 combined. Cultivar Seed Source 1 Days to Harvest 2 Fruit/Plant 3 Yield (lbs./plant) 3 Fruit/A Yield(lbs./A ) Goddess ST 63 2.8 15.1 7,517 40,620 Home Run HL 69 2.9 16.8 7,817 44,093 Grand Slam HL 73 2.6 14.8 7,066 40,199 Aphrodite RG 73 2.2 14.5 5,863 38,966 Strike HL 73 2.0 13.0 5412 35,419 Crescent Moon RU 76 2.8 19.6 7,592 52,872 Halona HL 76 3.4 15.0 9,321 41,071 Ariel RG 76 2.1 14.9 5,683 39,447 Atlantis RI 76 2.6 14.6 7,066 39,372 Athena RG 76 2.4 14.4 6,464 38,936 Eclipse SM 79 2.3 13.3 6,164 36,035 Galia Max HL 79 2.3 14.7 6,314 40,455 Sensation HL 79 2.9 14.5 7,817 39,027 Courier HL 79 2.3 12.4 6,164 32,698 Trial Average 2.5 14.8 6,876 39,944 1 Seed Source: HL=Hollar Seeds, RG=Rogers Brand/Syngenta, RI=Rispens Seeds, RU=Rupp Seeds, SM= Seminis Inc, ST=Stokes Seeds. 2 Days to harvest from transplanting on May 22. 3 All well-developed mature fruit, including fruit that were cracked but not rotten (see comments in Table 4). Table 3. Average fruit weights and fruit distribution by weight categories 1. Cultivar Avg. Fruit Weight (lbs.) % Small (3-5 lbs.) % Medium (5-7 lbs.) % Large (7-9 lbs.) % X-Large (>9 lbs.) Goddess 5.4 32 60 6 2 Home Run 5.8 29 63 6 2 Grand Slam 5.7 29 53 18 0 Aphrodite 6.6 15 35 42 8 Strike 6.5 8 54 38 0 Crescent Moon 7.0 0 51 34 15 Halona 4.4 76 22 2 0 Ariel 7.1 9 29 43 19 Atlantis 5.6 37 49 6 8 Athena 6.0 25 38 37 0 Eclipse 5.8 11 62 27 0 Galia Max 6.4 14 46 26 14 Sensation 5.0 37 60 3 0 Courier 5.4 22 65 13 0 1 % determined by number of fruit in each weight category. 69

Table 4. Cultivar percentage soluble solids readings of fruit and harvest observations and comments. Cultivar % Soluble Solids Comments Goddess 8.7 Earliest cultivar in trial by almost a week. Fruit became soft and overripe quickly. Sugar content low in comparison to other cultivars. Home Run 10.9 Smooth oval shape, small tight seed cavity. Grand Slam 10.3 Smooth oval shape, small tight seed cavity. Aphrodite 10.2 Standard recommended cultivar. Early maturity, large fruit size. Previous research has shown that higher plant populations than used in this trial can increase yield and reduce number of extra large fruit. Strike 11.0 Smooth oval shape, very firm fruit with small tight seed cavity. Crescent Moon 9.1 Large ribbed fruit with coarse netting. Soft flesh at maturity with variable sugar content. Some radial cracking at stem scar. Halona 11.2 Small to medium-sized ribbed fruit with sweet, soft flesh. Most fruit developed cracks radiating out from stem scar, needs timely harvest. Ariel 11.0 New, appearance and performance similar to Aphrodite in this trial. Atlantis 11.0 Good uniformity, oval shaped fruit with well-developed netting. Firm flesh with good flavor, decent shelf life and shipping ability. Medium to small-sized fruit may not be desirable for some markets. Athena 10.7 Standard recommended cultivar. Eclipse 11.5 Standard recommended cultivar. Midseason maturity, high yield and quality. Can have concentrated fruit set. Galia Max 10.1 Large fruited galia type with green flesh. Developed large cracks/holes in rind causing fruit rot in both fields. Sensation 12.4 Attractive, unique specialty melon with flavorful white flesh. Sensitive to soil moisture fluctuations. Severe rind cracking on coarse sand, no cracking on heavy soil with uniform moisture. Courier 14.0 Galia type, very sweet green flesh. Rind cracking a problem on coarse sand - cutting fruit from vine before full slip helped. 70

Powdery Mildew Resistant Cantaloupe Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 Margaret T. McGrath, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 George M. Fox, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 Sandra Menasha, Cornell Cooperative Extension-Suffolk County, NY Powdery mildew is a very common disease that can reduce yield (fruit quantity and/or size) and market quality (flavor, color, storability, etc) in melons. Successful control of powdery mildew in melon is critical to ensure leaves remain healthy until fruit mature and obtain high sugar content, which results in good flavor. Races of the powdery mildew pathogen have been differentiated on cantaloupe. Races 1 and 2 have been detected recently on Long Island. Fortunately, most powdery mildew resistant varieties currently marketed have resistance to both races. However, all varieties with resistance to both races do not perform similarly because the sources of genetic resistance, in particular regarding presence of modifier genes, differ among these resistant varieties. Also there is concern that the pathogen will again evolve a new race able to overcome the current resistance genes. This happened recently in Georgia. In spring 2007 there were reports from Georgia of poor control of powdery mildew in Athena, a variety grown widely that has resistance to both races 1 and 2 of the pathogen, which suggested a new race was present. In 2008, a new race (designated S ) was confirmed in Georgia. Since the pathogen is thought to move northwardly during the growing season, there is concern that the new race will be dispersed to New York. Thus there is another reason for evaluating resistant melon varieties: monitoring the pathogen population for appearance of this or another new race. The objective of this study was to evaluate some of the varieties of cantaloupe that were released recently with resistance to powdery mildew. They were compared to Athena, a resistant variety that is grown commonly, and to Superstar, a standard variety lacking genetic resistance. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted at the Long Island Horticultural Research and Extension Center in Riverhead on Haven loam soil. Fertilizer (N-P-K 10-10-10) at 500 lb/a was broadcast and incorporated on May 5. Black plastic mulch and drip tape were laid on May 6. Seeds were sown on May 31 in the greenhouse. Prior to transplanting, pre and post-emergent weed control between the plastic mulch strips was achieved by roto-tilling on May 29 and then applying Strategy (3 pt/a) on May 30 followed by overhead irrigation (about 0.5 in.) on May 31 to activate the herbicide. Seedlings were transplanted into the plastic-covered beds on June 11. Water was provided as needed through drip irrigation lines located beneath the mulch. Additional fertilizer (N-P-K 46-0-0) at 30 lb/a was injected through the drip irrigation system on July 2 and 17. During the season weeds were controlled by hand weeding and by applying Roundup WeatherMax (3%) + Scythe (1%) + Succeed (1%) on June 27 with a hand-held shielded sprayer to soil between plastic mulch strips and Select 2E (8 oz/a) with 1% COC on August 8. Cucumber beetles were managed with Admire 2F applied after transplanting as a soil drench around transplants (0.0007 fl oz/plant) on June 18 and with Asana XL (9.6 oz/a) applied to foliage on June 13, July 30, and August 14. No fungicides were applied specifically for powdery 71

mildew control. The following fungicides were applied preventively for downy mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis) and Phytophthora blight (Phytophthora capsici): Curzate 60 DF (3.2 oz/a) on July 30 and Ranman 400 SC (2.75 fl oz/a) on July 19 and August 14, 23, and 30. Plots were three adjacent rows each with four plants spaced 24 in apart. Rows were spaced 68 in apart. A plant of Multipik summer squash, a susceptible variety, was planted between each plot in each row to separate plots and provide a source of inoculum. A randomized complete block design with four replications was used. Upper and lower surfaces of leaves were assessed for powdery mildew beginning on July 22. Fifty old leaves were selected in each plot on July 22 based on leaf appearance and position in the canopy. On July 29 and August 7 fewer leaves were examined in plots where symptomatic leaves were common. The last assessment was made on August 15 just before the first harvest. More assessments were not made because of the impact on the canopy of harvesting. Powdery mildew colonies (spots) were counted; severity was assessed by visual estimation of percentage leaf area affected when colonies could not be counted accurately because they had coalesced and/or were too numerous. Colony counts were converted to severity values using the conversion factor of 10 colonies/leaf=1%. Average severity for the entire canopy was calculated from the individual leaf assessments. Powdery mildew control was calculated for upper and lower leaf surfaces using average canopy severity values for August 15 relative to the average value for Superstar. Melon fruit were harvested, weighed, and measured when they reached maturity. Harvesting was done on August 15, 19, 22, 25, and 29, and September 3. Fruit characteristics were also evaluated and rated on a scale of 1 to 9 with 1= poor and 9=best. Average monthly high and low temperatures ( o F) were 80/63 June in, 84/67 July in, and 79/63 in August. Rainfall (in.) was 3.88, 3.67, and 3.76 for these months, respectively. Results and Discussion Powdery mildew was first observed on July 15 at a very low level in Superstar, the susceptible variety (three affected leaves out of 200 older leaves examined). Severity increased greatly on this variety. All of the varieties tested suppressed powdery mildew on upper leaf surfaces relative to Superstar (Table 1). Eclipse, the only variety tested with resistance to just race 1, did not suppress powdery mildew on upper leaf surfaces as well as most of the other varieties that all have resistance to both races 1 and 2. Eclipse was no longer suppressing powdery mildew on lower leaf surfaces at the last assessment on August 15. These results indicate that both race 1 and 2 of the pathogen were present, which was confirmed by an adjacent planting of cucurbit differentials. Sarah s Choice did not exhibit the level of suppression expected considering the resistance genes it was bred to contain. Suppression of powdery mildew on lower leaf surfaces based on AUDPC values (a summation measure of disease severity over all assessment dates) was 75% for Sarah s Choice, and 98-100% for the other varieties, which were Pixie, Halona, Wrangler, Athena, Strike, and Hannah s Choice. Similar excellent suppression was achieved with several varieties evaluated in 2007. Wrangler had the greatest yield (Table 1). Fruit weight was lower than expected for all varieties (average less than 5 lb/fruit), except Pixie, which produces personal-sized melons (averaged 2.7 lb/fruit). Superstar had the lowest Brix value and lowest taste rating likely due entirely to powdery mildew not being controlled (Table 2). Strike had the highest taste rating and one of the highest Brix values. Wrangler was rated best in 2007. 72

Acknowledgments Project funded by the Friends of Long Island Horticulture Grant Program. Seed was donated by the companies listed in Table 2. Pesticides were donated by Bayer CropScience, DuPont Crop Protection, ISK Biosciences Corporation, FMC Corporation, Monsanto, and Valent BioSciences Corporation. 73

Table 1. Suppression of powdery mildew and yield for cantaloupe varieties compared on Long Island, NY, in 2008. Varieties are listed based on disease control with best first. Variety Powdery mildew severity (%) z Upper Leaf Surface Lower Leaf Surface Aug. 15 AUDPC Aug. 15 AUDPC Marketable Fruit Number/ Plant Weight/ Plant (lb) Unmarketable Fruit Number/Plant Hannah s Choice 0.00 d y 0.04 c 0.00 c 0.05 c 2.17 b 7.49 ab 0.64 bc Strike 0.00 d 0.05 c 0.00 c 0.04 c 1.31 d 5.90 bc 0.92 abc Athena 0.09 d 0.39 c 0.09 c 0.40 c 1.58 abc 3.77 c 1.17 a Wrangler 0.08 d 0.35 c 0.16 c 0.67 c 2.92 a 9.04 a 0.92 abc Halona 0.14 d 0.57 c 0.15 c 0.61 c 2.03 ab 7.00 ab 1.22 a Pixie 0.57 cd 2.28 c 1.35 bc 5.44 c 2.11 ab 5.64 bc 1.17 a Sarah s Choice 3.57 bc 17.36 b 8.36 b 58.03 b 1.44 bc 5.42 bc 1.06 ab Eclipse 4.93 b 21.38 b 33.50 a 138.07 a 1.50 abc 6.65 ab 0.58 c Superstar (susceptible) 40.44 a 203.02 a 50.30 a 235.98 a 1.47 abc 6.36 bc 1.06 ab P-value (treatment) <0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0015 0.0312 0.0495 z Exact colony counts were made when possible and severity was estimated using the conversion factor of 10 colonies/leaf=1%. Data were transformed from percentages by a square root transformation when needed to obtain normality of variance before analysis of variance was performed. The table has de-transformed means. y Numbers in each column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other according to Fisher s protected LSD (P=0.05). Table 2. Fruit characteristics of cantaloupe varieties compared on Long Island, NY, in 2008. The last entry is the standard, susceptible variety included for comparison. Varieties are listed based on taste with best first. Variety Seed Source y Length (in.) Width (in.) Fruit Quality Assessments z Cavity Color Brix (% sucrose) Taste Rib Net Strike HL 7.40 5.98 7.16 7.49 9.22 6.90 1.56 7.92 Sarah s Choice JS 6.68 5.62 7.38 5.75 7.83 6.56 1.98 6.16 Hannah s Choice OUT 7.13 5.61 6.46 7.69 8.33 6.50 4.64 7.95 Pixie HL 5.71 5.53 6.31 7.14 9.48 6.46 2.21 5.08 Wrangler HL 6.31 5.31 7.01 7.46 8.29 6.33 4.46 7.23 Halona SW 6.22 5.77 7.05 6.66 8.13 5.69 4.59 6.94 Athena SY 5.78 5.44 6.91 6.55 10.05 5.63 2.56 7.48 Eclipse SI 6.47 6.17 5.83 7.67 7.38 5.54 1.85 8.52 Superstar SI 6.65 5.98 5.36 5.17 5.38 4.17 4.09 6.90 z Seed cavity 1-9 rating: 1=large and little flesh, 9=closed. Flesh color 1-9 rating: 1=pale, 9=deep. Ribbing 1-9 rating: 1=none, 9=heavy. Netting 1-9 rating: 1=little, 9=excellent (western shipper). y HL=Hollar, JS=Johnny s, OUT=Outstanding Seeds, SI=Siegers, SY=Syngenta, SW=Seedway. 74

Evaluation of 21 Sweet Onion Cultivars in Southwest Michigan Ron Goldy and Virginia Wendzel, Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center, Benton Harbor, Michigan 49022 Objective Evaluate the performance of 21 sweet onion cultivars planted by direct seeding or transplanting under southwest Michigan growing conditions. Summary Significant differences in yield and quality were found between the 21 onion cultivars evaluated. Total yield ranged from 100 to 385.7 hundredweight per acre. Solid Gold had the highest yield but was not statistically different from Maverick, Western Giant, Centerstone, T-439, Bello Blanco, T-433, T-866, Ovation, Milestone, and Delgado. No entry had super colossal bulbs (>4.5 inches in diameter) and several bulbs had severe neck rot problems with Bello Blanco being the worst. Solid Gold and Western Giant had the lowest pyruvic acid levels at 3.26 micromoles/liter. Joliet had the highest soluble solid levels at 8.20%. Candy had the best acid to sugar ratio at 3.60 to 7.00. Weather conditions did not favor the direct seeded trial and transplants continue to be more consistent in production than direct seeding. Materials and Methods Fertilizer Prior to planting, 0-0-60, 34-0-0, sulfur, magnesium oxide and Cal-fortified were broadcast and incorporated at 200, 60, 20, 150, and 100 pounds per acre, respectively. After planting, the trial was fertilized on May 18 and 25, and June 22 with Nitro Plus 18 (18-0-0-3(Ca) with micronutrients) from Widmer and Associates, and weekly applications of 4-0-8-2 (Ca) from June 5 to August 14. Nitro Plus and 4-0-8-2 (Ca) were applied through the drip system. Nitro Plus supplied approximately 25 pounds per acre of nitrogen and 4-0-8-2 (Ca) supplied 60 pounds of nitrogen per acre. Total nitrogen was approximately 105 pounds per acre. Weed Control Weeds were controlled using hand hoeing and one application of Chateau (1.5 ounces/acre). Planting Transplanted onions were started in a greenhouse in 288-cell trays on February 26, 2009 and planted to the field on May 4 and 5. Direct seeded onions were planted April 15. Both trials were planted in four-row beds, 5.5-foot on center with 12 inches between rows in the bed. In-row spacing was 4 inches between plants providing approximately 95,000 plants per acre. Plots consisted of two rows 10 feet long. The trial was planted and analyzed as a completely randomized design with four replications. Plant Care The trial was drip irrigated as needed. No fungicides or insecticides were applied. 75

Harvest and Data Collection Bulbs were allowed to dry down in the field and harvest began August 19 and ended August 21. Bulbs were pulled, tops removed, and bulbs taken out of the field and allowed to dry before being graded and weighed. Bulbs were graded into super colossal (4.5+ inches in diameter), colossal (4-4.5 inches), jumbo (3-4 inches), medium (2-3 inches), small (1-2 inches) and cull. Pyruvic acid and soluble solid levels were obtained from the better performing lines. Pyruvic Acid and Soluble Solids Two bulbs from each plot were pooled to determine pyruvic acid and soluble solid levels. Acid levels were determined colorimetrically using 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine (2,4-DNPH) and then measuring the color intensity as absorbance on a spectrometer. Soluble solid levels were determined using a refractometer. Results and Discussion In general, 2009, like 2008, was a poor year for onion production. The planting season was similar to 2008 with cool, wet conditions causing planting delays and slow growth and in the case of the direct seeded trial, contributed to such poor stand that the direct seeded trial was abandoned. Between planting and emergence, germinating seedlings were subjected to soil temperatures of 41 F to 58 F with 2.73 inches of rain. Emerging seedlings were observed in all direct seeded plots by May 4, but they soon began to die and did not progress beyond the hook stage. Transplanted onions were not as severely affected but cool temperatures continued through the season and did affect bulb size in the transplanted trial as can be seen by the fact that there were no super colossal and few colossal bulbs (Table 1), and that 2009 total yield was smaller than in 2008 and 2007. Despite poor growing conditions, significant differences were observed in total yield, colossal, jumbo, medium, small, and cull bulbs (Table 1). Solid Gold had the highest total yield at 385.7 hundredweight. However, 10 other cultivars had statistically similar total yield. Solid Gold was also the leader in jumbo bulbs at 219.8 hundredweight and among the leaders in medium bulbs at 130.4 hundredweight. Candy had the highest number of colossal bulbs at 15.5 hundredweight, but performed poorly overall with only 174.6 hundredweight for total yield. Bello Blanco had the highest number of culled bulbs at 264.6 hundredweight (84% of total yield). Cull losses in all cultivars were primarily due to an undetermined neck rot, most likely Botrytis. Five entries ( Centerstone, T-433, Sedona, Copra, and Patterson ) had no culls. High cull losses indicate future trials may benefit from fungicide and bacteriacide applications. Sweet onions are defined as having less than 5 micromoles/liter pyruvic acid. Of the entries measured, Solid Gold and Western Giant had the lowest pyruvic acid level at 3.26, and Delgado had the highest at 6.11 (Table 1). Joliet had the highest sugar level at 8.2%. Of those measured, Candy had the best sugar to acid ratio at 3.60 to 7.00. Candy also had the highest number of colossal bulbs (15.5 hundredweight) but had a low total yield (174.6 hundredweight). This trial is a continuation of the onion trials at the Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center, which has the intent of developing a method of consistent sweet onion production in Michigan. So far, transplants have been more consistent than direct seeded plantings. Future trials will continue to investigate direct seeding as a means of producing sweet onions in Michigan. 76

Table 1. Yield in hundredweight per acre of 21 transplanted onions at the Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center, Benton Harbor, Michigan in 2009. Plant population was approximately 95,000 plants per acre. Variety Color Seed Source Total Yield Colossal Jumbo Medium Small Cull Acid %SS Solid Gold Y RI 385.7 3.9 219.8 130.4 7.7 23.8 3.26 4.70 Maverick Y BE 329.5 4.4 193.5 98.8 12.9 19.9 3.90 6.00 Western Giant Y SK 325.4 3.8 185.9 106.2 14.1 15.5 3.26 4.70 Centerstone Y AT 324.8 0.0 142.8 156.4 25.6 0.0 5.38 7.30 T-439 Y AT 317.5 0.0 185.0 120.4 9.3 2.7 5.02 6.20 Bello Blanco W SK 313.5 0.0 27.2 18.3 3.5 264.6 T-433 Y AT 282.5 4.9 140.5 99.5 37.7 0.0 5.47 6.10 T-866 Y AT 281.6 0.0 184.2 83.7 5.3 7.5 4.38 5.40 Ovation Y SK 273.6 3.9 147.4 104.1 12.2 5.9 4.14 5.85 Milestone Y AT 257.0 0.0 89.5 142.9 17.9 6.7 Delgado Y BE 253.8 0.0 130.7 104.4 11.0 7.7 6.11 6.45 Joliet Y SM 222.7 0.0 106.1 91.3 7.8 17.5 4.88 8.20 Rosita R BE 219.9 3.9 118.8 78.9 8.9 9.5 4.04 6.50 Aruba Y SK 219.4 0.0 118.2 53.4 13.1 34.7 3.30 6.75 Red Fortress R RI 209.8 0.0 79.6 87.22 1.9 41.1 Red Defender R RI 208.3 0.0 67.1 85.7 12.8 42.7 Sedona Y BE 189.5 0.0 21.6 145.5 22.3 0.0 Copra Y BE 179.0 0.0 2.1 126.7 50.2 0.0 Candy Y SM 174.6 15.5 105.3 22.5 3.2 28.1 3.60 7.00 Verrazano Y SM 172.1 0.0 74.1 69.7 10.7 17.6 Patterson Y BE 100.0 0.0 0.0 66.9 33.1 0.0 lsd=0.05 135.3 11.5 118.4 59.2 26.7 51.8 Color: Y=Yellow, W=White, R=Red. Seed Source: RI=Rispens Seeds, BE=Bejo, SK=Sakata, AT=American Takii, SM=Seminis. Colossal=4.0-4.5, Jumbo=3.0-4.0, Medium=2.0-3.0, Small=1.0-2.0. Acid=Pyruvic Acid in micromoles/liter. %SS=Soluble Solids. 77

Micro-rate Application Timings for Weed Control in Onion Great Bend, ND, 2009 James R. Loken and Harlene Hatterman-Valenti North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58108-6050 This paper reports on an experiment that was conducted to evaluate the most effective number of sequential micro-rate applications for early-season, broadleaf weed control in onion (Allium cepa L.). Materials and Methods The soil was a clay loam that was four years removed from a feedlot operation. Onion variety Teton pelleted seed (Seed Source: SVR/SE) was planted at 285,000 seeds/a using a Milton planter on May 20. Plots were 6 feet wide by 20 feet long and arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. At the time of weed cotyledon stage (June 4) herbicides were applied as micro-rates at 1/8 of their lowest labeled rate every seven days, with three, four, and five total applications. Micro-rate herbicide applications were made with a CO 2 pressurized backpack sprayer. A standard application of bromoxynil (0.38 lb ai/a) and oxyfluorfen (0.25 lb ai/a) was applied on July 8 (3-leaf stage) to control broadleaf weeds, and a single reduced rate application (1/4 the lowest labeled rate) of bromoxynil and oxyfluorfen was made on August 3 (7-leaf stage) as a final late-season broadleaf weed control measure. Best management practices were used for fertility, disease, insect, and grass weed control. Treatments were visually evaluated for overall control of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) after all micro-rate treatments were completed on July 8. On September 30, 5 feet of the middle two rows of each plot were harvested for grade and yield analysis. Split and diseased bulbs were graded as culls regardless of diameter. Table 1. Herbicide application dates, crop stage, and environmental conditions at Great Bend, ND, 2009. Application Date: 6-4 6-9 6-17 6-24 6-30 7-8 8-3 Onion Stage: Loop Flag-loop 1-2 lf 2 lf 2-3 lf 3 lf 7 lf Air Temp. ( F): 61 57 65 73 63 75 70 Wind speed (MPH): 7 3.5 4 1 7 0 5 Operating pressure: 40 psi 40 psi 40 psi 40 psi 40 psi 40 psi 40 psi Nozzle type: Flat fan Flat fan Flat fan Flat fan Flat fan Flat fan Flat fan Nozzle size: 8002 8002 8002 8002 8002 8002 8002 Volume (GPA): 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Results and Discussion Visual ratings indicated common lambsquarters control with herbicides was greatest with bromoxynil applied four or five times and oxyfluorfen applied five times (Table 2). None of the herbicide treatments provided control of common lambsquarters as great as the hand weeded check. Redroot pigweed control was sufficient across all herbicides and all application timings due to the late emergence, cool temperatures, and poor weed growth during the entire season. Oxyfluorfen applied five times provided control as great as the hand weeded check. There were 78

no yield differences (regardless of grade) within herbicides across application timings, indicating the importance of seasonlong weed control. Cool summer temperatures were unfavorable for crop growth, but favored continuous flushes of common lambsquarters, further reducing yields. 79

Table 2. Effect of three, four, or five micro-rate herbicide applications on weed control and yield in onion at Great Bend, ND. Treatment Visual Evaluations Yield Herbicide App 1 Rate (herb + MSO) Colq 2 Rrpw 3 Medium 4 Large 5 Total product/a % control cwt/a Bromoxynil 3 2 oz + 0.5% v/v 13.8 86.3 39.6 6.3 68.4 Bromoxynil 4 2 oz + 0.5% v/v 66.3 86.3 132.5 102.6 290.8 Bromoxynil 5 2 oz + 0.5% v/v 73.8 91.3 192.7 88.2 341.2 Oxyflourfen 6 3 1 oz + 0.5% v/v 33.8 91.3 113.4 85.5 245.8 Oxyflourfen 4 1 oz + 0.5% v/v 40.0 90.0 161.2 61.2 271.9 Oxyflourfen 5 1 oz + 0.5% v/v 57.5 96.3 179.2 90.0 312.4 Hand weeded check -- -- 100.0 100.0 172.0 90.0 314.2 Weedy check -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 LSD -- -- 21 5.6 126.7 NS 183.8 1 Application 2 Common lambsquarters 3 Redroot pigweed 4 Medium grade is 2.25-3 inches 5 Large grade is > 3 inches 6 Oxyfluorfen water-based formulation 80

2009 DSAC Pepper Variety Trial J.D. Kindhart and Bronwyn Aly, Senior Research Specialists Department of Crop Sciences Dixon Springs Agricultural Center University of Illinois, Simpson, IL Elizabeth Wahle, Extension Specialist Edwardsville Extension Center University of Illinois, Edwardsville, IL A pepper cultivar trial was established and evaluated at the Dixon Springs Ag Center in Pope County, Illinois. The plots were established from transplants set on May 19, 2009. The plots were grown in twin rows at 12-inch spacing on raised beds at 5.5-foot spacing with black plastic mulch and trickle irrigation. Fertility and pest management followed recommendations from the Midwest Vegetable Production Guide for Commercial Growers 2009. They were harvested four times from July 23 to September 10. Each variety was replicated three times. The 2009 growing season was exceptionally wet and cooler than normal. More than 10 inches of rainfall was recorded at DSAC for the month of July alone. Even with the cooler and wetter weather conditions, the pepper varieties seemed to do reasonably well, although maturity was later than we would have anticipated in a year with normal weather conditions. Losses from phytophthora were small and plot size was not adjusted for plant losses. Table 1 shows yield data. The varieties are listed in descending order of U.S. No. 1 yield. We wish to thank the seed companies for their contributions in this trial. 81

Table 1. Results of 2009 Pepper Cultivar Trial at DSAC. Cultivar Source Color/ Type Early (Bu/Acre) U.S. No. 1 Total (Bu/Acre) Bu/Acre U.S. No.2 Culls (No./ Acre) Avg Fruit Size US No. 1 Karisma RI Red 360 1,560 540 22,500 7.3 oz El Jefe SI Jalapeno 300 1,500 0 3,000 1.0 oz LaFayette SI Yellow 300 1,440 720 9,000 7.7 oz Polaris SI Red 300 1,440 480 13,500 7.4 oz Declaration SW Red 300 1,380 780 21,000 7.2 oz Telestar SI Red 60 1,380 720 16,500 7.1 oz Alliance RI Red 360 1,320 840 16,500 7.3 oz Gloria SW Yellow 180 1,200 600 13,500 6.9 oz PS9928302 RI Red 300 1,200 540 18,000 7.5 oz Sirius SI Yellow 60 1,200 360 28,500 7.2 oz Intruder RG Red 300 1,140 900 16,500 6.9 oz Red Knight X3R RI Red 360 1,080 840 31,500 7.0 oz Heritage SW Red 240 1,080 780 16,500 7.2 oz Aristotle X3R RI Red 180 1,080 660 28,500 7.4 oz Tom Cat RG Red 180 1,080 600 30,000 7.3 oz Don Emilio SI Pablano 180 1,080 0 7,500 3.2 oz Patriot SW Red 300 1,020 900 25,500 7.0 oz Hunter RG Red 180 960 960 19,500 6.9 oz Valencia SI Orange 0 600 780 64,500 6.1 oz Queen SI Orange 0 480 1,020 49,500 5.6 oz 82

Bell Pepper Evaluation for Resistance to Phytophthora Blight (Phytophthora capsici) M. Babadoost, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801 Phytophthora blight, caused by Phytophthora capsici, has become one of the important diseases of peppers in Illinois, as well as worldwide. Yield losses up to 100% occur in commercial fields and home gardens. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reactions of selected bell pepper cultivars to P. capsici in the field in Illinois. Materials and Methods Ten bell pepper cultivars Alliance, Aristotle XR3, California Wonder, Declaration, Intruder, Paladin, Polaris, Revolution, Snapper, and 9941819 SVR (Table 1) were tested for resistance to Phytophthora blight. Seedlings were grown in a greenhouse. Seven-week-old seedlings were kept outside the greenhouse for nine days, and then transplanted in a commercial field near Bradley (Kankakee County), Illinois, on May 30. The field was naturally infested with P. capsici. The soil was a silt clay loam with ph 6.5. The soil was deeply tilled in October 2008 after the corn crop was harvested and was disked on May 24, 2009. Raised beds with drip irrigation and black plastic mulch were prepared on May 29, 2009. The experiment was performed in a completely randomized block design with four replications. Seedlings (10/plot) were planted in one straight row with plants spaced 12 inches apart within rows centered 6 feet apart. Weeds were controlled by hand weeding. Plants received 0.3 inch water every week, or as needed, through the drip. Recorded precipitation in the area was 0 days (0.00 inches) during May 30-31, 12 days (3.92 inches) in June, nine days (2.51 inches) in July, 10 days (3.10 inches) in August, and 0 days (0.00 inches) during September 1-13. Average monthly high and low temperatures ( F) were 80/44, 79/58, 76/57, 77/56, and 76/53, during May 30-31, June, July, August, and September 1-13, respectively. The percentage of plants wilted or dead was determined on June 12, 18, and 25; July 2, 9, 16, 23, and 30; August 7, 14, 21, and 28; and September 4 and 11. Due to mechanical damage, most of the plants were lost in one of the blocks, thus the data from only three blocks were included in the data analysis. The data were analyzed using the LSD test. Results and Discussion Phytophthora lesions were observed on the crowns and at the base of stems beginning 14 days after transplanting the seedlings. Symptomatic plants gradually wilted and died. Significantly higher percentages of plants of cultivar California Wonder, a susceptible pepper to P. capsici, were lost during the season (Table 1). In cultivars Alliance, Paladin, Revolution, and 9941819 SVR, less than 85% of the plants were asymptomatic at the end of the season. The percentage of asymptomatic plants of cultivars Paladin and 9941819 SVR (96.67%) was the highest at the end of the season. Due to the cooler than normal conditions in 2009, the incidence of Phytophthora blight was relatively lower than in the past. The average number of marketable fruit per plant ranged from 6.03 (Snapper) to 12.44 (9941819 SVR) (Table 1). Similarly, the weight of marketable fruit per plant ranged from 2.14 pounds (Alliance) to 5.06 pounds (9941819 SVR). 83

Table 1. Reaction of bell pepper cultivars to Phytophthora capsici in the field in Illinois in 2009. Cultivar Seed Source v May June 30 y 18 Plant Stand (%) w, z July 9 July 31 August 21 September 11 Number Total Fruit Yield/Plant x, z Weight (lb) Marketable Number Weight (lb) Alliance HM 100 93.33 93.33 93.33 93.33 a 93.33 a 10.83 abc 2.83 d 7.20 cd 2.14 d Aristotle XR3 SM 100 86.67 83.33 83.33 80.00 ab 80.00 abc 11.76 abc 4.08 bc 8.53 bcd 3.43 bc California Wonder ST 100 86.67 86.67 83.33 70.00 b 66.67 c 12.71 ab 4.76 ab 10.46 ab 4.28 ab Declaration HM 100 90.00 90.00 90.00 80.00 ab 80.00 abc 12.62 ab 4.88 ab 9.13 bc 3.85 bc Intruder SW 100 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 a 86.67 ab 10.38 abc 3.80 bcd 8.38 bcd 3.39 bc Paladin SY/RG 100 100.00 100.00 100.00 96.67 a 96.67 a 11.50 abc 3.85 bcd 8.77 bc 3.29 bcd Polaris WN 100 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 a 83.33 abc 9.10 bc 3.78 bcd 7.25 cd 3.39 bc Revolution HM 100 90.00 86.67 86.67 86.67 ab 86.67 ab 11.92 abc 4.07 bc 8.17 bcd 2.98 cd Snapper EZ 100 86.67 86.67 80.00 80.00 ab 73.33 bc 8.57 c 3.30 cd 6.03 d 2.83 cd 9941819 SVR SM 100 96.67 96.67 96.67 96.67 a 96.67 a 13.39 a 5.28 a 12.44 a 5.06 a LSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS 19.67 19.17 3.79 1.11 2.68 1.16 v HM=Harris Moran, SM=Seminis, ST=Stokes, SW=Seedway, SY/RG=Syngenta, Rogers Brands, WN=Western, EZ=Enza Zaden. w Symptomless plants. x Fruit yield was harvested only twice (August 14 and September 13) during the season. y Seedlings were transplanted on May 30. z Values within each column followed with the same letter are not significantly different (P=0.05) from each other according to Fisher s protected LSD test. 84

2009 Green Pepper Cultivar Evaluation Bob Precheur, Rick Callendar, Herminio Perez, and Jose Reyes Dept. of Horticulture and Crop Science, OSU Columbus, Manager and Staff, Muck Crops Branch. Celeryville, OH In Cooperation with Wiers Farms Inc., Willard, OH Summary of Results Eight varieties were transplanted on May 26, 2009, at a grower s location in Celeryville, OH. The experiment was conducted as a randomized complete block design with four replications. Plots were double rows, 25 feet long. Eight plants from the middle were harvested to determine yield and quality. The harvest dates were: August 12and 24; September 8 and 21; and October 6, 2009. The top performing varieties (boxes per acre of extra large and large fruit) for total harvest, were 9841819, Pluto, Karisma, Declaration, and Aristotle, which were significantly better in yield than Revolution and Hunter (see Table 1). Varieties producing in excess of 600 bushel/a of extra large and large fruit were 9841819 and Pluto. There was no significant difference in yield among the top five varieties but in practical terms, yield ranged from 643 boxes/a (9841819) to 545 boxes/a (Aristotle) see Table 1. Table 2 shows the percentage of marketable fruit in the large size categories compared to all marketable fruit. Percent marketable large represents the number of extra large and large fruit compared to all fruit harvested for all harvests. Percent marketable represents every size category that can be sold from extra large down to the select category. 9841819 and Pluto were the only varieties with 50% or more of its fruit in the larger size categories. For percent marketable, there was no significant difference among varieties except for Hunter, which had significantly lower percent marketable fruit than 9841819 and Pluto. 85

2009 Green Pepper Results Table 1. Total yield in all size categories in bushels or boxes/acre. ID # Variety Extra Large 1 Large XL+L & (Rank ) 2 Medium Small Select Total 2 9841819 352 291 644 (1) a 189 65 78 977 6 Pluto 277 338 616 (2) a 180 53 44 893 4 Declaration 269 284 554 (4) a 252 148 62 1,015 3 Karisma 241 342 583 (3) a 249 94 100 1,027 5 Aristotle 210 335 545 (5) a 226 73 120 964 8 Intruder 194 342 535 (6) ab 272 131 87 1,026 1 Revolution 170 211 381 (7) b 200 109 54 745 7 Hunter 91 288 379 (8) b 192 157 122 851 LSD 0.05% 104 113 159 97 66 59 283 1 The extra large category includes jumbo and extra large fruit sizes. 2 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different. (Rank)=highest yield to lowest of extra large plus large boxes per acre. Table 2. Percent marketable large and percent marketable yield (extra large + large + medium + small + select) ID # Variety % Marketable Large 1 ID # Variety % Marketable 2 6 Pluto 62 a 3 6 Pluto 92 a 2 9841819 59 ab 2 9841819 90 ab 5 Aristotle 49 abc 4 Declaration 88 abc 3 Karisma 48 bc 1 Revolution 87 abc 4 Declaration 45 c 8 Intruder 86 abc 8 Intruder 44 c 5 Aristotle 84 abc 1 Revolution 36 c 3 Karisma 83 bc 7 Hunter 36 c 7 Hunter 81 c LSD 0.05% 13 7 1 % Marketable Large=the number of extra large + large fruit divided by the number of extra large + large + medium + small + select + cull fruit times 100. 2 % Marketable=the number of extra large + large + medium + small fruit divided by the number of extra large + large + medium + small + select + cull fruit times 100. 3 Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different. 86

Pumpkin Variety Performance With and Without Treatment for Powdery Mildew in Northern Indiana, 2009 Elizabeth T. Maynard, Purdue University, Westville, IN 46391 Introduction Pumpkins for decorative use are grown on more than 4,000 acres in Indiana. Combined acreage in Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio represents about a quarter of pumpkins grown for decorative use in the United States. Successful pumpkin production requires the use of cultivars that yield well and produce pumpkins of the size, shape, color, and quality demanded by the market. Genetic resistance to the fungal disease powdery mildew is present in some varieties. This trial was designed to evaluate performance of pumpkin varieties in northern Indiana with and without treatment for powdery mildew. The trial included eight jack-o-lantern size pumpkins, one small or pie pumpkin, and three mini-pumpkins. Also reported are yield and fruit characteristics for 17 additional varieties grown in unreplicated plots. Materials and Methods Trials were conducted at the Pinney-Purdue Agricultural Center in Wanatah, Indiana. In a replicated trial treatments were arranged in a split-plot design with powdery mildew treatment (yes or no) as the main plot, and variety as the subplot. Treatments were replicated three times in blocks. Subplots were 36 feet long by 21 feet wide. Main plots were 84 feet wide and included three tiers of four subplots, separated by 15-foot alleys. On either side of the replicated trial, seventeen varieties were planted in single plots as an observation trial. They were managed similarly to the replicated trial, with all plots receiving fungicide applications for powdery mildew. The soil was a Tracy sandy loam. The Fall 2008 soil test showed 1.2% organic matter, ph 6.4, 25 ppm phosphorus (P), 93 ppm potassium (K), 165 ppm magnesium (Mg), and 600 ppm calcium (Ca). Prior to planting wheat as a cover crop in fall 2008, we applied 20, 30, and 45 lb./a N, P 2 O 5 and K 2 O, plus 7.8 lb./a S and 0.8 lb./a Zn. In spring 2009, wheat was killed with glyphosate in early May and incorporated. Fertilizer (375 lb./a 6-24-24) was broadcast to provide 22.5 lb. N, 90 lb. P 2 O 5 and 90 lb. K 2 O per acre. An additional 57.5 lb. N per acre was sidedressed as UAN on June 30. Pumpkins were planted on June 5 using a modified John Deere Maximerge 7000 planter and dropping seeds by hand into the seed tube. Each pumpkin cultivar was planted in six subplots 36 feet long and 21 feet wide with two rows spaced 7 feet 4 inches apart. Weeds were controlled with the preemergence herbicide Strategy (ethalfluralin+clomazone) applied at 4 pt./a on June 5, and by cultivation, hoeing, and hand weeding. Overhead irrigation was applied during the season as needed. Pumpkins were thinned to achieve the desired stand of 24 plants per plot (1,383 plants/a). The insecticide Arctic 3.2 EC was applied at 4 oz./a on July 10 and July 17 for squash vine borer. Main plots assigned to receive treatment for powdery mildew were treated with Nova 40W at 4 oz./a and Bravo Ultrex at 1.4 lb./a. on July 23, and August 7 and 21, and with Pristine at 18.5 oz./a on July 31, August 14 and 31. All plots were protected against downy mildew with applications of Ranman at 2.1 oz./a on August 21, and Previcur Flex at 1.2 pt./a on August 14 and 31. 87

Downy mildew on pumpkins was not observed on the experimental farm during the growing season. Powdery mildew severity was evaluated on September 5-7 by: (1) estimating percent leaf surface covered with powdery mildew on upper and lower surfaces of two young, two middle-aged, and two old leaves per plot; (2) estimating percent of petiole covered with powdery mildew on those leaves; and (3) rating overall health of vines in the plot. Severity on leaves and petioles was recorded using the Horsfall-Barratt scale, and the overall health of vines was rated on a scale from 9 (no powdery mildew) to 1 (extremely severe powdery mildew). Plant vigor was also rated using a scale of 9 (extremely vigorous) to 1 (very low vigor). Pumpkins were harvested September 10-14. For mini-pumpkins, all fruit were harvested from six plants in each plot; for other varieties the entire plot was harvested. Harvested fruit were graded into marketable orange (rind at least one-half orange), marketable green (full size and starting to turn but less than onehalf orange), and cull. Number and weight of pumpkins in each group were recorded and used to calculate average fruit size and percent of total yield in each category. On September 14, harvested pumpkins were evaluated for color, shape, suture depth, uniformity, overall quality, and peduncle length, width, and health. Pumpkins were left in the field and on September 24, peduncle health was rated for five orange pumpkins per plot, using a scale of 5 (solid throughout length) to 1 (collapsed and disintegrating over half the length). On September 24 and 25, individual weight, height, and diameter were recorded for five pumpkins of a typical size, one small, and one large pumpkin in two replications of the plots treated for powdery mildew (data not shown). For the replicated trial analyses of variance were used to test for main effects and interactions when appropriate, followed by mean separation using Fisher s protected least significant difference. Yield and yield components were analyzed separately for jack-o-lanterns, minipumpkins, and the pie pumpkin. Disease ratings, vine vigor, and peduncle health ratings were analyzed for all varieties combined. Horsfall-Barratt ratings were converted to percentages. The average of, and the difference between percentages on upper and lower leaf surfaces were calculated; plot means for those and for petiole ratings were used in analysis. Peduncle and fruit quality ratings did not meet assumptions for analysis of variance, so treatment means and standard errors are presented. Results and Discussion The growing season was drier and cooler than normal. Indiana Crop and Weather Reports from USDA NASS reported 1,774 growing degree days (GDD) from June 9 through September 13, 188 fewer than normal. Rainfall during that period total 11.0 inches, 1.8 inches below normal. Plants were smaller than usual in trials conducted at this location. Powdery Mildew Severity, Vine Vigor, and Peduncle Health Powdery mildew leaf coverage in early September averaged 30% in plots that received fungicide treatments and 73% in plots that did not (Table 1); the difference was statistically significant. Varieties differed in resistance to powdery mildew, but significant differences were detectable only between varieties near the top and bottom of the range. In treated plots, Mustang had the lowest amount of powdery mildew at 15%, but did not have significantly less than RPX 1626, Gold Challenger, Gold Dust, Gold Medal, Gold Speck, or Munchkin. In untreated plots, Spartan had the most powdery mildew at 86%, but differed significantly only from Diablo, HSR 4721 (since named Corvette PMR), RPX 1626, and Munchkin. 88

Plots treated for powdery mildew showed a bigger difference between powdery mildew coverage on lower and upper leaf surfaces (lower-upper = 48) than plots not treated for powdery mildew (lower-upper = 21) (Table 1). Better fungicide coverage on upper leaf surfaces than lower leaf surfaces probably explains the larger difference in treated plots. Varieties that showed little or no difference in the amount of powdery mildew on lower and upper leaf surfaces when not sprayed for powdery mildew included Mustang, HSR 4721, Spartan, Solid Gold, and Gold Medal. In plots sprayed for powdery mildew, Mustang showed the least difference between lower and upper leaf surfaces, but not significantly different from HSR 4721, Gold Dust, or Gold Challenger. Powdery mildew coverage of petioles was heavier in untreated plots (58%) than treated plots (25%) (Table 1). In untreated plots, Mustang had less powdery mildew on petioles than all other varieties, followed by HSR 4721, Diablo, and RPX 1626. In treated plots, Mustang had 3% coverage on petioles, but not significantly less than RPX 1626, Spartan, or Diablo. The overall ratings for powdery mildew reflected the effectiveness of treatment, averaging 6.9 in treated plots and 3.6 in untreated plots (Table 1). In treated plots, ratings were similar for all varieties. In untreated plots, Gold Speck and HSR 4721 received the highest ratings (least powdery mildew), but were not significantly better than Gold Dust. These evaluations of powdery mildew susceptibility do not paint a clear picture. The single evaluation date late in the season was not sufficient to clearly identify varieties with strong resistance. Vine vigor was rated slightly lower in untreated plots (4.7) than treated plots (4.9) (Table 1). Varieties that ranked highest for vine vigor included Gold Medal and 168 (since named Goosebumps II) in treated plots, and RPX 1626 and Gold Medal in untreated plots. Peduncle health evaluated 2.5 weeks after harvest averaged lower in untreated plots (3.8 on a 1 to 5 scale) than treated plots (4.5) (Table 1). Varieties that showed a difference of at least 1 rating point between treated and untreated plots, indicating that treatment for powdery mildew had an important effect on peduncle health and therefore fruit quality, were Diablo, Gold Challenger, and Solid Gold. Varieties that showed a difference less than or equal to 0.5 rating point between treated and untreated plots included 168, HSR 4721, Mustang, RPX 1626, and Spartan. Varieties that received ratings above the average included Gold Medal, HSR 4721, and RPX 1626 (in both untreated and treated plots), Gold Challenger (in treated plots only) and 168 (in untreated plots only). Varieties with both high peduncle health ratings and little difference between treated and untreated plots were HSR 4721 and RPX 1626. Yield, Number of Fruit, and Fruit Size Treatment for powdery mildew did not significantly affect jack-o-lantern yield, fruit number, or average fruit weight (Table 2). Treated plots averaged 11.0 tons and 1,606 marketable orange fruit per acre averaging 13.8 lb. each. Untreated plots averaged 10.6 tons and 1,520 pumpkins per acre, with an average weight of 14.0 lb. Yield of orange plus green pumpkins also did not differ between treated and untreated plots. Varieties differed somewhat in their response to treatment for powdery mildew (interactions between powdery mildew treatment and cultivar were significant at P<.15), but in most cases the difference between treated and untreated plots was not significant (comparisons not shown). 89

The jack-o-lantern pumpkins ranged in size from 19 lb. (Gold Medal) to 11.5 lb. (RPX 1626), averaged across powdery mildew treatments. Gold Medal and Mustang produced the highest yield in tons per acre of orange pumpkins whether treated or untreated for powdery mildew, averaging 13.9 and 13.6, respectively. These were followed by the varieties HSR 4721, Spartan, and Diablo, which produced similar tons per acre whether treated or untreated for powdery mildew. Solid Gold and Gold Challenger produced the lowest average yields (8.8 and 7.4, respectively), similar to one another whether treated or untreated. RPX 1626 yielded similar to HSR 4721, Spartan, and Diablo when untreated, and similar to Gold Challenger when treated for powdery mildew. HSR 4721 and Mustang produced the greatest number of orange fruit per acre, 1,983 and 1,863, respectively, averaged across powdery mildew treatments. Spartan, RPX 1626, Diablo, and Gold Medal did not differ significantly in number of orange fruit produced when averaged across powdery mildew treatments. Gold Challenger and Solid Gold produced the fewest orange fruit per acre, 1,258 and 1,219, respectively, although Gold Challenger was not significantly less productive than Gold Medal or Diablo. Yield of all orange and green fruit in tons and numbers of fruit per acre followed a pattern similar to that for orange fruit. For the mini-pumpkin varieties yield in tons and number per acre were nearly 25% greater in treated than untreated plots (3.6 vs. 2.9 tons per acre and 15,852 vs. 11,806 fruit per acre); the differences were marginally significant at P<.10. Average weight of mini pumpkins was about 10% greater in untreated plots than treated plots (0.50 lb. vs. 0.45 lb.). The three mini-pumpkins did not differ in yield or fruit number per acre. Averaged across powdery mildew treatments, Gold Dust was the largest (0.56 lb.), Munchkin in middle (0.47 lb.), and Gold Speck the smallest (0.4 lb.). The single variety classed as a pie type, 168 (Goose Bumps II), had similar yields in treated and untreated plots, but average fruit weight was 0.4 lb. greater in treated plots (6.1 vs. 5.7 lb.). These results are similar to those of the 2008 trial at this location, when yield and fruit size of the September harvest were not influenced by powdery mildew treatment. In 2008, there was a larger effect on fruit harvested in October. In this trial only one harvest was made, and after that there was little fruit remaining for a later harvest due to the cool growing season. Fruit Characteristics Observations on fruit shape, color, peduncle (stem) length and width, fruit uniformity, and overall fruit appearance are shown in Table 3. In most instances, numerical ratings did not differ significantly in plots treated or not treated for powdery mildew, so averages across treatments are presented. Jack-o-lantern varieties rated most uniform were Diablo and HSR 4721. Jack-olantern varieties that received ratings for overall fruit appearance of 6.5 or above included Diablo, HSR 4721, and Spartan. Observation Trial Fruit characteristics, yield, and average fruit size for the unreplicated trial are presented in Tables 3 and 4. Yield of jack-o-lanterns in the unreplicated plots was 11.6 tons and 1,594 orange fruit per acre similar to the average of the replicated plots treated with fungicide. Five experimental lines from Harris Moran ranged in average fruit weight from 14.6 to 19.8 lb. Rock Star (16.9 lb.) and Warlock (16.4 lb.) were similar in size and produced similar yield of orange 90

fruit (12.2 and 11.8 tons per acre, respectively). Expert averaged 14.1 lb. and 9.7 tons per acre. Magic Lantern, Magic Wand, and New Rocket ranged from 11.4 to 12.4 lb. average fruit weight, and 10.2 to 12.1 tons per acre. Magic Lantern and Magic Wand, along with HMX 8694 were notable because all fruit harvested was more than half orange there we no mature pumpkins on the vine that had begun to turn but were still more than half green. Charisma PMR was the smallest of the jack-o-lantern pumpkins, at 9.6 lb., and produced 8.3 tons per acre of orange fruit. Lil Orangemon is a mini-pumpkin. This squat, deeply-ribbed fruit was dappled cream and orange, averaged 1.3 lb. per fruit, and produced 13,137 fruit and 8.8 tons per acre. Three pie pumpkins included Field Trip, Gargoyle, and SSX 5078. Field Trip produced squat, 3-4 lb. fruit with long stems. Gargoyle produced round, 3-4 lb. fruit with a few warts. SSX 5078 produced round, 5-5.5 lb. fruit; about 20% of the fruit were less than half orange at the time of harvest. One specialty pumpkin was included: Flat White Boer Ford. This is the species Cucurbita maxima. As the name suggests, the fruit is very squat and whitish, averaging 11.7 lb., but with some as small as 2.2 lb. and others as large as 20.2 lb. or more. Typical fruit are 11 inches across and 4.5 inches tall. The vines were very vigorous. This variety shows promise as a decorative squash. Summary Fungicide treatments for powdery mildew significantly reduced the amount of disease present on leaves and petioles near harvest time in early September. Varieties differed in the amount of disease, but the single evaluation date late in the season was not sufficient to clearly identify varieties with superior resistance. Statistically significant differences in jack-o-lantern yield, fruit number, or average fruit size due to fungicide treatment for powdery mildew were not found. There is good indication that for some varieties fungicide treatment improved peduncle quality, but for others it did not. The results presented here provide yield and descriptive information for pumpkin varieties, including several that are recently introduced, older varieties, and experimental lines. Combined with results from trials in other locations and years this information should help producers choose cultivars most suitable for their operations. Acknowledgments J. Leuck and Pinney-Purdue Ag Center staff managed field operations. P. Begley, A. Dishman, R. Hernandez, B. Rhoda, R. Shay, J. Sheets, J. Smiddy, and Morgan H.S. Horticulture Class assisted with fieldwork. Seed companies listed in Tables 2 and 4 provided financial support and/or seed. 91

Table 1. Powdery mildew severity on leaves and petioles, overall powdery mildew rating, vine vigor, and peduncle health for pumpkin varieties grown with (Yes) and without (No) fungicide treatment to protect from powdery mildew, Wanatah, Indiana 2009 z. Variety Average of Lower and Upper Leaf Surfaces Percent Powdery Mildew Coverage y Difference Between Lower and Upper Leaf Surfaces Petiole Overall Powdery Mildew Rating x Vine Vigor Rating x Peduncle Health w No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes 168 73 abcd 37 fg 22 hij 65 a 70 a 31 cdef 2.7 fg 7.3 a 5.7 bcd 6.3 abc 4.1 ± 0.13 4.3 ± 0.18 Diablo 70 bcd 34 fg 28 fghi 63 ab 44 bc 16 fgh 3.7 ef 7.0 a 4.0 efg 4.0 efg 3.5 ± 0.18 4.5 ± 0.24 Gold Challenger 81 ab 25 gh 21 hij 43 cdefg 73 a 24 efg 2.0 g 6.7 ab 4.3 defg 4.0 efg 3.7 ± 0.18 4.8 ± 0.00 Gold Dust 74 abcd 26 gh 28 fghi 41 cdefg 74 a 26 defg 5.0 cd 6.7 ab 4.3 defg 4.0 efg Gold Medal 76 abc 30 gh 13# ij 54 abcd 68 a 41 bcd 2.7 fg 7.0 a 7.0 ab 7.7 a 4.0 ± 0.31 4.7 ± 0.18 Gold Speck 72 abcd 27 gh 35 efgh 44 bcdef 71 a 35 bcde 5.3 bc 7.3 a 3.7 fg 4.7 def HSR 4721 69 bcd 33 fg 9# j 36 defg 30 cdef 19 fg 5.3 bc 7.0 a 4.3 defg 4.7 def 4.1 ± 0.07 4.6 ± 0.12 Munchkin 59 de 30 gh 53 e 52 abcde 66 a 36 bcde 4.0 de 7.0 a 3.7 fg 4.3 efg Mustang 76 abc 15 h 8# j 24 g 13 gh 3 h 3.7 ef 6.5 ab 4.3 defg 5.0 cde 3.5 ± 0.07 4.0 ± 0.12 RPX 1626 61 cde 23 gh 15 ij 45 bcdef 48 b 12 gh 3.7 ef 7.3 a 7.3 a 5.0 cde 4.7 ± 0.07 4.8 ± 0.20 Solid Gold 79 ab 46 df 13# ij 49 abcde 69 a 42 bc 2.7 fg 6.3 abc 4.3 defg 5.0 cde 2.7 ± 0.35 4.5 ± 0.07 Spartan 86 a 36 fg 10# ij 58 abc 66 a 15 gh 2.7 fg 6.7 ab 3.3 g 4.0 efg 3.5 ± 0.24 4.0 ± 0.46 Average 73** 30 21 48 58** 25 3.6** 6.9 4.7* 4.9 3.8 4.5 z Values are means of three replications., *, and ** indicate significant difference between mean of treated and untreated plots at P.10,.05 and.01, respectively. Means within a column followed by the same letter do not differ significantly at P.05 according to Fisher s protected LSD. # indicates difference between lower and upper leaf surfaces not significantly different from 0. y Percentage of leaf surface or petiole covered with powdery mildew on September 5-7 based on two young, two middle-aged, and two old leaves per plot. Field observations recorded using Horsfall-Barratt scale were transformed to percentages using midpoints of the scale before analysis. x Overall powdery mildew severity and vine vigor in each plot rated September 5-7 on a scale of 1-9, with 1=extremely severe powdery mildew and 9=no powdery mildew, and 1=very low vigor and 9=extremely high vigor. w Average peduncle health rating for five orange fruit per plot on September 24 using a 1 to 5 scale, with 5=peduncle solid throughout length; 4=peduncle pliable up to a third of its length; 3=peduncle pliable for more than than half its length, but not shriveled; 2=peduncle pliable and shriveled for most of its length; 1=peduncle collapsed and disintegrating over most of length. Mean ± standard error. No ratings made for mini-pumpkins. 92

Table 2. Average fruit weight, number of fruit, and yield of pumpkin varieties grown with (Yes) and without (No) fungicide treatment to protect from powdery mildew, Wanatah, Indiana 2009 z. Variety Seed Source y Stand Plants/A Marketable Orange Fruit x Marketable Orange and Green Fruit x No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes Lb./frt. No./A Tons/A No./A Tons/A Jack-o-lanterns Diablo (5061) SK 1,373 13.2 15.0 1,460 1,498 9.7 11.2 1,498 1,498 9.9 11.2 Gold Challenger RU 1,344 12.2 11.6 1,114 1,402 6.8 8.1 1,133 1,402 6.9 8.1 Gold Medal RU 1,383 19.0 18.9 1,440 1,498 13.7 14.1 1,440 1,537 13.7 14.4 HSR 4721 HL 1,383 11.9 12.0 1,921 2,036 11.4 12.2 2,017 2,074 11.9 12.3 Mustang (4710) SI 1,383 14.5 14.6 1,825 1,901 13.2 13.9 1,825 1,921 13.2 14.0 RPX 1626 RU 1,373 12.7 10.3 1,786 1,440 11.4 7.5 1,844 1,517 11.8 8.1 Solid Gold RU 1,268 15.1 14.2 999 1,440 7.4 10.2 1,018 1,479 7.6 10.6 Spartan SW 1,383 13.7 13.5 1,613 1,633 11.1 10.9 1,613 1,633 11.1 10.9 Average 1,361 14.0 13.8 1,520 1,606 10.6 11.0 1,549 1,633 10.7 11.2 LSD.05 w 1.7 315 2.2 309 2.2 Mini Pumpkins Gold Dust RU 1,383 0.62 0.50 11,908 16,364 3.7 4.1 Gold Speck RU 1,364 0.40 0.40 13,214 14,213 2.6 2.9 Munchkin RU 1,258 0.49 0.45 10,295 16,978 2.5 3.8 (no green fruit) Average 1,306 0.50* 0.45 11,806 15,852 2.9 3.6 LSD.05 w 0.04 ns ns Pie Pumpkins (Warted) 168 SI 1,364 5.7* 6.1 2,785 2,343 8.0 7.1 2,785 2,458 8.0 7.5 z Values are means of three replications. and * indicate significant difference between mean of treated and untreated plots at P.10 and.05, respectively. Per acre values calculated by multiplying plot values by number of plots per acre. y HL=Hollar, RU=Rupp, SI=Siegers, SK=Sakata, SW=Seedway. x Marketable orange fruit includes all firm fruit at least one-half orange. Marketable orange and green includes all firm fruit of mature size and starting to turn orange by September 14. w Within a size grouping (jack-o-lantern or mini), variety means within a column differing by more than this amount are significantly different at P.05 according to Fisher s protected LSD. ns=not significant. 93

Table 3. Fruit characteristics of pumpkins grown in Wanatah, Indiana 2009 z. Peduncle y Variety Color y Shape y Sutures y Length Width Uniform y Overall y Replicated Trial Jack-o-lanterns Diablo (5061) M-D R M-D 5.3±0.2 6.3±0.2 7.5±0.2 7.5±0.3 Gold Challenger M R-O M 4.7±0.3 6.5±0.2 5.7±0.5 5.2±0.7 Gold Medal M-D V M-D 4.7±0.2 7.2±0.2 3.7±0.2 6.2±0.3 HSR 4721 L R-O S 5.0±0.0 6.2±0.3 7.3±0.2 6.7±0.3 Mustang (4710) M-L O S 4.7±0.2 5.2±0.3 6.3±0.2 5.5±0.3 RPX 1626 L-M R-O S-M 4.5±0.2 5.7±0.2 5.0±0.4 4.8±0.2 Solid Gold M R-O S 5.5±0.2 6.0±0.3 6.0±0.4 5.3±0.7 Spartan M-D R-O M 3.3±0.2 4.7±0.2 6.7±0.2 6.7±0.3 Replicated Trial Mini and Pie Pumpkins Gold Dust M S D 6.7±0.3 3.0±0.0 7.7±0.3 6.0±0.0 Gold Speck M S D 7.3±0.3 3.0±0.0 8.0±0.0 6.0±0.0 Munchkin M S D 4.8±0.3 3.0±0.0 8.0±0.0 6.0±0.0 168 D S-R S 7.0±0.3 4.0±0.0 6.7±0.2 7.0±0.0 Observation Trial Jack-o-lanterns Charisma PMR D S-R D 5 4 7 8 Expert D O D 5 5 6 8 HMX 8693 D O M 6 4 7 7 HMX 8694 D O-T M-D 5 5 7 8 HMX 8695 D R-O M 4 6 5 6 HMX 9680 D R-O S 4 7 5 5 HMX 9699 D R-O S 4 7 4 5 Magic Lantern D R-O M 5 5 5 6 Magic Wand M O M-D 5 7 6 7 New Rocket D R-O M 5 5 8 8 Rock Star D S D 4 6 7 8 Warlock D R-O S 4 7 6 6 Observation Trial Mini, Pie, and Specialty Pumpkins Lil Orangemon MT S D 8 3 7 8 Field Trip M S M 7 5 7 8 Gargoyle M R S 5 7 8 7 SSX 5078 M R S 5 4 8 7 Flat White Boer Ford white very S M 5 4 6 7 z Observations of harvested fruit made on September 14 for six plots of each cultivar in replicated trial and on September 18 for one plot of each cultivar in observation trial. y Fruit color: D=dark, M=medium, L=light orange, MT=multi-colored. Shape: S=squat, R=round, O=oblong, V=variable. Sutures: S=shallow, M=medium, D=deep. Peduncle length and width, fruit uniformity, and overall fruit quality rated on a 1-9 scale, with 2=short/thin/ peduncle, non-uniform, poor quality; 5=average; 8=extra long/extra thick/dark green solid peduncle, very uniform, high quality. 94

Table 4. Average fruit weight, number of fruit, and yield of pumpkin varieties grown in unreplicated plots in Wanatah, Indiana 2009 z. Variety Seed Source z Stand Marketable Orange Fruit y Orange and Marketable Green Fruit y Plants/ A Lb./frt. No./A Tons/A No./A Tons/A Jack-o-lanterns Charisma PMR JS 1,383 9.6 1,729 8.3 2,017 10.5 Expert JS 1,383 14.1 1,383 9.7 1,786 13.4 HMX 8693 HM 1,268 15.8 1,786 14.1 1,844 14.9 HMX 8694 HM 749 14.6 1,037 7.6 1,037 7.6 HMX 8695 HM 1,383 17.0 1,556 13.3 1,613 14.2 HMX 9680 HM 1,037 19.8 1,383 13.7 1,613 17.5 HMX 9699 HM 1,268 18.4 1,613 14.9 1,844 17.8 Magic Lantern HM 1,383 12.4 1,959 12.1 1,959 12.1 Magic Wand HM 1,383 11.4 1,786 10.2 1,786 10.2 New Rocket JS 1,383 11.8 2,017 11.9 2,190 13.4 Rock Star JS 1,383 16.9 1,440 12.2 1,901 18.0 Warlock HM 1,383 16.4 1,440 11.8 1,556 13.3 Average 1,282 14.9 1,594 11.6 1,762 13.6 Mini Pumpkin Lil Orangemon HM 1,383 1.3 13,137 8.8 13,137 8.8 Pie Pumpkins Field Trip HM 1,383 3.8 4,379 8.4 4,379 8.4 Gargoyle HM 1,383 3.5 3,803 6.6 3,860 6.6 SSX 5078 SK 1,383 5.2 3,630 9.4 4,552 13.3 Average 1,383 4.2 3,937 8.1 4,264 9.4 Specialty Pumpkin Flat White Boer Ford SK 1,383 11.7 2,478 14.5 2,478 14.5 z HM=Harris Moran, JS=Johnny s Selected Seeds, SK=Sakata. y Marketable orange fruit includes all firm fruit at least one-half orange. Marketable orange and green includes all firm fruit of mature size and starting to turn orange by September 14. Per acre values calculated by multiplying plot values by number of plots per acre. 95

Powdery Mildew Resistant Pumpkin Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 Margaret T. McGrath, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 George M. Fox, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 Sandra Menasha, Cornell Cooperative Extension-Suffolk County, NY Resistance to powdery mildew in pumpkin and squash is conferred by one main major gene and several modifier genes. Past evaluations have revealed variation in degree of powdery mildew suppression among varieties that was due mostly to the number of copies of the major gene, with mildew being less severe on those varieties having resistance from both parents compared to those with one copy. There was also additional variation likely due to modifier genes. Pumpkin varieties with a putative new major gene started to be released in 2008. In this study, seven Halloween-type pumpkin varieties with resistance from one parent (PMR), including two varieties with a putative new resistance gene from Hollar Seeds, and six varieties with resistance genes from both parents (PMRR) were evaluated for their ability to resist powdery mildew relative to two standard pumpkin varieties without known genes for resistance: Gold Speck and Sorcerer. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted at the Long Island Horticultural Research and Extension Center in Riverhead on Haven loam soil. Fertilizer (N-P-K 10-10-10) at 500 lb/a was broadcast and incorporated on May 5. Black plastic mulch and drip tape were laid on May 7. Seeds were sown on May 28 in the greenhouse. Seedlings were transplanted into black plastic mulch on June 10. Water was provided as needed through drip irrigation lines located beneath the mulch. Additional fertilizer (N-P-K 46-0-0) at 30 lb/a was injected through the drip irrigation system on July 2 and 17. During the season, weeds were controlled between the rows of black plastic mulch by seeding white clover for a living mulch on May 13 after roto-tilling to prepare a seed bed and manage weeds that had already germinated. During the season, weeds were managed by mowing, hand weeding, and applying Select 2E (8 oz/a) with 1% COC on August 8. Cucumber beetles were managed with Admire 2F applied after transplanting as a soil drench around transplants (0.0007 fl oz/plant) on June 24 and with Asana XL (9.6 oz/a) applied to foliage on June 13, July 30, and August 14. No fungicides were applied specifically for powdery mildew. The following fungicides were applied preventively for downy mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis) and Phytophthora blight (Phytophthora capsici): Curzate 60 DF (3.2 oz/a) on July 30 and Ranman 400 SC (2.75 fl oz/a) on July 19 and 14, and August 23 and 30. Plots were three adjacent rows each with four plants spaced 36 inches apart. Rows were spaced 68 inches apart. A plant of Multipik summer squash, a susceptible cultivar, was planted between each plot in each row to separate plots and provide a source of inoculum. A randomized complete block design with four replications was used. Upper and lower leaf surfaces were assessed for powdery mildew on July 16 and 31, and on August 8, 15, and 26. Initially, 20-50 older leaves were examined in each plot, with the quantity adjusted based on the incidence of symptomatic leaves. Mid-aged and young leaves were also 96

assessed when powdery mildew had progressed to these age groups. Powdery mildew colonies (spots) were counted; severity was estimated when colonies had coalesced or were too numerous to count. Colony counts were converted to severity values using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. Average severity for the entire canopy was calculated from the individual leaf assessments. These canopy severity values were used to calculate area under disease progress curves (AUDPC) to obtain a measure of severity over the entire assessment period. Pumpkin fruit were harvested and weighed on September 24. Unmarketable fruit were counted. Average monthly high and low temperatures ( F) were 80/63 in June, 84/67 in July, 79/63 in August, 75/61 in September, and 63/47 in October. Rainfall (in.) was 3.88, 3.67, 3.76, 8.34, and 3.18 for these months, respectively. Results and Discussion Symptoms of powdery mildew were first seen on July 16 at a very low level in plots of susceptible varieties. Plants did not grow well apparently as a result of inadequate water and fertilizer due to problems with the drip irrigation. Varieties with PMRR did not perform consistently better than those with PMR (Table 1). The degree of disease suppression with resistant pumpkins was not as high as with resistant melon varieties, which also was the case in previous experiments. Suppression, calculated as the percentage amount a resistant variety s powdery mildew severity rating was below the rating for Sorcerer, numerically ranged from 2-49% on upper leaf surfaces and 10-57% on lower surfaces based on the August 26 assessment values and 3-69% and 27-74%, respectively, based on AUDPC values. The smallest differences, those below about 20%, were not significant differences. Thus, based on these assessment values, some varieties were not providing effective suppression of powdery mildew. Based on all assessment values of powdery mildew severity on upper leaf surfaces, neither Midas Touch nor Gargoyle were providing suppression; for at least two values there also was no detectable suppression with Magic Lantern, Superior, Magic Wand, and the three experimental varieties. However, all resistant varieties were suppressing powdery mildew on lower leaf surfaces based on AUDPC values. This is an important finding because powdery mildew is much easier to control on upper leaf surfaces with both conventional and organic fungicides. Midas Touch exhibited the least resistance (27% suppression on lower leaf surfaces). Gold Speck, a minifruited variety with no known genes for resistance, was substantially less severely affected by powdery mildew than Sorcerer (61% and 65% suppression on upper and lower leaf surfaces, respectively). Powdery mildew was never significantly less severe on Gold Dust, a similar variety with PMR (69% and 74% suppression). This confirms previous observations that minifruited varieties are naturally less susceptible to powdery mildew. Wee-B-Little, another minifruited variety without resistance, performed well in previous evaluations. Camaro, a variety that reportedly has a new gene for resistance, did not differ significantly from Gold Dust. An experimental with this gene, HSR 4710, did not perform as well, providing no suppression of powdery mildew on upper leaf surfaces while Camaro provided 44% suppression. Degree of suppression on lower surfaces was 53% and 65%, respectively. The varieties tested listed in order of powdery mildew severity on August 26 were: Gold Dust (PMR), Gold Speck (PMS), Camaro (PMR), Gladiator (PMRR), Warlock (PMRR), OS 8615 (PMRR), Gargoyle (PMRR), Treasure (PMR), HSR 4710 (PMR), Magic Wand (PMRR), Superior (PMRR), Magic Lantern (PMR), OS 6866 (PMRR), Midas Touch (PMR), and Sorcerer (PMS). 97

Pumpkin Variety Fruit Descriptions and Assessments Sorcerer Small to medium size, dark to medium orange coloration, moderately deep sutures, medium thick stem. Mostly round to oblong. Overall appearance rating of 7.5 out of 9. Camaro Light orange coloration and medium thick stems. Moderate to large in size with slightly deep sutures. Mostly oblong to round. Overall appearance rating of 7. HSR 4710 Light to medium orange coloration and somewhat blotchy; coloration not uniform. OK stem. Small to moderately large in size. Mostly oblong with shallow sutures. Overall appearance rating of 6. Gladiator Dark orange, mostly round fruit with a medium thick stem and moderately shallow to moderately deep sutures. Small to medium in size and mostly uniform. Overall appearance rating of 7.5. Warlock Dark orange, mostly oblong, medium size fruit. Medium to thick stem and shallow sutures. Warts on outside of fruit. Uniform, good color all around. Overall appearance rating of 6.5. Gargoyle Small, round by round fruit. Medium thick stem and deep sutures at stem end. Medium to dark orange in color. Very uniform size and shape. Overall appearance rating of 7. Magic Lantern Small to medium fruit was mostly oblong to round. Medium to dark orange coloration. Moderately shallow sutures. Thin to moderately thick stem. Range in size and shape. Overall appearance rating of 7. Superior Light to medium orange coloration. Thick stems. Mostly oblong fruit but some round. Many, moderately deep sutures. Medium in size. Overall appearance rating of 7. OS 8615 Small to medium fruit. Light to medium orange. Thin to moderately thick stem. Mostly roundoblong. Some have many moderately deep sutures, few moderately shallow sutures. Overall appearance rating of 7. OS 6866 Small in size with a medium to dark orange coloration. Many, moderately shallow sutures. Thin to medium thick stems. Mostly round in shape. Fairly uniform. Overall appearance rating of 7. Magic Wand Very uniform, medium sized fruit. Dark orange coloration and moderately deep sutures. Medium thick to thick stems. Mostly round by round. Some fruit with warts. Overall appearance rating of 7.5. 98

Midas Touch Medium to large fruit with a medium to dark orange coloration. Mostly oblong in shape but some round. Medium thick stems and moderately shallow sutures. Variable size and shape. Overall appearance rating of 7.5. Treasure Very small, round by round fruit. Coloration medium to dark orange. Thin stem and moderately shallow sutures. Variable in size. Overall appearance rating of 6.5. Gold Speck Extremely small, round by slightly flattened fruit with a medium orange coloration. Thin stems and deep sutures. Very uniform in size and shape. Overall appearance rating of 8. Gold Dust Extremely small, round by slightly flattened fruit with a medium orange coloration. Thin stems and deep sutures. Very uniform in size and shape. Overall appearance rating of 8. Acknowledgments Project funded by the Friends of Long Island Horticulture Grant Program. Seed was donated by companies listed in Table 1. Pesticides were donated by Bayer CropScience, DuPont Crop Protection, ISK Biosciences Corporation, FMC Corporation, Monsanto, and Valent BioSciences Corporation. 99

Table 1. Control of powdery mildew and yield for Halloween-type pumpkin varieties compared on Long Island, NY, 2008. The last two entries are the standard pumpkin varieties without resistance included for comparison. Resistant varieties are listed in order of their ability to suppress powdery mildew based on combined AUDPC values. Variety (resistance) y Seed Powdery Mildew Severity (%) z Upper Leaf Surface Lower Leaf Surface Source x Aug. 15 Aug. 26 AUDPC Aug 15. Aug. 26 AUDPC #/plant lb/fruit Oct. 1 Oct. 14 Oct. 1 Oct. 14 Marketable Fruit Good Handles v Rotten Fruit (%) (%) Gold Dust (PMR) RU 1.7 d w 40.8 e 179.7 f 2.6 b 37.1 g 205.7 f 3.22 b w 0.5 g 98.8 f 98.3 d 2.5 3.9 bc Camaro (PMR) HL 7.5 abcd 52.8 de 321.8 def 6.6 b 46.6 fg 278.1 ef 0.72 efg 13.0 a 67.6 de 5.0 a 0 0 c Gladiator (PMRR) HM 4.8 bcd 53.1 de 327.2 def 4.0 b 54.7 cdefg 301.8 def 0.87 def 7.0 ef 26.4 abc 4.5 a 1.9 1.9 c Warlock (PMRR) HM 3.5 bcd 62.8 abcd 353.2 de 3.6 b 54.0 defg 324.0 def 0.79 defg 9.1 cde 42.4 bc 19.7 ab 0 0 c Treasure (PMR) OUT 3.7 bcd 61.9 abcd 340.7 de 6.3 b 63.1 abcdefg 393.4 bcdef 1.48 c 1.5 g 100.0 f 95.3 d 0 0 c OS 8615 (PMRR) OUT 12.1 abc 66.8 abcd 423.1 bcd 6.7 b 51.0 efg 348.4 def 1.15 cd 7.1 def 79.4 ef 51.0 c 0 0 c HSR 4710 (PMR) HL 9.2 abcd 71.0 abc 458.9 abcd 8.1 b 57.5 bcdefg 376.8 cdef 0.65 fg 11.7 ab 23.8 ab 8.3 ab 0 3.6 c OS 6866 (PMRR) OUT 9.5 abcd 74.9 abc 433.3 bcd 7.0 b 77.8 ab 419.4 bcde 1.07 cde 5.7 f 26.1 abc 0.0 a 0 2.4 c Magic Wand (PMRR) HM 6.4 abcd 66.7 abcd 410.4 cd 10.6 ab 63.9 abcdef 443.3 bcde 0.72 efg 9.7 bcd 44.6 bcd 20.2 ab 0 7.4 abc Gargoyle (PMRR) HM 12.1 ab 69.0 abcd 493.1 abc 13.9 ab 53.1 defg 484.3 bcd 1.36 c 2.9 g 97.9 f 91.9 d 4.7 12.8 a Superior (PMRR) OUT 9.9 abcd 60.8 cd 440.5 abcd 13.8 ab 73.3 abcde 550.3 bc 0.69 fg 11.4 abc 46.1 bcd 18.6 ab 0 0 c Magic Lantern (PMR) HM 7.1 abcd 72.9 abc 445.7 abcd 13.5 ab 75.6 abcd 551.8 bc 0.93 def 7.5 def 16.5 a 3.3 a 1.6 4.7 abc Midas Touch (PMR) SI 17.3 a 78.9 ab 555.2 ab 19.9 ab 77.4 abc 581.2 b 0.69 fg 11.4 abc 48.4 cd 31.0 bc 0 0 c Gold Speck (PMS) RU 2.5 cd 39.4 e 222.8 ef 2.6 b 56.1 bcdefg 279.9 ef 5.54 a 0.4 g 98.7 f 99.0 d 0.4 3.4 c Sorcerer (PMS) HM 16.9 a 80.4 a 574.5 a 34.2 a 86.5 a 796.4 a 0.52 g 6.8 ef 10.0 a 0.0 a 2.4 11.9 ab P-value <.0001 0.0004 <.0001 0.0003 0.0100 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.4333 0.0555 z Exact colony counts were made when possible and severity was estimated using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. Data were transformed from percentages by a square root transformation when needed to obtain normality of variance before analysis of variance was performed. The table has detransformed means. y Varieties listed based on the sum of AUDPC values for both leaf surfaces. PMR=resistance from one parent, PMRR=resistance genes from both parents, and PMS=susceptible to powdery mildew. x HL=Hollar, HM+Harris Moran, OUT=Outstanding Seeds, RU=Rupps, SI=Siegers. w Means followed by the same letter are not statistically different from each other (Fisher s Protected LSD, P=0.05). v Handles were considered good if they were solid and not rotting, whether green or brown. 100

Pumpkin Cultivar Evaluation in Ohio, 2009 Bob Precheur, Jim Jasinski, Mac Riedel, and Landon Rhodes Department of Horticulture and Crop Science, Southwest Extension IPM; Department of Plant Pathology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 Introduction Pumpkins are the third largest fresh market vegetable in Ohio with nearly 7,000 acres in production. Pumpkins account for 10% to 40% of annual gross income for some vegetable producers. It is important for our producers to use cultivars that consistently produce high yields of quality fruit. Of equal importance is to incorporate new cultivars into the program that provide good disease tolerance in order to reduce pesticide input and production costs while maintaining high quality. This project was supported in part by a research grant from the Ohio Vegetable and Small Fruit Research and Development Program. Methods Thirty-two cultivars (21 medium and large size, eight small and novelty types, and three minipumpkins) were evaluated at the OARDC Western branch in South Charleston, OH. Prior to planting, 100 lbs/a of actual N, P 2 O 5 and K 2 O was applied. All plots were transplanted the first week of June 2009. All transplants were germinated in 5 x 3.5 cm Elle pots 10 days prior to transplanting. Admire, for cucumber beetle and bacterial wilt control, was applied to the seedlings two days prior to transplanting. Plots were 30 feet long with 15 feet between rows and 3 feet between plants in the row. Strategy was applied for weed control pre-planting. The experiment was conducted as a randomized complete block design with four replications. Trickle irrigation was available for all plots and was used as necessary from mid- to late July through August to provide 1 inch of water per week. A standard disease control program included the fungicides: Bravo + Procure on July 25, August 8 and 24, and September 6; and Quintec + Manex on August 1, 14, and 31, and September 16. A boom sprayer with cone nozzles at 40 psi was used for fungicide application. A standard insect control program included Sevin XLR on August 14 and September 6 to control beetle feeding on fruit. Fruit were harvested September 17 and 18. Results Cultivars are listed in Table 1 ranked according to average fruit size and tons produced per acre. The top five varieties in terms of average fruit size were: Phatso Jr (30 lb/fruit), Mustang PMR (27 lb/fruit), Phatso II (26 lb /fruit), Gold Medal (26 lb/fruit), and Solid Gold (25 lb/fruit). Thirteen of the 21 varieties tested had an average fruit size of 20 lbs per fruit or greater. Yield for the largest five varieties ranged from 20 ton/acre for Phatso II, to 15 ton/a for Solid Gold. Only Super Herc, Gladiator, Magic Wand, RPX 1626, and ACX 7302 had yields lower than 15 tons per acre. Phatso Jr and Phatso II are attractive, large pumpkins with good skin color and thick handles. HMX 8695 is a nice large upright round 24-pound pumpkin with good dark color and a strong handle. It appears to be a larger Warlock type. HMX 8693 and 94 are slightly smaller at 18 pounds each. Mustang PMR is an improved Camaro type with better color than Camaro. Freddie is round to slightly upright with nice ribbing and large, 23-pound fruit. Moonshine is an 101

attractive and productive white variety producing 6-7 tons/a with an average fruit size of 6-7 pounds. Flat White Boar Ford is a large, white, flying saucer-shaped pumpkin weighing about 12 pounds. The shape and color is something different for your pumpkin display. Powdery mildew tolerance was evaluated near the end of the season on September 9. The addition of Quintec to the fungicide spray program was highly effective in controlling powdery mildew on both the top and lower leaf surface. Powdery mildew was virtually nonexistent in the plots and most leaf ratings were zero to less than 3%. Therefore, powdery mildew cultivar resistance could not be determined this season. In the future, an unsprayed section of each plot will be used for disease rating. Downy mildew was not observed on any varieties. Microdochium (White Speck) was observed at low levels in September. Symptoms of virus infection on the leaves and the fruit were very minor this season compared to other years. Individual pictures of each variety plus comparison views among varieties are available at the VegNet Web site: http://vegnet.osu.edu. Table 1. 2009 pumpkin cultivar evaluation, South Charleston, OH. ID # Variety Marketable Orange Fruit/A Marketable Orange Tons/A Average Fruit Size (lbs) % Marketable Diameter (in) Source 1 Phatso Jr 1,234 19 30.6 68 16.0 SI 5 Mustang PMR 1,210 16 27.2 52 12.3 HL 2 Phatso II 1,476 20 26.7 78 13.0 SI 12 Gold Medal 1,306 17 26.3 74 12.6 RU 13 Solid Gold 1,185 15 25.0 78 13.3 RU 18 HMX 8695 1,258 15 24.0 74 13.3 HM 4 Diablo (SSX 5160) 1,476 17 23.0 86 13.8 SK 17 Warlock 1,137 13 23.0 70 12.3 HM 3 Freddie 1,331 15 23.0 79 12.5 NZ 11 Gold Challenger 1,379 15 22.0 84 11.5 RU 21 Super Herc 895 10 21.0 72 12.0 HM 8 ACX 7301 1,573 16 20.0 69 12.0 AC 20 Gladiator 1,234 12 20.0 69 11.1 HM 15 HMX 8693 1,766 16 18.0 75 12.3 HM 19 Magic Lantern 2,081 17 17.0 78 11.0 HM 14 Magic Wand 1,476 13 18.0 76 13.0 HM 16 HMX 8694 1,645 15 18.0 75 11.2 HM 6 HSR 4721 1,669 15 17.0 57 11.0 HL 9 ACX 6501 2,057 18 17.0 83 11.3 AC 10 RPX 1626 1,621 13 16.0 74 11.0 RU 7 ACX 7302 1,815 14 14.0 77 11.2 AC LSD 0.05% 559 6.8 3.3 17 0.7 102

Table 2. 2009 small and novelty pumpkin cultivar evaluation, South Charleston, OH. ID # Variety Marketable Orange Fruit/A Marketable Orange Tons/A Average Fruit Size (lbs) % Marketable Diameter (in) Source 25 Lil Orangemon 18,004 13.5 1.5 100 5.5 HM 26 Gargoyle 3,944 9.5 4.6 91 6.3 HM 27 HMX 8696 5,711 11.1 3.9 78 6.6 HM 28 Field Trip 5,614 15.0 5.3 97 10.3 HM 29 Cannon Ball 4,283 11.3 5.3 88 7.4 HM 30 Magician 1,185 9.2 16.5 52 11.7 HM 31 Moonshine 2,057 7.0 6.7 99 8.9 NZ 32 Flat White Boar Ford 2,637 15.0 11.7 91 13.46 SK LSD 0.05% 1,472 5.7 1.5 10.5 - Table 3. 2009 mini-pumpkin cultivar evaluation, South Charleston, OH. ID # Variety Marketable Orange Fruit/A Marketable Orange Tons/A Average Fruit Size (lbs) % Marketable Diameter (in) Source 22 Munchkin 19,796 4.1 0.41 100 3.3 RU 23 Gold Speck 19,602 3.6 0.36 100 3.6 RU 24 Gold Dust 18,973 5.2 0.54 100 3.7 RU LSD 0.05% 2,663 0.4 0.03 - - 103

Pumpkin Cultivar Evaluations for West Virginia, 2009 Lewis W. Jett, State Extension Vegetable Specialist West Virginia University, 2102 Agriculture Sciences Building, Morgantown, WV 26506 Introduction Pumpkins (Cucurbita sp. L.) are a very popular food and ornamental crop in West Virginia. One of the most significant diseases infecting pumpkins is powdery mildew. The objective of this study was to evaluate several recently released pumpkin cultivars with varying levels of powdery mildew tolerance. Materials and Methods Nineteen pumpkin cultivars were evaluated at the WVU Jackson s Mill Education Center near Jane Lew, WV. Prior to planting, 50 lbs of actual N/acre, and 100 lbs of P 2 O 5 and K 2 O were broadcast and disked into the planting site. All cultivars were direct seeded on June 16, 2009. No herbicides were applied, and cultivation and hand weeding were used to control weeds prior to canopy closure. Each plot was 25 feet long with 8 feet between rows and 4 feet between plants, resulting in approximately 1,361 plants/acre. An additional 50 lbs of actual N/acre was applied as a side-dress four weeks after seeding. Standard pest management practices were employed, although no fungicides were used to control powdery mildew in order to evaluate cultivar resistance/tolerance to this disease. The experimental design was a randomized complete block design with three replications per cultivar. Marketable fruit were harvested on September 28. Powdery mildew resistance was evaluated by observing colonization of the fruit stem (peduncle) at harvest. Results Average fruit size ranged from 15-28 lbs with Magic Lantern, Tom Fox, Sorcerer, and Magician producing a medium-sized fruit; and Jack-o-lantern and Super Herc, Aladdin, Mustang, and Camaro producing a large pumpkin (Table 1). Camaro had excellent disease tolerance but did not have a dark orange color and produced many green pumpkins suggesting it may require a longer growing season than provided in this evaluation (Table 2). Mustang had excellent yield, size, and disease resistance. The fruit color of Mustang was an acceptable medium orange, but was not a dark orange observed with cultivars such as Super Herc and Aladdin. Gold Medal does not have any purported resistance to powdery mildew, but had excellent yield and quality. Gold Medal had a dark orange color with excellent fruit stems. Compared with Howden, Gold Medal had significantly less powdery mildew infection. A&C 510 had significantly higher yields than many cultivars but had poor resistance to powdery mildew and lower quality characteristics. Warlock produced a dark orange, large pumpkin with a slightly rough surface. Warlock also exhibited good resistance to powdery mildew. Crystal Star produced a uniform white pumpkin; however, the fruit stem could have been larger. Full Moon tended to produce a non-uniform pumpkin with an off-white color. Full Moon must have wider in-row spacing than was used in this study to produce its full size potential. Wolf is a large pumpkin with an extremely thick fruit stem. The stem of the fruit seems to be too large and was difficult to harvest (Table 2). 104

Table 1. Total marketable yield and fruit per acre for selected pumpkin cultivars in West Virginia, 2009. Variety Seed Source Average Fruit Size (lbs) Total Marketable Yield/Acre (Tons) Marketable Orange Fruit/Acre Aladdin SW 25.9 21.4 1,701 A&C 510 RU 20.3 25.2 2,495 Camaro SW 26.0 17.7 1,361 Crystal Star (white) RU 15.5 15.8 2,042 Full Moon (white) RU 23.1 7.8 681 Gladiator SW 18.9 16.8 1,815 Gold Gem RU 20.7 24.9 1,946 Gold Medal RU 24.0 28.4 2,382 Gold Rush RU 23.4 24.6 2,041 Howden SW 18.5 20.5 2,212 Magic Lantern SW 16.5 13.0 1,565 Magician SW 14.8 21.9 2,949 Mustang SW 28.7 30.8 2,155 Solid Gold RU 24.2 17.8 1,474 Sorcerer RU 15.4 16.7 2,155 Super Herc. SW 26.0 19.9 1,531 Tom Fox JS 15.4 15.9 2,042 Warlock SW 19.9 15.2 1,531 Wolf SW 20.8 21.9 1,362 Mean 21.3 13.2 1,384 Standard Error 0.7 1.2 117 105

Table 2. Color, stem, and powdery mildew ratings of pumpkin cultivars evaluated in West Virginia, 2009. Variety Color z Stem Rating y Powdery Mildew Tolerance x Aladdin 4.7 3.9 4.4 A&C 510 3.2 3.2 2.7 Camaro 3.5 4.5 5.0 Crystal Star (white) 4.7 3.0 3.0 Full Moon (white) 2.0 2.0 n/a Gladiator 4.5 4.1 4.0 Gold Gem 4.8 3.7 2.8 Gold Medal 4.4 4.4 3.5 Gold Rush 4.0 3.3 3.0 Howden 4.5 3.8 2.3 Magic Lantern 4.8 4.8 4.4 Magician 4.9 4.4 3.6 Mustang 4.3 4.2 5.0 Solid Gold 4.4 4.0 3.3 Sorcerer 4.7 4.3 4.2 Super Herc. 5.0 5.0 4.4 Tom Fox 4.8 3.8 2.5 Warlock 4.5 4.0 4.7 Wolf 3.0 1.0 2.0 Mean 4.3 3.8 3.5 Standard Error 0.1 0.2 0.2 z Color rating: 1=light orange, 3=medium orange, 5=dark orange. y Stem rating: 1=weak, 5= strong, thick, dark green. x Powdery mildew rating: 1=no resistance, 5=high resistance. 106

Yield of 12 Zucchini and Three Yellow Squash Selections in Southwest Michigan Ron Goldy and Virginia Wendzel Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center, Benton Harbor, Michigan 49022 Objective To evaluate the commercial potential of 12 zucchini and three yellow squash selections under southwest Michigan growing conditions. Summary Statistical differences were noted between the 12 zucchini entries but not the three yellow squash. Paycheck had highest total yield at 1,928 half-bushels per acre, however, Reward, RSQ6144, Bonus, Leopard, and Payroll zucchini were statistically similar. Paycheck and Reward were also among the leaders in yield of small, medium, and large fruit. The two yellow zucchini, Golden Delight and Golden Glory, were lowest in total yield which is not unusual for yellow zucchini. The three yellow squash were similar in total yield and yield of small, medium, and large fruit. Materials and Methods Fertilizer Prior to planting 33-0-0, 0-0-60, Cal-fortified (calcium plus micronutrients), sulfur, and Solubor were broadcast and incorporated at 120, 330, 100, 28 and 13 pounds/acre, respectively. After planting, fertilizer was applied through the drip system as 4-0-8-2 (2% Ca) at the rate of 1 pound nitrogen/acre/day beginning June 12 ending August 7. Fumigation/Weed Control Beds were fumigated with 300 pounds/acre 67/33% Methyl Bromide/Chloropicrin at shaping and plastic laying on May 12. Between-row weeds were controlled by cultivating and hoeing. Planting All entries were direct seeded on May 29 and reseeded if needed on June 9. Beds were 6 inches high and spaced 5.5 feet on center with in row spacing of 1.5 feet, providing 5,280 plants/acre. The trial was planted and analyzed as a completely randomized design with four replications and eight plants/replication. Two guard plants bordered each plot. Plant Care Plots were irrigated as needed and disease and insect pests controlled using recommended cultural practices. Harvest and Data Collection Harvest was conducted 14 times between July 13 and August 14 and fruit graded into small, medium, large, and culls. Results and Discussion Significant differences were noted for all traits measured in the zucchini trial (Table 1). However, this was not the case for the yellow squash trial (Table 2). Paycheck zucchini had the 107

highest total yield at 1,928 half-bushels per acre (Table 1), but it was not statistically different than five other entries. Paycheck was also among the leaders in yield in all categories and the leader in medium (653 half-bushels) and cull fruit (62 half-bushels). Reward had the highest yield of small fruit (1,045 half-bushels) and was among the leaders in total, medium, and large fruit yield. Bonus had the highest yield of large fruit (346 half-bushels) and was one of the leaders in total and cull yield. Paycheck fruit is not as long as some of the other zucchini in the trial. This results in a fruit diameter increase but not an increase in length as the fruit matures. Therefore, Paycheck needs to be harvested on a regular basis to keep fruit in the proper length to diameter ratio. This may have been an interaction with the cool weather experienced in 2009, but other entries had longer, thinner fruit. The two yellow zucchini entries, Golden Delight and Golden Glory, had the lowest yield but similar total yields at 910 and 908 half-bushels per acre, respectively. Lower yield for yellow zucchini compared to green zucchini is not unusual. Golden Glory had 83% of its yield as small fruit whereas Golden Delight had its fruit size divided more between small (60%) and medium (36%). The three yellow squashes trialed were statistically similar in their performance in all categories measured (Table 2). Total yield ranged from 708 (ACX7002Y) to 879 (ACX7001Y) half-bushels per acre, but the difference was not significant. All three entries were straight neck types. Cool weather experienced in southwest Michigan contributed to generally smaller fruit size in 2009. It also helped with plant survivability and diminished virus incidence. Several entries were tolerant to virus but symptoms were not observed on even susceptible cultivars such as Spineless Beauty. Virus symptoms did occur later in the season beyond the final harvest date of this trial. Table 1. Yield in half-bushels per acre of 12 zucchini entries grown at the Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center, Benton Harbor, Michigan. Plant population was 5,280 plants per acre. Variety Seed Source* Total Yield Yield Small % Total Yield Medium % Total Yield Large % Total Paycheck RS 1,928 950 49 653 34 264 13 62 3 Reward HM 1,872 1045 56 611 33 202 10 15 1 RSQ6144 RS 1,743 801 47 600 34 305 17 37 2 Bonus AC 1,667 811 49 461 28 346 20 50 3 Leopard HM 1,657 853 53 455 27 319 18 30 2 Payroll RS 1,610 852 53 474 29 279 17 3 <1 RSQ5184 RS 1,594 693 44 600 38 284 18 18 1 Spineless Beauty RS 1,560 715 47 564 37 278 17 3 <1 Envy RS 1,524 885 58 513 34 119 8 7 <1 HMX8742 HM 1,181 743 63 283 25 140 11 15 1 Golden Delight RS 910 549 60 326 36 28 3 7 1 Golden Glory RS 908 757 83 123 14 28 3 0 0 lsd=.05 332 167 11 182 10 194 9 39 2 *Seed Source: RS=Rogers Seed Company, HM=Harris Moran, AC=Abbott and Cobb Seed Company. Yield Cull % Total 108

Table 2. Yield in half-bushels per acre of three yellow squash entries grown at the Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center, Benton Harbor, Michigan. Plant population was 5,280 plants per acre. Variety Seed Source* Total Yield Yield Small % Total Yield Medium % Total Yield Large % Total ACX7001Y AC 879 643 74 197 21 23 2 15 2 Slick Pik JS 717 533 77 179 23 4 1 0 0 ACX7002Y AC 708 529 74 158 23 0 0 21 3 lsd=.05 ns ns ns ns ns ns 2 ns ns *Seed Source: AC=Abbott and Cobb Seed Company, JS=Johnny s Seeds Yield Cull % Total 109

Powdery Mildew Resistant Acorn-type Winter Squash Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 Margaret T. McGrath, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 George M. Fox, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 Sandra Menasha, Cornell Cooperative Extension-Suffolk County, NY Cultivars with resistance are a valuable tool for managing powdery mildew, a very common disease that can reduce yield (fruit quantity and/or size) and market quality (flavor, color, storability, etc). Several winter squash varieties recently became available on the commercial market advertised as having resistance to powdery mildew. The goals of this experiment were: 1. To determine whether winter squash varieties with homozygous resistance (e.g., two copies of the powdery mildew resistance gene: PMRR) are better protected against powdery mildew than cultivars with heterozygous resistance (PMR). 2. To determine whether striped acorn-types with PMRR are not as effective at suppressing powdery mildew as solid green acorn-types with PMRR. These were the results obtained in a similar experiment conducted in 2007. The ability of these varieties to resist powdery mildew as well as their yields were determined relative to Table Ace, a standard cultivar lacking powdery mildew resistance that is commonly grown. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted at the Long Island Horticultural Research and Extension Center in Riverhead on Haven loam soil. Fertilizer (N-P-K 10-10-10) at 500 lb/a was broadcast and incorporated on May 5. Black plastic mulch and drip tape were laid on May 6. Seeds were sown on May 30 in the greenhouse. Seedlings were transplanted into beds covered with black plastic mulch on June 16. Water was provided as needed through drip irrigation lines located beneath the mulch. Additional fertilizer (N-P-K 46-0-0) at 30 lb/a was injected through the drip irrigation system on July 2 and 17. Weeds were controlled between the rows of black plastic mulch by seeding white clover for a living mulch on May 13 after roto-tilling to prepare a seed bed and manage weeds that had already germinated. During the season, weeds were controlled between the rows of black plastic mulch by seeding white clover for a living mulch on May 13 after roto-tilling to prepare a seed bed and manage weeds that had already germinated. During the season, weeds were managed by mowing, hand weeding, and applying Select 2E (8 oz/a) with 1% COC on August 8. Cucumber beetles were managed with Admire 2F applied after transplanting as a soil drench around transplants (0.0007 fl oz/plant) on June 21, and Asana XL (9.6 oz/a) applied to foliage on June 13, July 30, and August 14. No fungicides were applied to control powdery mildew. The following fungicides were applied preventively for downy mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis) and Phytophthora blight (Phytophthora capsici): Curzate 60 DF (3.2 oz/a) on July 30, and Ranman 400 SC (2.75 fl oz/a) on July 19 and 14, and August 23 and 30. Plots were three adjacent rows each with three plants spaced 24 inches apart. Rows were spaced 68 inches apart. A plant of Multipik summer squash, a susceptible variety, was planted between each plot in each row to separate plots and provide a source of inoculum. A randomized complete block design with four replications was used. 110

Upper and lower leaf surfaces were assessed for powdery mildew on July 16 and 31, and on August 8, 15, and 26. Initially, 20-50 older leaves were examined in each plot, with the quantity adjusted based on the incidence of symptomatic leaves. Mid-aged and young leaves were also assessed when powdery mildew had progressed to these age groups. Powdery mildew colonies (spots) were counted; severity was estimated when colonies had coalesced or were too numerous to count. Colony counts were converted to severity values using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. The average severity for the entire canopy was calculated from the individual leaf assessments. These canopy severity values were used to calculate area under disease progress curves (AUDPC) to obtain a measure of severity over the entire assessment period (July 15- August 15). Powdery mildew control was calculated for upper and lower leaf surfaces using AUDPC values relative to the average AUDPC value for Table Ace. Squash fruit were harvested, weighed, and measured on September 10 and 18. Two representative fruit per plot were selected for measuring fruit width, fruit length, and cavity width, and for assessing sugar content, which was done with a hand-held refractometer using fruit samples that were frozen and then thawed. Fruit characteristics were also evaluated and overall appearance was rated on a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (best). Average monthly high and low temperatures ( F) were 80/63 in June, 84/67 in July, 79/63 in August, and 75/61 in September. Rainfall (inches) was 3.88, 3.67, 3.76, and 8.34 for these months, respectively. Results and Discussion Symptoms of powdery mildew were first seen on July 15 on Table Ace, the susceptible variety. All varieties and almost all plots had symptoms on August 23. Tables 1 and 2 contain the four solid green PMRR varieties, followed by the two green PMR varieties, the two striped PMRR varieties, and last the susceptible standard check. Varieties within these groups are organized by AUDPC value for lower leaf surface. Solid green acorn-type varieties with PMRR were not significantly less severely affected by powdery mildew than varieties with PMR (Table 1). There was one exception to this conclusion: AUDPC for severity on upper leaf surfaces for Tay Belle PM (PMR) was significantly greater than for Sweet Reba (PMRR). The level of powdery mildew suppression achieved based on AUDPC values was 70-86% and 91-95% for upper and lower leaf surfaces, respectively, for the PMRR varieties and 60-82% and 83-89% for the PMR varieties. In 2007, when powdery mildew was more severe, lower leaf surface AUDPC value for Autumn Delight was significantly lower than for Table Star. In 2008, powdery mildew severity was numerically higher for the two striped acorn-type varieties with PMRR than the solid green acorn-types with PMRR; this was a significant difference only for severity on lower leaf surfaces on August 15. The level of suppression for Celebration and Sugar Dumpling was 71% and 76% for lower leaf surfaces. Celebration did not suppress powdery mildew on upper leaf surfaces based on AUDPC values. Neither AUDPC value for Celebration in 2007 was significantly lower than Table Ace. Celebration, Sweet Reba, and Royal Ace PM produced the greatest number and weight of marketable fruit per plant (Table 1). These values were significantly greater than those for Tay Belle PM, which were the lowest, and Table Ace, which had the next lowest yield values. Yielding ability of Table Ace may have been affected by powdery mildew. Autumn Delight, Tay Belle PM, and Table Ace produced the largest fruit by weight, while average fruit weight was lowest for Honey Bear, which was as expected because this variety was bred to produce a 111

personal-sized fruit. Fruit of all varieties were rated 4 or 5 for color, appearance, and overall marketability (Table 2). Acorn Squash Variety Fruit Descriptions and Assessments Table Ace Oblong fruit, dark green, semi-pointed end, narrow. Light colored flesh, large cavity, small to medium size. Table Star White ring around stem, medium green color, very pointed end, squatty shape. Light orange colored flesh, medium cavity. Autumn Delight Dark green, deep ridges, oblong, wide, big fruit. Large fruit with large cavity, good internal color, rounded end. Sweet Reba Green, medium ridges, tear drop shape, very pointed end, some squatty fruit. Light orange colored flesh, smaller large cavity. Sugar Dumpling Green and yellow speck. Round to squat fruit, looks like very small pumpkin. Very light orange flesh, very small amount of flesh, small cavity. Honey Bear Very small, round, dark green fruit resembling pool or cannon balls, slight ridges. Medium orange flesh, medium cavity. Celebration Yellow orange green white fruit, medium size, medium ridges, round to pointed end. Light orange flesh, small to medium cavity. Royal Ace PM Dark green, small to medium fruit size, medium ridges, round with pointed end. Medium orange flesh, small cavity, smaller fruit. Tay Belle PM Light to medium green, medium ridges, blocky shape, slightly pointed end, good size fruit. Very light, almost faint yellow flesh, medium cavity. Acknowledgments Project funded by the Friends of Long Island Horticulture Grant Program. Seed was donated by the companies listed in Table 2. Pesticides were donated by Bayer CropScience, DuPont Crop Protection, ISK Biosciences Corporation, FMC Corporation, Monsanto, and Valent BioSciences Corporation. 112

Table 1. Yield and suppression of powdery mildew for acorn squash varieties compared on Long Island, NY, in 2008. The first six entries are green acorn-type varieties with resistance to powdery mildew listed in order of disease control on lower leaf surfaces (AUDPC). These are followed by two striped acorns, then the conventional green acorn variety included for comparison. Powdery Mildew Severity (%) z Variety (resistance) y Upper Leaf Surface Lower Leaf Surface Aug.15 AUDPC Aug. 15 AUDPC Number / Plant Marketable Fruit Weight/ Plant (lb) Weight/ Fruit (lb) Sweet Reba (PMRR) 1.8 cd x 9.3 e 1.9 c 8.8 c 2.53 ab 2.98 ab 1.18 de Autumn Delight (PMRR) 1.8 cd 12.0 de 2.0 c 11.5 bc 1.69 cd 2.66 abcd 1.57 a Honey Bear (PMRR) 2.0 cd 13.1 cde 2.9 c 13.4 bc 2.14 bc 2.02 cd 0.94 g Royal Ace PM (PMRR) 2.7 bcd 19.5 cde 2.8 c 15.7 bc 2.19 abc 2.92 ab 1.33 c Table Star (PMR) 1.3 d 12.0 de 3.3 bc 18.8 bc 2.11 bc 2.70 abc 1.29 cd Tay Belle PM (PMR) 3.5 bc 25.6 cd 5.5 bc 29.3 bc 0.64 e 0.91 e 1.45 b Sugar Dumpling (PMRR) 4.9 ab 29.4 bc 8.9 b 41.4 bc 2.17 bc 2.30 bcd 1.06 f Celebration (PMRR) 6.8 a 49.9 ab 8.3 b 53.1 b 2.75 a 3.19 a 1.16 ef Table Ace (Susceptible) 7.2 a 64.7 a 21.8 a 174.6 a 1.31 d 1.93 d 1.48 ab P-value 0.0004 <.0001 <.0001 0.0005 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 z Exact colony counts were made when possible and severity was estimated using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. y PMRR indicates homozygous resistance; PMR indicates heterozygous resistance. x Numbers in each column with a letter in common are not significantly different according to Fisher s Protected LSD (P=0.05). 113

Table 2. Fruit quality assessments for acorn squash varieties compared on Long Island, NY, in 2008. Variety (resistance) Fruit Quality Assessments z Seed Source Overall Color Shape Appearance Marketability Sweet Reba (PMRR) OUT 5 4.5 5 5 Autumn Delight (PMRR) SW 5 4.5 5 5 Honey Bear (PMRR) J.B.Loy y 4.5 3.5 4 4 Royal Ace PM (PMRR) HM 5 5 4.5 4 Table Star (PMR) SW 4.5 3.5 4.5 4 Tay Belle PM (PMR) SW 4.5 4 4.5 4 Sugar Dumpling (PMRR) J.B.Loy 5 3.5 5 5 Harlequin (PMRR) SW 5 4.5 5 5 Table Ace (Susceptible) SW 4.5 4 4.5 5 z 1-5 rating scale; 5=best. y Seed of two varieties were provided by the breeder, Dr. J. Brent Loy, Department of Plant Biology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. HM=Harris Moran, OUT=Outstanding Seeds, SW=Seedway. 114

Powdery Mildew Resistant Butternut Squash Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 Margaret T. McGrath, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 George M. Fox, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 Sandra Menasha, Cornell Cooperative Extension-Suffolk County, NY Powdery mildew is an annual production problem for all cucurbit crops throughout the United States, reducing yield potential and fruit quality when not controlled. Effective control with fungicides alone has been challenged by development of fungicide resistance to key chemistries. The goal of this study was to determine whether hybrids with homozygous resistance e.g., two copies of the powdery mildew resistance gene (PMRR) provide better suppression of powdery mildew in butternut squash than varieties with heterozygous resistance (PMR). In order to have good comparisons, PMR and PMRR experimental hybrids were obtained from two plant breeders. A susceptible hybrid was also obtained from one of these breeders. Three additional PMRR hybrids were obtained from another source. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted at the Long Island Horticultural Research and Extension Center in Riverhead on Haven loam soil. Fertilizer (N-P-K 10-10-10) at 500 lb/a was broadcast and incorporated on May 5. Black plastic mulch and drip tape were laid on May 6. Most seeds were sown on May 28 in the greenhouse. The NH experimental hybrids were seeded on June 5. Seedlings were transplanted into beds covered with black plastic mulch on June 12. Water was provided as needed via drip irrigation lines located beneath the mulch. Additional fertilizer (N-P- K 46-0-0) at 30 lb/a was injected through the drip irrigation system on July 2 and 17. During the season weeds were controlled by hand weeding and by applying Roundup WeatherMax (3%) + Scythe (1%) + Succeed (1%) on June 27 with a hand-held shielded sprayer to soil between plastic mulch strips, and Select 2E (8 oz/a) with 1% COC was applied on August 8. Cucumber beetles were managed with Admire 2F applied after transplanting as a soil drench around transplants (0.0007 fl oz/plant) on June 21 and Asana XL (9.6 oz/a) applied to foliage on June 13, July 30, and August 14. No fungicides were applied to control powdery mildew. The following fungicides were applied preventively for downy mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis) and Phytophthora blight (Phytophthora capsici): Curzate 60 DF (3.2 oz/a) on July 30 and Ranman 400 SC (2.75 fl oz/a) on July 19 and August 14, 23, and 30. Plots were three adjacent rows each with five plants spaced 24 inches apart. Rows were spaced 68 inches apart. A single plant of Multipik summer squash, a susceptible variety, was planted between each plot in each row to separate plots and provide a source of inoculum. A randomized complete block design with four replications was used. Upper and lower leaf surfaces were assessed for powdery mildew on July 15 25, and 29, and August 8 and 15. Initially, 50 old leaves were selected in each plot based on leaf appearance and position in the canopy. Beginning on July 29 the quantity examined in each plot was adjusted based on the incidence of symptomatic leaves. Mid-aged and young leaves were also assessed on August 15. Powdery mildew colonies (spots) were counted; severity was estimated when 115

colonies had coalesced or were too numerous to count. Colony counts were converted to severity values using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf = 1%. Average severity for the entire canopy was calculated from the individual leaf assessments. These canopy severity values were used to calculate area under disease progress curves (AUDPC) to obtain a measure of severity from July 29 through August 15. Powdery mildew control was calculated for upper and lower leaf surfaces using AUDPC values relative to the average AUDPC value for the susceptible hybrid. Squash fruit were harvested, weighed, and measured on September 9 and 16. Two representative fruit per plot were selected for measuring fruit width, fruit length, and cavity width and for assessing sugar content, which was done with a hand-held refractometer using fruit samples that were frozen and then thawed. Fruit characteristics were also evaluated and overall appearance was rated on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1=poor and 5=best. Average monthly high and low temperatures ( F) were 80/63 in June, 84/67 in July, 79/63 in August, and 75/61 in September. Rainfall (in.) was 3.88, 3.67, 3.76, and 8.34 for these months, respectively. Results and Discussion Powdery mildew symptoms were first seen on July 25, 43 days after transplanting. At the last assessment on August 15, powdery mildew was at a low severity on the susceptible hybrid (average of 4% and 9% of upper and lower leaf surfaces covered with symptoms. Powdery mildew was significantly more severe on the susceptible hybrid compared to the resistant hybrids at most assessments (Table 1). There were no significant differences in powdery mildew severity among the PMR and PMRR hybrids in the two sets of experimental hybrids. Among the three additional PMRR hybrids, the one with the greatest severity values, WSXP1036, had significantly more powdery mildew on lower leaf surfaces based on AUDPC values (a seasonal disease severity summation) than three of the four other PMRR hybrids and one of the two PMR hybrids. Based on these results, butternut hybrids with one gene for resistance provide adequate suppression, equivalent to that obtained by hybrids with two genes, and PMRR hybrids can vary in the degree of suppression possibly reflecting modifier genes. The hybrids provided 38% to 78% suppression of powdery mildew on upper leaf surfaces and 46% to 92% suppression on lower leaf surfaces. Greater suppression of powdery mildew on lower leaf surfaces is highly desirable because this disease develops best on this surface where control with fungicides can be compromised by resistance to mobile products. JWS 61079 was the only entry with fruit characteristic ratings below 4 (Table 2). Butternut Squash Variety Fruit Descriptions and Assessments JWS 6238c Susceptible hybrid included for comparison; not a horticultural standard. Very small, compact to medium size, short and squat fruit, short to long necks. Slightly bulbous and slight indentation at neck. JWS 6823 Long, thin to thick necks, bulbous ends, small- to medium-size fruit. 116

JWS 61019 Wide, long necks; slightly bulbous bottom. Medium-size, wide fruit; medium neck; slight indentation. JWS 61079 Variable, very long to short, fat neck; large fruit. Variable in shape, some short. Extremely long neck, large fruit, slight curve. WSXP1035 Very wide, bulbous bottom; medium to large fruit. Fat neck, slightly bulbous end. Uniform, medium to long neck. WSXP1036 Medium to long neck; short, bulbous end; large, wide fruit. WSXP1037 Variable size; medium to large, wide, fat fruit; short to medium neck. NH1503 Very long, narrow necks; variable in color; big fruit; very variable size and shape, some long and thin, some short and squat NH1517 Very long neck; slight curve to neck; narrow, big fruit. Acknowledgments Project was funded by the Friends of Long Island Horticulture Grant Program. Seed was donated by the companies listed in Table 2. Pesticides were donated by Bayer CropScience, DuPont Crop Protection, ISK Biosciences Corporation, FMC Corporation, Monsanto, and Valent BioSciences Corporation. 117

Table 1. Yield and suppression of powdery mildew for butternut squash hybrids compared on Long Island, NY, in 2008. Powdery Mildew Severity (%) z Experimental Hybrid (resistance) y Upper Leaf Surface Lower Leaf Surface Aug. 8 AUDPC Aug. 8 AUDPC Number/ plant Marketable Fruit Weight/ plant (lb) Weight/ fruit (lb) WSXP1035 (PMRR) 0.49 bc x 8.1 b 0.43 c 11.9 cd 2.78 bc 6.06 bc 2.21 cd WSXP1037 (PMRR) 0.58 bc 11.6 b 1.59 bc 34.5 bc 3.39 b 7.17 b 2.16 d WSXP1036 (PMRR) 1.18 b 16.4 ab 4.28 b 39.4 b 2.81 bc 6.53 bc 2.34 cd JWS 61079 (PMRR) 0.55 bc 6.5 b 0.21 c 9.7 cd 3.67 b 11.88 a 3.24 a JWS 61019 (PMRR) 0.72 bc 14.5 ab 0.50 c 15.3 bcd 2.81 bc 7.48 b 2.68 bc JWS 6823 (PMR) 0.27 c 10.8 b 0.47 c 23.5 bcd 4.97 a 7.62 b 1.53 e NH1517 F1 (PMRR) 0.20 c 6.7 b 0.23 c 7.6 d 1.56 d 4.16 cd 2.90 ab NH1503 F1 (PMR) 0.22 c 5.7 b 0.15 c 6.2 d 2.65 bcd 7.84 b 2.93 ab JWS 6238c (susceptible) 3.84 a 26.5 a 11.69 a 73.5 a 1.81 cd 3.08 d 1.63 e P-value <.0001 0.0487 <.0001 0.0012 0.0002 <.0001 <.0001 z Exact colony counts were made when possible and severity was estimated using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. Data were transformed from percentages by a square root transformation when needed to obtain normality of variance before analysis of variance was performed. The table has de-transformed means. Only older leaves were assessed on August 8. AUDPC values were calculated for canopy severity, which included assessments of young and mid-aged leaves examined on August 15. y PMRR indicates homozygous resistance; PMR indicates heterozygous resistance. x Numbers in each column with a letter in common are not significantly different according to Fisher s Protected LSD (P = 0.05). Table 2. Fruit quality assessments for butternut squash varieties compared in 2008. The last entry is the susceptible variety included for comparison. Variety (resistance) Fruit Quality Assessments z Seed Source Overall Color Shape Appearance Marketability WSXP1035 (PMRR) HM 5 5 5 5 WSXP1037 (PMRR) HM 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 WSXP1036 (PMRR) HM 4 5 4.5 5 JWS 61079 (PMRR) JS 4.5 3.25 3.75 4 JWS 61019 (PMRR) JS 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 JWS 6823 (PMR) JS 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 NH1517 F1 (PMRR) J.B.Loy y 4.5 4.25 4.75 4.25 NH1503 F1 (PMR) J.B.Loy 4.25 4 4 4 JWS 6238c (susceptible) JS 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 z 1-5 rating scale; 5=best. y Seed of two varieties were provided by Dr. J. Brent Loy, Department of Plant Biology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. Others were obtained directly from the breeder at the company. HM=Harris Moran, JS=Johnny s Selected Seeds. 118

Powdery Mildew Resistant Zucchini and Yellow Summer Squash Variety Evaluation, New York 2008 Margaret T. McGrath, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 George M. Fox, Cornell University, Riverhead, NY 11901 Sandra Menasha, Cornell Cooperative Extension-Suffolk County, NY Powdery mildew is an annual production problem for growers of cucurbit crops throughout the United States, reducing yield potential and fruit quality when not controlled. Effective control with fungicides alone has been challenged by the development of fungicide resistance to key chemistries. Recently, several squash varieties have become available that are advertised with resistance to this disease. The goal of this experiment was to determine whether squash varieties with homozygous resistance (e.g., two copies of the main powdery mildew resistance gene, PMRR) are better protected against powdery mildew than varieties with heterozygous resistance (PMR). This was the case in variety evaluations conducted in 2007 but not in 2006. Most commercial resistant squash varieties have PMR. The ability of the varieties evaluated in 2008 to resist powdery mildew, as well as their yielding ability, was determined relative to Spineless Beauty and Gentry, standard varieties lacking powdery mildew resistance. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted at the Long Island Horticultural Research and Extension Center in Riverhead on Haven loam soil. Fertilizer (N-P-K 10-10-10) at 500 lb/a was broadcast and incorporated on May 5. Black plastic mulch and drip tape were laid on May 6. Seeds were sown on May 25 in the greenhouse. Seedlings were transplanted into beds covered with black plastic mulch on June 12. Water was provided as needed via drip irrigation lines located beneath the mulch. Additional fertilizer (N-P-K 46-0-0) at 30 lb/a was injected through the drip irrigation system on July 2 and 17. During the season, weeds were controlled between the rows of black plastic mulch by seeding white clover for a living mulch on May 13 after roto-tilling to prepare a seed bed and manage weeds that had already germinated. During the season, weeds were managed by mowing, hand weeding, and applying Select 2E (8 oz/a) with 1% COC on August 8. Cucumber beetles were managed with Admire 2F applied after transplanting as a soil drench around transplants (0.0007 fl oz/plant) on June 21 and Asana XL (9.6 oz/a) applied to foliage on June 13, July 30, and August 14. No fungicides were applied to control powdery mildew. The following fungicides were applied preventively for downy mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis) and Phytophthora blight (Phytophthora capsici): Curzate 60 DF (3.2 oz/a) on July 30 and Ranman 400 SC (2.75 fl oz/a) on July 19, and August 14, 23, and 30. Plots were three adjacent rows each with five plants spaced 24 inches apart. Rows were spaced 68 inches apart. A single plant of Multipik summer squash, a susceptible variety, was planted between each plot in each row to separate plots and provide a source of inoculum. A randomized complete block design with four replications was used. Upper and lower leaf surfaces of the susceptible varieties were examined for powdery mildew on July 7. Assessments were done on July 15, 22, and 29, and August 8 and 15. Initially, 20-50 119

older leaves were examined in each plot, with the quantity adjusted based on the incidence of symptomatic leaves. Mid-aged and young leaves were also assessed on August 15 when powdery mildew had progressed to these age groups. Powdery mildew colonies (spots) were counted and severity was estimated when colonies had coalesced or were too numerous to count. Colony counts were converted to severity values using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. Average severity for the entire canopy was calculated from the individual leaf assessments. These canopy severity values were used to calculate area under disease progress curve (AUDPC) to obtain a measure of severity over the entire assessment period (July 15 August 15 ). Powdery mildew control was calculated for upper and lower leaf surfaces using AUDPC values relative to the AUDPC value for the susceptible varieties. Powdery mildew severity was also assessed on stems and leaf petioles. Squash fruit were harvested and weighed on July 20, 23, 26, and 31, and August 2, 7, and 18. Fruit were separated into marketable and unmarketable grades based on length, then weighed. There were no unmarketable fruit with blemishes due to disease or insect feeding. Fruit characteristics were also evaluated and overall appearance was rated on a scale of 1 to 9 with 1=poor, 5=marginal, 7=acceptable, and 9=best. Average monthly high and low temperatures ( o F) were 80/63 in June, 84/67 in July, and 79/63 in August. Rainfall (in.) was 3.88, 3.67, and 3.76 for these months, respectively. Results and Discussion Symptoms of powdery mildew were found on the powdery-mildew-susceptible varieties on July 7 at a low level (on 19 of 400 older leaves examined). Symptoms were found in all but one plot on July 15. Among the zucchini varieties, powdery mildew on lower leaf surfaces was suppressed best by Zucchini #8517, a PMRR experimental variety developed by Outstanding Seeds (Table 1). Degree of suppression based on AUDPC values (a seasonal disease severity summation) was 75% and 81% on upper and lower leaf surfaces, respectively. Performance varied among the PMR varieties reflecting differences in modifying genes. A zucchini variety considered to have a medium level of resistance to powdery mildew, Envy, provided only 33% and 31% suppression on upper and lower leaf surfaces, respectively, which was the lowest degree of suppression relative to Spineless Beauty, the susceptible check variety. Payroll, which has more resistance, provided 46% and 43% suppression on the two leaf surfaces, respectively. Amatista, a grey zucchini type with a higher level of resistance, suppressed powdery mildew by 64% and 50%, respectively. Zucchini #8517 and Amatista were both significantly better than Envy for most assessments. The yellow squash susceptible variety, Gentry, did not become as severely affected by powdery mildew as Spineless Beauty. The two resistant squash varieties evaluated, Success PM and Sunglo, are PMRR. They suppressed powdery mildew equally well: 68% suppression on upper leaf surfaces and 70% and 85% suppression on lower leaf surfaces. Better control of powdery mildew was obtained with resistant summer squash varieties in 2008 than in 2007. Zucchini #8517 out-yielded the other zucchini varieties. Success PM did not yield as well as the susceptible variety, as in previous years; however, in 2008 it was not because Success PM, an OP variety, began producing fruit later than the other varieties. There were marketable fruit in all plots at the first harvest. Fruit quality was very good for all varieties. The lowest overall appearance rating was 7.5 for Success PM. All varieties produced fruit with acceptable characteristics, which were rated at least 7 out of 9. 120

Zucchini Variety Fruit Descriptions and Assessments Amatista Grey zucchini, almost white in coloration due to many white speckles on skin. Small fruit, very uniform in shape with a very bulbous blossom end and tapered stem end. Dark green ridges. Rounded, smooth blossom end. Overall appearance rating of 8 out of 9. Envy Dark green fruit with a nice length, shape, and size. Very few small, light green flecks on the skin. Slightly bulbous at both ends. Slightly raised blossom end and slight ridging near stem end. Glossy. Overall appearance rating of 8.5. Payroll Fruit of this variety are very long and slender, with a slightly bulbous blossom end that tapers slightly toward the stem end. Green coloration with light green speckles. Light green peduncle. Slight ridging, small rounded blossom end. Very uniform size and shape. Semi-gloss appearance. Overall appearance rating of 8.5. Spineless Beauty Green skin with many small, light green flecks. Smooth, rounded blossom end. Green peduncle. Large and long fruit. Slight ridging around stem end. Slightly bulbous end. Semi-gloss appearance. Uniform. Overall appearance rating of 9. Zucchini #8517 Green with many small light green flecks. Light green peduncle. Bulbous end that tapers nicely to stem end and a smooth rounded blossom end. Slight ridges. Semi-glossy appearance. Medium length and width. Uniform. Overall appearance rating of 9. Yellow Summer Squash Variety Fruit Descriptions and Assessments Gentry Golden-sunshine yellow. Slight crook neck. Very bulbous blossom end tapers and narrows at neck and slightly bulbous stem end. Rounded smooth blossom end. Light green stem. Good yield! Uniform. Overall appearance rating of 8.5. Success PM Sunshine yellow. Slightly warty skin. Many slight sutures up and down length of fruit. Light green stem. Bulbous blossom end, short neck, with slight constriction, and then slightly bulbous stem end. Variable size and shape. Overall appearance rating of 6.75. Acknowledgments Project funded by the Friends of Long Island Horticulture Grant Program. Seed was donated by the companies listed in Table 1. Pesticides were donated by Bayer CropScience, DuPont Crop Protection, ISK Biosciences Corporation, FMC Corporation, Monsanto, and Valent BioSciences Corporation. 121

Table 1. Suppression of powdery mildew and yield for summer squash varieties compared on Long Island, NY, in 2008. The first five entries are zucchini types; Amatista is a grey zucchini, the rest are conventional, green fruit types. Varieties are listed in order of disease control based on AUDPC values. The last three entries are yellow summer squash types; Sunglo is a crookneck type, the rest are straightneck types. Variety (resistance) y Powdery Mildew Severity (%) z Seed Upper Leaf Surface Lower Leaf Surface Source x Aug. 7 AUDPC July 29 Aug. 7 AUDPC Marketable Fruit Number/ plant Weight/ plant (lb) Zucchini #8517 (PMRR) OUT 9.0 cd w 93.4 de 0.01 d 6.6 d 109.8 c 7.3 a 5.9 a Amatista (PMR) SY 10.2 cd 138.5 cd 0.62 cd 32.0 cd 285.2 b 3.3 c 0.9 c Payroll (PMR) SY 29.1 b 206.5 bc 1.11 cd 41.7 bc 326.3 b 5.7 b 3.4 b Envy (PMR) SY 28.7 b 256.2 b 5.62 b 61.4 ab 398.0 b 5.8 b 3.7 b Spineless Beauty (Susceptible) SY 54.1 a 380.1 a 13.71 a 75.6 a 575.6 a 4.9 b 3.0 b Sunglo (PMRR) SY 5.9 cd 34.2 e 0.22 d 13.1 d 46.0 c Success PM (PMRR) HMO 2.1 d 34.5 e 0.04 d 7.9 d 96.4 c 7.3 a 3.1 b Gentry (Susceptible) SY 17.0 bc 108.0 de 3.72 bc 53.6 abc 316.8 b 9.3 a 4.3 a P-value (treatment) <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.0005 <.0001 z Exact colony counts were made when possible and severity was estimated using the conversion factor of 30 colonies/leaf=1%. Data were transformed from percentages by a square root transformation when needed to obtain normality of variance before analysis of variance was performed. The table has detransformed means. y PMRR indicates homozygous resistance. PMR indicates heterozygous resistance. x HL=Hollar, JS=Johnny s, OUT=Outstanding Seeds, SI=Siegers, SY=Syngenta, SW=Seedway. w Numbers in each column with a letter in common are not significantly different according to Fisher s Protected LSD (P=0.05). Yield was analyzed for the two squash types separately. Sunglo was excluded because it is a crookneck type while the other two are straightneck types. Probability <t from the t-test comparing them was 0.0408 and 0.0143 for number and weight of fruit, respectively. 122

2009 DSAC Sweet Corn Trial J.D. Kindhart and Bronwyn Aly, Senior Research Specialists Department of Crop Sciences Dixon Springs Agricultural Center University of Illinois, Simpson, IL Elizabeth Wahle, Extension Specialist Edwardsville Extension Center University of Illinois, Edwardsville, IL A sweet corn variety trial was established and evaluated at the Dixon Springs Agricultural Center in Pope County, Illinois. The varieties were hand seeded on June 1, 2009, at 12 inch in-row spacing and 30-inch rows. Each plot was 30 feet in length. Fertility and pest management followed recommendations from the Midwest Vegetable Production Guide for Commercial Growers 2009. Excessive rainfall resulted in slightly diminished stand for some cultivars. However, ears harvested and plant stand counts are both provided in Table 1 so growers can determine the relative productivity of the cultivars evaluated. Ears were hand harvested and evaluated for various horticultural and marketing characteristics. Results of these evaluations are contained in Table 1 and are based on the average of five representative ears. Table 2 provides growers with a list of the cultivars evaluated as well as seed source, color, and type of sweet corn. Table 1. Yield data from 2009 DSAC sweet corn variety trial. Date Variety No. of Stalks No. of Ears Wt. per 5 Ears (lbs.) Avg. Length 5 Ears (in.) Width of 5 Ears (in.) Tip Fill 1 Husk Flavor 2 / Cover 1 Comments 8/8/09 Shasta 22 16 2.7 7.8 9.4 8.2 9.5 2.5 8/8/09 BC 0808 22 16 3.1 7.9 9.9 8.0 5.2 3.0 8/8/09 372A 14 18 2.7 7.0 9.9 9.2 8.5 3.5 8/8/09 2171 10 8 2.6 7.2 9.5 7.5 7.0 3.5/tough 8/8/09 2170 11 15 2.7 7.6 9.2 9.2 8.5 ~ 8/8/09 Ravelin 12 12 2.4 7.1 9.2 8.8 7.0 3.5 8/9/09 Honey Select 18 21 3.1 8.2 9.8 6.0 8.0 1.5/not good 8/9/09 Vitality 20 10 1.8 6.0 8.5 3.0 7.0 4.0/overall poor 8/9/09 277A 14 16 2.7 6.8 9.5 7.5 7.0 4.0/juicy 8/9/09 Mirai 350BC 10 10 2.4 7.0 9.4 9.8 7.5 4.0 8/9/09 Mirai 308BC 14 16 2.2 7.1 9.1 8.5 7.5 4.0/least favorite of Mirai 8/9/09 Triumph 11 10 2.6 7.2 9.4 8.8 8.5 4.0 8/9/09 78553Y 15 20 3.1 7.6 9.5 9.2 8.0 4.5/nice 8/9/09 1178 13 13 2.5 7.4 9.2 9.2 7.5 3.0/tough 8/10/09 White Out 24 16 2.6 7.5 9.4 8.2 7.8 3.5 8/10/09 Celestial 24 20 2.4 7.6 8.9 8.0 8.8 3.5 123

Table 1 (continued) Date Variety No. of Stalks No. of Ears Wt. per 5 Ears (lbs.) Avg. Length 5 Ears (in.) Width of 5 Ears (in.) Tip Fill 1 Husk Flavor 2 / Cover 1 Comments 8/10/09 Sugar Pearl 18 16 2.6 6.5 9.4 9.2 7.2 4.5 8/10/09 Avalon 25 21 2.7 7.8 9.0 9.0 8.2 2.0 8/10/09 Synergy 26 22 2.5 6.9 9.5 10.0 9.0 4.25/tough 8/10/09 BC 0805 25 24 2.8 7.9 9.4 8.2 8.2 3.0 8/10/09 Absolute 24 21 3.4 7.9 10.4 9.0 8.2 2.0/pretty ear 8/10/09 Devotion 20 18 2.7 7.4 9.6 9.5 8.8 3.5 8/10/09 Awesome 14 22 2.8 6.9 9.8 9.8 8.5 3.5/tough 8/10/09 Mirai 336BC 16 16 2.7 7.2 9.0 9.2 9.0 4.5/pretty ear, uniform 8/10/09 Obsession 14 15 2.6 7.4 9.2 9.2 9.2 4.0 8/10/09 Fantastic 14 13 2.8 7.1 9.8 8.8 8.5 4.5 8/10/09 71413B 17 16 2.4 6.9 9.2 9.5 9.0 4.5/pretty good, uniform 8/10/09 Mirai 351BC 18 20 3.0 7.4 9.8 9.5 8.5 5.0 8/10/09 Mirai 301BC 14 15 3.2 7.9 9.9 9.2 9.2 5.0/pretty ear 8/10/09 14213B 14 13 2.5 7.0 9.2 10.0 8.0 3.5 8/10/09 BSS 0982 11 18 2.9 7.0 10.0 9.0 6.0 4.5 8/10/09 74987Y 15 12 2.9 7.6 9.5 9.5 8.0 4.0/uniform, nice 8/10/09 71628Y 12 14 2.8 7.5 9.4 8.8 8.8 4.0 8/10/09 71492Y 12 10 2.0 6.5 9.0 10.0 8.8 4.25/uniform, nice, tender 8/10/09 Mirai 131Y 12 7 2.8 7.9 9.6 7.8 6.5 4.0 8/10/09 Mirai 130Y 10 8 2.6 7.6 9.8 8.2 8.0 4.0/uniform 8/10/09 GH 0851 21 20 2.8 7.8 9.5 7.0 8.5 1.5 8/10/09 1575 14 16 2.5 7.0 9.0 8.0 8.5 4.0/uniform 8/10/09 Vision 10 14 2.3 6.5 9.0 8.5 9.0 4.0 8/10/09 173A 12 11 2.2 6.1 9.1 7.0 8.2 4.0 8/11/09 Montauk 16 18 3.0 7.5 10.0 8.5 9.0 4.0/pretty ear 8/11/09 Temptation 19 13 2.3 6.2 9.4 8.5 8.2 2.2/tough 8/11/09 Kristine 22 20 3.0 8.0 9.8 9.0 9.0 3.5 8/11/09 Iceburg 13 11 2.1 6.9 8.9 8.0 8.2 4.0/tender 8/12/09 Misquamicut 20 11 2.4 7.5 9.6 8.8 9.0 3.0 8/12/09 Providence 20 19 2.6 8.0 8.5 9.0 8.5 4.5/juicy, tender 8/12/09 Legion 13 17 2.1 7.0 8.5 7.0 8.5 4.0 8/12/09 Garrison 14 14 2.2 7.0 9.0 8.0 8.8 3.0 8/15/09 BSS 0977 14 24 2.1 7.0 8.9 8.0 9.0 3.5/double ears, uniform 8/17/09 WSS 15 21 2.5 6.8 9.8 8.5 8.5 3.5 1 Rating based on scale of 1-10: 1 being no tip fill or husk cover; and 10 being excellent, complete tip fill and husk cover. 2 Rating based on scale of 1-5: 1 being very poor flavor and 5 being excellent flavor. 124

Table 2. List of cultivars evaluated in the 2009 DSAC sweet corn trial along with seed source, color, and type of corn. Variety Seed Co. Color Type 1 Variety Seed Co. Color Type Montauk Seedway bi sy Legion Rogers bi sh2 Synergy Seedway bi sy Fantastic Seedway bi sh2 Kristine Seedway bi sy Awesome Seedway bi sh2 Temptation Seedway bi se 2170 Seedway bi sh2 Providence Seedway bi sy 2171 Seedway bi sh2 Absolute Seedway bi se Obsession Seedway bi sh2 Vitality Seedway bi sy 277A Seedway bi sh2 Shasta Seedway w se Triumph Seedway bi sh2 Sugar Pearl Seedway w se BSS 0977 Rogers bi sh2, bt White Out Seedway w se 372A Seedway w sh2 Misquamicut Seedway w sy Devotion Seedway w sh2 Avalon Seedway w sy Iceberg Seedway w sh2 Celestial Seedway w sy Garrison Rogers y sh2 Honey Select Seedway y sy Vision Seedway y sh2 BC 0805 Rogers bi sy, bt 173A Seedway y sh2 BC 0808 Rogers bi sy, bt 1178 Seedway y sh2 71413B Centest bi sh2 1575 Seedway y sh2 Mirai 351BC Centest bi sh2 GH 0851 Rogers y sy, bt 74213B Centest bi sh2 Mirai 308BC Centest bi sh2 BSS 0982 Rogers bi sh2, bt Mirai 301BC Centest bi sh2 WSS 1830 Rogers w sh2 Mirai 336BC Centest bi sh2 71492Y Centest y sh2 Mirai 350BC Centest bi sh2 78553Y Centest y sh2 Mirai 130Y Centest y sh2 71628Y Centest y sh2 Mirai 131Y Centest y sh2 74987Y Centest y sh2 Ravelin Rogers y sh2 1 sy=synergistic, se=sugar enhanced. sh2=supersweet or augmented supersweet, bt=insect-protected. 125

Sweet Corn Hybrid Disease Nursery 2009 Jerald Pataky, Marty Williams*, Mike Meyer, Bryan Warsaw, and Jim Moody* Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois; and USDA-ARS*, Urbana, IL 61801 Sweet corn hybrids have been evaluated for their reactions to prevalent diseases in nurseries at the University of Illinois for 26 consecutive years. This report summarizes the reactions of 387 sweet corn hybrids to common rust, NCLB, Stewart s wilt, MDM, and SCLB based on their performance in the 2009 nursery. These hybrids also were evaluated for their responses to three HPPD-inhibiting, post-emergence herbicides: Callisto (mesotrione), Laudis (tembotrione), and Impact (topramezone). Resistance and susceptibility are the two extremes of a continuum of host reactions to diseases. Resistance is a measure of the ability of the host to reduce the growth, reproduction, and/or disease-producing abilities of the pathogen, thus resulting in less severe symptoms of disease. Major genes for resistance, such as Rp1-D, Ht1, or Mdm1, can prevent or substantially limit disease development if specific virulence (i.e., races) is not prevalent in pathogen populations. Hybrids with major gene resistance usually have clearly distinguishable phenotypes. Major gene resistance may be ineffective if specific virulence occurs, such as the Rp1-D-virulent race of the common rust fungus. In the absence of effective major gene resistance, disease reactions often range from partially resistant to susceptible. Hybrids can be grouped into broad classes such as: resistant (R), moderately resistant (MR), moderate (M), moderately susceptible (MS), and susceptible (S) based on severity of disease symptoms. This procedure produces statistically overlapping groups without clear-cut differences (e.g., the hybrid with least severe symptoms in the MR class does not differ significantly from the hybrid with the most severe symptoms in the R class). Thus, boundaries between categories of disease reactions are somewhat arbitrary. Nevertheless, a consistent response of a hybrid over several trials produces a reasonable estimate of the disease reaction of that hybrid relative to the response of other hybrids. These reactions can be used to assess the potential for diseases to become severe and affect yield of that hybrid. Certain post-emergence herbicides also can injure some sweet corn hybrids. Responses of sweet corn hybrids to several cytochrome P450-metabolized herbicides have been associated with a mutation in a specific cytochrome P450 gene on chromosome 5S. Classification of hybrids for responses to herbicides will help identify those with the greatest risk of injury. Materials and Methods Hybrids The 2009 nursery included 387 entries: 259 sh2 hybrids, 48 se hybrids and 80 su hybrids. Hybrids with multiple endosperm mutations were placed in the most appropriate of the three categories. Seven hybrids (Challenger, GH 3369, Obsession, SEM 19, Signet, Suregold, Synergy) were entered in the trial twice. Separate entries of those seven hybrids are reported and serve as a measure of variability in the trial. Standard hybrids with relatively consistent reactions to common rust, Stewart s wilt, NLB, MDM, and SLB (Table 1) also were included to compare the results of the 2009 nursery to those from previous nurseries. Hybrids known to carry the Rp1- D, Rp1-E, Rp1-I or Rp-G rust resistance genes also were included and aid in the interpretation of responses to different populations of Puccinia sorghi. 126

Table 1. Reactions of sweet corn hybrids included as standards in the 2009 disease nursery Hybrid Stewart s wilt Common rust (races) NLB (0 & 1) MDM A&B SLB Prior 09 Rating Prior avir* D G Prior 09 Rating Prior 09 Rating Prior 09 Rating 277A 4 3 2.5 6 7 5 9 5 5 32% 9 8 97% 3 4 3.3 Ambrosia 2 3 2.5 5 7 6 7 5 5 32% 9 9 100% 6 6 4.5 Bonus 1 1 1.3 Rp Rp 6 Rp 5 5 29% 2 2 6% 7 6 4.5 El Toro 3 3 2.5 Rp Rp 7 Rp 7 7 39% 2 4 21% 4 2 2 Eliminator 2 1 1.7 Rp Rp 7 Rp 6 7 41% 1 2 10% 6 6 4.5 Garrison 2 2 2.2 Rp Rp Rp Rp 2 1 10% 2 3 16% 3 3 2.5 GH 1829 5 3 2.5 Rp Rp Rp 5 6 7 42% 9 9 100% 6 6 4.5 Jubilee 9 9 5 5 6 6 6 8 9 50% 9 9 100% 4 4 3.3 Miracle 1 2 2 3 3 4 3 3 5 30% 9 9 100% 3 3 2.8 Sensor 5 6 4.2 4 4 5 4 4 6 36% 9 9 100% 3 1 1.8 Snow White 7 6 3.8 9 9 9 9 7 6 36% 3 6 67% 3 3 2.8 Tuxedo 3 2 2.3 3 3 2 3 2 4 23% 9 9 100% 1 1 1.3 Prior=reaction in previous years (1984-2004). 09=reaction in 2009: 1=resistant, 3=moderately resistant, 5=moderate, 7=moderately susceptible, 9=susceptible. Rating=2009 mean rating: 1 to 9 for Stewart s wilt and SLB, 0 to 100% severity of NLB, 0 to 100% incidence of MDM. Experiment Design and Procedures Each trial of a disease or herbicide was a separate experiment with replicates of hybrids arranged in randomized complete blocks. Each rep was split into two main blocks: sh2 hybrids or su and se hybrids. Each experimental unit was a 12-foot row with about 18 plants per row. Trials were planted in four different fields (Table 5) from May 21 to June 9 on the University of Illinois South Farms and included: Stewart s wilt (2 reps), NLB (3 reps), MDM (2 reps), SLB (2 reps), D-rust (3 reps), G-rust (2 reps), and avirulent rust (2 rep). Responses to Callisto (mesotrione), Laudis (tembotrione), and Impact (topramezone) were evaluated from 13, 2, and 2 reps, respectively. Inoculation and Disease Assessment Plants at the 4- to 6-leaf stage were inoculated with Erwinia stewartii (Stewart s wilt) by wounding leaves in the whorl and introducing bacteria in a 0.1 M saline solution into wounds. For the three foliar fungal diseases, (NLB, SLB, and common rust) spores were sprayed directly into plant whorls from the 3- to 8-leaf stages. Inocula consisted of conidia of either race 0 or race 1 of Exserohilum turcicum; conidia of Bipolaris maydis race O; and urediniospores of one of three isolates of Puccinia sorghi: avirulent on Rp genes (avirulent), Rp1-D-virulent (D-virulent), or Rp-G/Rp1-I/Rp1-E-virulent (G-virulent). Plants were inoculated with Maize dwarf mosaic virus strain A (MDMV-A) and Sugarcane mosaic virus (MDMV-B) at the 2- to 6-leaf stages. A phosphate buffer solution with a mixture of the viruses was sprayed directly onto leaves using a motorized backpack sprayer. One replicate each was inoculated at the 2- to 3-leaf or the 4-to 6- leaf stages. 127

Table 2. Criteria for classifying hybrid reactions to diseases in the 2009 nursery. Disease (rating) Rust (%) Resistant Moderately Resistant Classification of Reaction Moderate Moderately Susceptible Susceptible Rp 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 avirulent 0 <10 <15 <20 <25 <30 <35 <40 <45 45 D-virulent 0 10 15 20 25 30 34 38 42 >42 G-virulent 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 >45 NLB race 0&1 (%) 10 16 21 26 32 37 42 47 >47 Stewart s wilt (1-9) <1.75 <2.5 <3 <3.25 <3.75 <4.25 <4.6 <5 5 MDM-A&B (%) 0 10 20 35 50 <80 <90 <100 100 SLB (1-9) <2 <2.5 3 3.5 4 4.75 5.25 <6.5 6.5 Callisto and Laudis (%) <1 5 10 <15 <20 <25 <35 <50 50 See text for description of disease and herbicide assessments. The total number of plants and the number of plants with symptoms of MDM were counted about two weeks after inoculation. Incidence (%) of MDM-infected plants was calculated for each hybrid from totals of all replicates. Symptom severity was rated for each of the other diseases. Stewart s wilt was rated before anthesis using a scale from 1 (symptoms within 2 cm of inoculation wounds) to 9 (severe systemic infection or dead plants). Chlorotic, Rp-resistant reactions were scored in the rust trials about two to three weeks after the first inoculation. Percent leaf area infected with common rust and NLB were rated at harvest maturity in all rust and NLB trials. Hybrids with chlorotic NLB-lesions typical of Ht-resistance also were noted. Symptoms of SLB were rated on a 1 to 9 scale (mild to severe). Herbicide Application and Assessment Post-emergence herbicides were applied at twice the registered rates when the majority of plants ranged from the 4- to 5-leaf stages and were about 8 to 12 inches tall. Herbicide treatments included Callisto at 6.0 oz/a, Impact at 1.5 oz/a, and Laudis at 6.0 oz/a. Adjuvants included 1% crop oil concentrate (COC) and 28% urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) All fields were treated preemergence with metachlor + atrazine. Corn injury was rated visually one and three weeks after application independently using two methods. One method scored each row for percentage of leaf area with bleaching symptoms. The other method classified rows from 1 to 9, where 1=no injury apparent, 5=moderate injury, and 9=severe injury or dead plants. Data Analysis Disease and herbicide injury ratings were analyzed by ANOVA. Hybrid reactions to diseases and herbicides were classified from 1 (highly resistant) to 9 (highly susceptible) according to standard deviations from the mean (z-scores), Bayesian least significant difference (BLSD) separations (k=100), and ranks of standard hybrids. Results and Discussion Symptoms ranged from slight disease to severely infected plants (Tables 6, 7). Reactions of standard hybrids to Stewart s wilt, common rust, NLB, MDM, and SLB were within expected ranges (Table 1). The criteria for classifying hybrid reactions are listed in Table 2. Table 7 includes reactions and disease ratings of 387 hybrid entries based solely on the 2009 trial. This is the only data we have for some of these hybrids. For hybrids that have been evaluated 128

previously, an assessment of disease reactions based on multiple trials is most representative of hybrid performance. Stewart s Wilt Stewart s wilt ratings (1 to 9) ranged from 1.2 to 6 with a mean of 3.3. Sixty-six hybrids that were rated 4.25 or higher (i.e., frequent systemic infection) were classified as moderately susceptible to susceptible (7 to 9). Symptoms of Stewart s wilt were mild (rated less than 1.75) on 22 hybrids classified as resistant. An additional 87 hybrids were classified from resistant to moderately resistant. Ten hybrids rated 1.5 or below had highly resistant reactions. These included: A0873 5807, Bold, Bonus, BSS 5390, Code 944, CSAYP6-225, GH 0937A, GH 9597, GG Code 212, and Summer Sweet 7650 Y. If Stewart s wilt infection is non-systemic (i.e., ratings <3), yield is affected minimally. Northern Leaf Blight Severity of NLB (% leaf area symptomatic) ranged from 2% to 65% and averaged 28% in the 2009 trial In the two replicates inoculated with race 0, many hybrids had chlorotic lesions indicative of Ht-gene resistance. In those replicates, NLB was about ⅓ to less severe on hybrids with Ht1-resistance than if inocula were entirely race 1 as in the third replicate. Severity was 10% or less in the 27 hybrids classified as resistant. An additional 87 hybrids were classified from R to MR with less than 21% leaf area infected. The effects of NLB on yield are minimal when severity is below 20%. Of the 114 hybrids with the most resistant reactions to NLB, 104 were sh2, nine were su, and one was an se endosperm type. Of the 25 hybrids with the most severe reactions to NLB (>50% severity), eight were sh2, 14 were su, and three were se. Ninety-nine of the 114 hybrids classified from R to MR for NLB had chlorotic lesions indicative of an Ht gene that conveyed resistance to E. turcicum race 0. Only 5 of 84 hybrids classified from MS to S had Ht-gene resistant reactions. NLB severity averaged 20.5% and ranged from 2% to 46% on 179 hybrids with Ht-gene reactions. Severity averaged 35% and ranged from 6% to 65% for 208 hybrids without Ht-gene reactions. The dozen hybrids with the least severe NLB symptoms ( 7% severity) included: Accede MRY, ACcensuate MRY, ACX 1204 MRW, Code 902, Code 947, HMX 9347 S, HMX 9349 S, Prime Plus, Summer Sweet 7641 MRW, Summer Sweet 8101 MRW, Tribute, and Winstar. Maize Dwarf Mosaic Incidence of MDM-infected plants ranged from 0 to 100% and averaged 67%. Most hybrids (158) were completely susceptible to MDM with 100% symptomatic plants. An additional 62 hybrids were classified from MS to S with more than 80% symptomatic plants. Hybrids classified from MS to S probably were susceptible but a few plants escaped infection. Most of the 167 hybrids classified from R to M/MS (less than 80% incidence) probably carry the Mdm1 gene although many may be heterozygous for this gene and/or may not carry additional modifier genes necessary for complete resistance to MDM. Consequently, MDM-resistant hybrids displayed a range of responses. MDM-infected plants were not observed for 11 hybrids classified as resistant, including: Dallas, GH 0991, Samurai, SEM 9, SEM 39, SHY 6RH 1034, SUY 6RH 1182, SUY 6RH 1183, UY 1953 OK, and WH 1428. The incidence of symptomatic plants was 10% or less for 26 hybrids classified as R/MR. Incidence was 20% or less for 32 hybrids classified as MR. An additional 98 hybrids with 20% to 80% MDM-infected plants were classified from MR to MS. Incidence of infected plants averaged 18%; and 86 of the MR-to-MS 129

hybrids had less than 40% MDM-infected plants in the replicate inoculated at the 4- to 6-leaf stages. Conversely, incidence of MDM averaged 75%; and 85 of the MR-to-MS- hybrids had 40% or more MDM-infected plants in the replicate inoculated at the 2- to 3-leaf stages. Hybrids with R to M reactions to MDM ( 50% incidence) were prevalent among su endosperm types (57 of 80), common among sh2 endosperm types (87 of 259) and relatively uncommon among se endosperm types (5 of 48). Southern Leaf Blight SLB ratings (1 to 9 scale) ranged from 1 to 7.5 and averaged 3.25. Ratings were 5 or above for 46 hybrids classified as MS to S. One hundred and eighty-nine hybrids rated 3 or below were classified from R to MR. Seventy-eight hybrids rated below 2 were classified as resistant. Common Rust Low levels of D-virulent and G-virulent P. sorghi occurred in all rust trials but this contamination was not so prevalent that Rp-resistant reactions could not be identified soon after inoculation. However, as a consequence of this spread of inocula, rust severity at fresh market harvest was not necessarily 0% on all Rp-resistant hybrids. For example, the hybrid Bonus, which carries the Rp1-D gene, had 3% and 1% leaf area infected in the avirulent and G-virulent trials as a result of D-virulent inocula spreading to those trials (Table 3). In comparison, rust severity was 31% on Bonus in the D-virulent trial in which the Rp1-D gene was ineffective against the virulent race. Bold, another Rp1-D-resistant hybrid with a more susceptible genetic background than Bonus, had 24% and 18% rust severity in the avirulent and G-virulent trials as a result of contaminant, D-virulent inocula; but rust severity was 55% in the D-virulent trial when the Rp1-D gene was ineffective. Rust severity ranged from 0% to 5% on GH 1829 (Rp-G), GH 2269 (Rp1-I) and GH 5704 (Rp1-E) in the avirulent trial due to contaminant, G-virulent inocula; but ranged from 25% to 44% in the G-virulent trial when the Rp-G, Rp1-I and Rp1-E genes were ineffective (Table 3). Garrison, which carries the Rp1-D and Rp1-I genes, was not infected in any trial, indicating that isolates with a combination of virulence against both of these genes were not present. Sixty-nine hybrids were Rp-resistant in all three trials: avirulent, G-virulent, and D-virulent. Similar to Garrison which is Rp1-D/Rp1-I, these hybrids probably carry the Rp1-D gene that conveys resistance to G-virulent isolates and an Rp gene that conveys resistance to D-virulent isolates (e.g., Rp-G, Rp1-E, or Rp1-I). Each inbred parent may contribute a different Rp gene to some of these hybrids. In other hybrids, one inbred may contribute multiple Rp genes via compound rust resistance in which combinations of various Rp genes are closely linked in coupling phase (e.g., Rp1-DGJ, Rp1-JFC, or Rp-GFJ). An additional 63 hybrids were Rp-resistant to avirulent and D-virulent isolates, but susceptible in the G-virulent trial where severity ranged from 9% to 46% on these hybrids. These hybrids probably carry the Rp-G, Rp1-I, or Rp1-E gene similar to GH 1829, GH 2269 or GH 5704. The remaining 131 hybrids were Rp-resistant in the avirulent and G-virulent trials, but rust severity on these hybrids ranged from 17% to 55% in the D-virulent trial. These hybrids probably carry the Rp1-D gene. Among the 124 hybrids that were not Rp-resistant, rust severity ranged from 6% to 63%, 14% to 54%, and 11% to 80% in the avirulent, D-virulent, and G-virulent trials, respectively. Only four hybrids (Code 917, GG Code 74, Merlin, and Tuxedo) were rated MR or better in all three trials with an average rust severity of 19%, 10%, 17%, and 15%, respectively. Mean rust severity over 130

all three trials was less than 20% on two additional hybrids, Lancelot and Miracle. Thirty-eight hybrids with an average rust severity of 33% or higher were classified as MS to S in at least two of the three trials. Rust has the potential to be very severe on these 38 hybrids. Table 3. Reactions of hybrids with known Rp genes in trials inoculated with different isolates of Puccinia sorghi. Hybrid (Rp genes) Rust Severity (%) avirulent D-virulent G-virulent Bonus (Rp1-D) 3 31 1 Bold (Rp1-D) 24 55 18 GH 1829 (Rp-G) 3 0 29 GH 2269 (Rp1-I) 0 0 25 GH 5704 (Rp1-E) 5 0 44 Garrison (Rp1-D/Rp1-I) 0 0 0 Shaded areas=rust due to contaminant inocula. Reactions to Herbicides Injury due to the three HPPD-inhibiting herbicides was assessed based on the amount of leaf area bleached (loss of chlorophyll) 1 and 3 weeks after application. None of the sweet corn hybrids were injured by Impact (topramezone). Eleven hybrids were severely injured by Laudis (tembotrione) and Callisto (mesotrione): 177A, 3175, BC 375, Code 921, Code 941, CSAYP6-225, HMX 6386S, Merit, SEM 4, SEM 8, and SVR 0870 5770). Six of these 11 hybrids are known to be homozygous for a mutant cytochrome P450 (CYP) allele that conditions sensitivity to several P450-metabolized, post-emergence herbicides. Laudis mildly injured one additional hybrid and Callisto mildly injured an additional 58 hybrids (classified from 4 to 7). Based on previous research, 80 hybrids were known to be homozygous or heterozygous for CYP alleles that condition herbicide reactions. All six hybrids that were homozygous for the mutant CYP allele that conditions sensitivity were severely injured by Callisto and Laudis (Table 4). None of the 32 hybrids that were homozygous for the CYP allele that conditions tolerance were injured. Of 42 hybrids that were heterozygous for these CYP alleles, none were injured by Laudis, while 21 were mildly injured (classified 4 to 6) and two were substantially injured ( 7) by Callisto. Table 4. Reactions of hybrids with known CYP alleles to Callisto (mesotrione) and Laudis (tembotrione). Reaction CYP Genotype Number of Hybrids per Category Callisto Laudis 1-3 4-6 7-9 1-3 4-6 7-9 Homozygous sensitive cyp cyp 0 0 6 0 0 6 Heterozygous CYP cyp 19 21 2 42 0 0 Homozygous tolerant CYP CYP 32 0 0 32 0 0 Category: 1-3=little or no injury, 4-6=mild injury, 7-9=considerable injury. 131

Table 5. Protocol for the 2009 University of Illinois sweet corn hybrid disease nursery. Field and Trial Herbicide Inoculated Rated 551 (May 21) avirulent rust (2 reps) June 9, 15, 17, 19, 22, 25 June 28 (Rp), Aug 3 MDM June 28, 12, 19 June 30 M13S (May 21) NLB race 0 Callisto June 17, 19, 22, 25, 29 August 5 G-rust (2 reps) Callisto June 15, 17, 19, 22, 25, 30 July 2 (Rp), Aug 3 Cruse 1300 (May 29) MDM Callisto June 15, 19; July 2 July 14 NLB race 0 Callisto June 24, 29; July 2, 7, 9, 15 August 17 D-rust Callisto June 24, 26, 29; July 1, 7, 10 August 19 Stewart s wilt Callisto June 23, 25, 29 July 14 SLB Callisto June 26, 30; July 2, 8, 15 August 12 NLB race 1 Callisto June 24, 29; July 2, 7, 9 August 21 Laudis (2 reps) July 1 July 7, 22 Impact (2 reps) July 1 July 7, 22 Callisto (2 reps) July 1 July 7, 22 Cruse 1100 (June 9) D-rust (2 reps) Callisto July 7, 10, 13, 20 August 21-22 SLB Callisto July 8, 15, 23 August 20 Stewart s Callisto July 1, 7 July 30 Table 6. Number of hybrids in each category from the 2009 University of Illinois sweet corn disease nursery. Moderately Resistant Moderately Resistant Moderate Trial Susceptible Susceptible Rp 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Common rust avirulent 257 1 1 7 10 26 34 21 11 12 D-virulent 132 0 3 9 24 68 70 51 18 12 G-virulent 200 4 4 17 28 44 42 16 15 15 NLB (races 0&1) Ht-resistant rxn 25 42 32 30 31 14 4 1 0 no Ht-resistant rxn 2 5 8 16 56 42 36 18 25 MDM(A&B) 11 26 32 54 26 18 15 47 158 Stewart s wilt 22 43 44 72 75 63 33 16 17 SLB 78 53 58 39 59 53 22 16 8 Callisto 52 150 116 30 11 9 8 9 2 Laudis 355 13 7 0 1 0 5 5 1 132

Table 7. Reactions of hybrids in the University of Illinois sweet corn disease nursery 2009. ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn Sugary and sugar enhancer hybrids su Y 5 Sem 0875 5821 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 3 20 Ht 2 2.3 3 18 6 4.8 3 1 su Y 5 Sem A0873 5807 Rp 1 3 17 Rp 1 4 26 Ht 1 1.5 2 6 7 5.3 2 1 su Y 5 Sem A0875 7057 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 31 Ht 6 4 3 20 5 3.8 1 1 se B 4 Sem Absolute 4 24 5 28 5 26 5 32 4 2.8 9 100 3 2.8 2 1 se B 3 Cr Ambrosia 7 37 6 31 7 39 5 32 3 2.5 9 100 6 4.5 3 1 se W 4 Cr Argent 5 28 6 32 5 27 5 29 1 1.7 8 97 1 1.8 7 2 se W 4 MM Augusta 5 26 5 29 5 30 5 31 3 2.7 8 93 6 4.8 2 1 se Y 3 Cr Bodacious R/M Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 7 38 5 3.7 5 41 6 4.3 2 1 sesyn B 3 Cr Bojangles 6 33 5 27 9 48 5 31 7 4.3 9 100 5 4 1 1 su Y 4 Rog Bold Rp 24 9 55 Rp 18 5 27 1 1.5 4 31 2 2.3 2 1 su Y 5 Rog Bonus Rp 3 6 31 Rp 1 5 29 Ht 1 1.3 2 6 6 4.5 3 1 se B 4 MM Brocade TSW 5 27 7 36 5 28 5 27 5 3.5 9 100 2 2.3 2 1 su Y 4 SnRv Captain 5 28 6 32 8 43 7 4.5 9 100 6 4.5 3 1 sesyn W 4 Cr Celestial 6 31 7 36 6 31 5 27 1 1.7 7 90 2 2 7 2 sesyn B 3 Sdw Charisma 4 24 4 23 4 23 5 28 5 3.3 9 100 8 5.5 3 1 su Y 3 Rog Code 901 Rp 11 7 36 Rp 3 7 42 1 1.7 3 20 5 3.8 3 1 su Y 3 Rog Code 903 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 11 5 30 Ht 5 3.7 3 17 2 2 3 1 su Y 4 Rog Code 904 Rp 3 5 28 Rp 2 9 51 9 5.3 4 30 5 4 4 1 su Y 5 Rog Code 915 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 37 Ht 5 3.7 2 3 7 5.3 3 1 su Y 3 Rog Code 921 6 34 7 38 6 31 6 35 9 5.7 2 7 7 5 8 5 su Y 4 Rog Code 927 Rp 1 Rp 0 4 21 4 24 Ht 3 2.7 5 44 7 5 3 1 su Y 5 Rog Code 928 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 1 8 Ht 6 3.8 6 55 3 3 1 1 su Y 4 Rog Code 952 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 8 46 Ht 9 5 2 3 1 1.5 3 1 se B 4 Rog Code 955 6 32 5 30 6 32 9 48 5 3.3 9 100 2 2.3 2 1 se W 4 Rog Code 956 Rp 3 5 27 Rp 2 6 37 6 3.8 8 97 1 1.5 1 1 se Y 4 Rog Code 957 Rp 1 5 27 Rp 1 8 43 7 4.3 9 100 2 2.3 2 1 se Y 2 Rog Code 958 8 43 6 33 9 58 9 53 5 3.5 9 100 9 7 2 1 su Y 4 HM Coho Rp 4 5 30 Rp 2 9 52 7 4.5 5 45 5 4 4 1 su Y 4 Cr CSUYP2-35 Rp 4 6 31 Rp 1 8 45 3 2.5 4 22 4 3.3 2 1 su Y 4 Cr CSUYP6-205 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 9 50 5 3.5 9 100 8 5.8 1 1 sesyn B 2 Cr CSYBF7-256 Rp 6 Rp 0 8 43 6 35 6 4 8 97 1 1 2 1 sesyn B 2 Cr CSYBF7-257 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 31 7 4.5 8 96 1 1.3 2 1 sesyn B 3 Cr CSYBF7-258 7 39 6 31 9 49 6 36 5 3.7 9 100 7 5 1 1 sesyn B 2 Cr CSYBF7-263 6 31 5 27 7 38 6 37 6 4 8 94 3 2.8 1 1 sesyn W 4 Cr CSYWF7-260 6 33 5 29 9 48 5 29 4 2.8 9 100 7 5 2 1 su Y 4 Rog Dallas 7 37 7 35 7 39 9 58 9 5.2 1 0 3 3 4 1 se B 4 Cr Delectable 4 22 4 23 3 17 6 34 4 3.2 8 94 1 1.8 3 1 Continued on next page 133

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn se W 5 MM Denali 5 29 6 32 5 29 5 31 2 2.2 9 100 3 2.8 4 1 se B 3 MM Double Gem 5 26 6 31 5 28 4 23 6 4.2 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 su Y 3 HM Dynamo Rp 4 5 26 Rp 1 9 50 6 3.8 4 25 6 4.3 6 1 su Y 4 Sem El Toro Rp 7 7 37 Rp 3 7 39 3 2.5 4 21 2 2 3 1 su Y 4 Cr Eliminator Rp 7 7 37 Rp 1 7 41 1 1.7 2 10 6 4.5 2 1 su Y 5 Rog Elite Rp 5 6 33 Rp 2 9 51 5 3.5 2 6 6 4.3 3 1 su Y 5 SnRv Enterprise Rp 1 4 25 Rp 2 4 23 3 2.7 3 13 2 2 2 1 su Y 4 Cr Evita Rp 6 5 26 Rp 1 8 47 5 3.3 2 6 5 4 2 1 se Y 2 Sem EX 0873 5414 Rp 15 5 29 Rp 2 6 35 6 3.8 3 17 6 4.8 3 1 su Y 5 Rog GH 0937 A Rp 2 6 31 Rp 2 5 32 Ht 1 1.3 3 14 6 4.5 3 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 0991 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 31 2 2.2 1 0 1 1.3 3 1 se Y 4 Rog GH 1829 (Rp-G) Rp 3 Rp 0 5 29 7 42 3 2.5 9 100 6 4.5 2 1 su Y 3 Rog GH 2041 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 31 9 65 8 4.8 8 94 2 2.3 3 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 2298 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 9 53 8 4.8 3 15 2 2 4 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 2547 Rp 5 5 29 Rp 2 7 40 5 3.7 4 29 5 4 1 1 su Y 2 Rog GH 2669 (Rp1-I) Rp 0 Rp 0 4 25 4 26 Ht 4 2.8 5 37 6 4.3 4 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 3369 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 41 6 3.8 2 10 3 2.5 3 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 3369 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 38 7 4.3 4 33 5 3.8 3 1 su Y 2 Rog GH 4902 Rp 0 3 19 Rp 2 9 52 7 4.3 6 69 4 3.3 3 1 su Y 5 Rog GH 5704 Rp 4 Rp 0 8 41 4 26 Ht 3 2.5 5 48 2 2.3 1 2 su Y 5 Rog GH 5704 (Rp1-E) Rp 5 Rp 0 8 44 4 26 Ht 3 2.5 5 42 2 2.3 1 3 sesu Y 4 Rog GH 6014 Rp 9 Rp 0 5 28 6 36 Ht 8 4.7 2 6 1 1.8 4 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 6223 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 26 4 2.8 5 41 1 1.8 2 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 6377P Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 35 Ht 4 3.2 2 4 6 4.3 4 1 su Y 5 Rog GH 6462 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 38 Ht 5 3.5 4 23 5 4 2 1 su Y 4 Rog GH 8267 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 28 5 28 Ht 6 4 2 3 6 4.5 6 1 su Y 5 Rog GH 9597 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 31 Ht 1 1.5 4 28 7 5.3 4 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 74 1 6 2 14 2 11 5 30 2 2.2 7 86 5 3.8 1 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 146 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 21 5 29 7 4.3 6 52 1 1.3 2 1 su Y 3 GG Green Giant Code 166 Rp 1 Rp 0 4 21 7 39 5 3.7 4 33 1 1 2 1 su Y 2 GG Green Giant Code 174 Rp 2 3 20 Rp 1 6 33 5 3.7 4 27 2 2 3 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 175 Rp 1 4 22 Rp 1 2 14 Ht 2 1.8 7 86 1 1.5 1 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 188 Rp 1 Rp 0 1 9 3 20 Ht 1 1.7 3 19 5 4 1 1 Continued on next page 134

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 201 Rp 1 Rp 0 4 25 6 36 6 4.2 5 39 1 1 2 1 su Y 1 GG Green Giant Code 203 6 33 6 33 5 26 8 47 7 4.3 9 100 5 4 3 1 su Y 2 GG Green Giant Code 204 Rp 2 3 19 Rp 1 9 53 4 3.2 8 93 8 6 2 1 su Y 2 GG Green Giant Code 206 Rp 1 3 17 Rp 1 8 44 5 3.7 9 100 8 6 2 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 210 Rp 1 3 20 Rp 4 5 27 6 4 6 54 1 1.5 2 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 212 Rp 0 Rp 0 1 10 3 21 Ht 1 1.3 4 35 5 4 2 1 su Y 1 GG Green Giant Code 218 Rp 6 Rp 9 6 34 8 46 6 4 7 85 3 2.5 3 1 su Y 1 GG Green Giant Code 219 8 49 7 38 5 30 8 47 5 3.7 8 93 4 3.3 3 1 su Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 220 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 33 3 2.5 3 12 5 3.8 3 1 su Y 4 Sem Harvest Gold Rp 5 4 23 Rp 1 3 18 Ht 1 1.7 6 76 5 4 1 1 su Y 3 HM HM 2390 Rp 0 4 22 Rp 6 9 51 7 4.3 7 86 4 3.5 2 1 se B 1 HM HMX 6358 BES 9 60 9 48 9 80 9 50 8 4.8 9 100 7 5 2 1 su Y 4 HM HMX 6384 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 9 48 6 3.8 4 29 1 1 1 1 su Y 5 HM HMX 8376 Rp 2 Rp 0 6 31 6 35 Ht 4 3.2 4 25 5 4 1 1 su Y 5 HM HMX 8378 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 40 4 3 4 23 5 4 1 1 su Y 5 HM HMX 9385 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 6 36 4 2.8 5 41 2 2.3 4 2 su Y 5 HM HMX 9395 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 4 22 2 2.2 2 3 3 2.5 2 1 su Y 5 HM HMX 9396 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 3 1 9 Ht 6 3.8 4 24 5 4 2 1 se+ Y 4 Rog Honey Select 5 27 5 29 6 31 7 42 7 4.3 9 100 1 1.8 1 1 su Y 1 SnRv Jet Rp 2 5 27 Rp 3 9 49 4 3.2 9 100 9 7.3 2 1 su Y 4 Rog Jubilee 6 33 6 34 6 33 9 50 9 5 9 100 4 3.3 3 1 se B 5 MM Lancelot 3 17 2 15 4 21 5 31 3 2.7 9 100 2 2 2 1 se B 3 MM Luscious TSW 6 31 5 30 6 32 5 31 6 4.2 9 100 3 2.8 2 1 su Y 4 Sem Merit 9 50 9 43 6 34 5 31 6 4.2 9 100 5 4 9 9 su Y 4 Sem Merkur Rp 3 6 32 Rp 4 2 14 Ht 2 2 5 40 6 4.8 2 1 se Y 5 MM Merlin 3 15 3 17 3 18 5 32 3 2.5 9 100 1 1.3 3 1 se Y 4 Cr Miracle 3 19 4 21 3 17 5 30 2 2 9 100 3 2.8 3 1 se B 3 Cr Mystique 6 31 6 33 4 24 3 21 2 2.3 8 93 3 2.8 5 1 se B 1 MM Native Gem 8 42 6 32 8 43 5 31 6 3.8 9 100 5 3.8 1 1 se B 4 MM Precious Gem 4 22 4 23 4 22 6 33 2 2 9 100 1 1.5 3 1 Continued on next page 135

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn su Y 2 SnRv Prelude 6 34 5 30 5 29 8 45 7 4.3 9 100 5 4 2 1 se B 2 HM Reflection 9 53 8 40 9 73 6 33 6 4 6 73 7 5.3 2 1 su Y 5 Rog Rocker Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 41 5 3.5 4 34 4 3.3 1 1 se B 3 Sem SEM 15 7 36 5 26 7 38 6 35 8 4.8 8 92 4 3.5 2 1 se B 3 Sem SEM 19 8 44 6 31 6 34 6 33 6 4 9 100 5 3.8 1 1 se B 3 Sem SEM 19 5 28 6 33 6 32 5 30 6 3.8 9 100 5 4 2 1 se B 3 Sem SEM 23 Rp 4 5 28 Rp 1 6 33 5 3.5 9 100 2 2 2 1 se B 3 Sem SEM 31 8 48 6 33 7 39 5 31 7 4.3 9 100 6 4.5 3 1 se Y 2 Sem SEM 38 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 32 4 3 2 9 6 4.5 2 1 se y 2 Sem SEM 39 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 36 3 2.7 1 0 6 4.3 3 1 se B 4 Sem Sensor 4 20 5 27 4 24 6 36 6 4.2 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 se Y 2 Cr Sugar Buns 5 25 5 26 4 21 6 33 5 3.7 9 100 5 3.8 2 1 su Y 4 Sem SUY 6RH 1176 Rp 0 4 24 Rp 1 7 39 5 3.3 9 100 7 5 3 1 su Y 5 Sem SUY 6RH 1182 Rp 3 5 30 Rp 2 6 34 Ht 7 4.5 1 0 7 5.3 2 1 su Y 5 Sem SUY 6RH 1183 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 30 Ht 4 3.2 1 0 8 5.8 2 1 sb B 2 HM Sweet Chorus 7 39 5 30 5 29 7 38 7 4.5 8 91 9 7.3 2 1 sesy B 3 Sem Synergy 3 17 4 21 5 30 4 25 Ht 6 4 8 97 6 4.3 2 1 sesyn B 3 Sem Synergy 4 20 5 26 5 28 5 28 Ht 5 3.7 8 96 5 3.8 2 1 su Y 4 Cr Tamarack Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 41 2 1.8 3 20 6 4.3 2 1 se B 1 Sem Temptation 8 49 6 31 8 41 6 33 7 4.5 9 100 9 6.8 1 1 su Y 3 HM Turbo 2 10 4 21 3 17 5 30 Ht 4 3 5 36 1 1.8 5 1 se Y 4 MM Tuxedo 3 16 2 14 3 16 4 23 2 2.3 9 100 1 1.3 2 1 su Y 5 SnRv UY 0712 OJ Rp 3 5 27 Rp 3 6 37 5 3.7 2 6 4 3.5 1 1 su Y 5 SnRv UY 1953 OK 6 30 5 29 5 28 3 18 Ht 2 2.2 1 0 3 2.5 2 1 su Y 1 SnRv UY 3435 OM Rp 3 5 30 Rp 3 7 38 7 4.5 8 94 9 6.8 2 1 su W 5 Rog WH 1428 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 28 4 2.8 1 0 3 2.5 2 3 su W 5 Rog WH 2801 (Rp1-D) Rp 14 8 40 Rp 12 5 31 2 2 9 100 5 4 2 2 Shrunken-2 and HQ sh2 hybrids sh2 Y 3 IFS 177A 6 30 6 34 7 36 7 41 2 1.8 9 100 4 3.3 8 7 sh2 Y 3 IFS 179A 5 27 6 34 5 29 5 32 2 1.8 8 97 7 5 3 1 sh2 Y 4 IFS 182A Rp 2 6 31 Rp 4 1 10 Ht 1 1.7 9 100 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 B 2 IFS 273A 5 27 4 25 5 27 7 40 4 3 7 87 9 6.8 4 1 sh2 B 3 IFS 277A 7 36 5 30 9 48 5 32 3 2.5 8 97 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 B 3 IFS 278A 6 34 6 33 7 40 3 21 Ht 2 2.2 9 100 3 3 3 1 sh2 B 4 IFS 282A Rp 3 7 37 Rp 2 2 11 Ht 2 2.2 9 100 3 2.5 1 1 sh2 W 4 IFS 382A Rp 5 7 37 Rp 2 2 12 Ht 2 2.3 9 100 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 Y 3 IFS 1179 6 33 6 31 6 34 8 46 4 3.2 8 97 1 1.8 4 1 Continued on next page 136

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 4 IFS 1183 M S34 Rp 2 5 30 Rp 2 2 13 Ht 3 2.7 4 21 2 2.3 3 1 sh2 Y 2 IFS 1277 8 44 8 42 9 55 9 48 4 3.2 9 100 3 2.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 IFS 1280 Rp 1 5 30 Rp 1 2 14 Ht 2 1.8 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 IFS 1283 Rp 2 5 26 Rp 2 2 11 Ht 1 1.7 9 100 1 1.5 3 1 sh2 B 2 IFS 2170 7 37 6 33 8 45 7 38 4 3.2 9 100 8 6 1 1 sh2 B 3 IFS 2178 Rp 3 5 26 Rp 2 2 13 Ht 2 1.8 9 100 2 2 3 1 sh2 B 4 IFS 2281 Rp 6 6 33 Rp 2 2 16 Ht 1 1.7 9 100 2 2.3 2 1 sh2 W 2 IFS 3173 8 40 7 36 8 41 7 40 4 3 9 100 4 3.3 4 1 sh2 W 3 IFS 3175 7 36 9 45 9 63 8 45 4 3.2 9 100 5 4 8 8 sh2 W 2 IFS 3474 6 34 6 31 7 37 7 38 5 3.7 4 31 4 3.3 4 1 sh2 B 4 Cent 74213B 6 32 5 30 6 34 5 27 Ht 2 2.3 8 97 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 Y 4 AC Abco Var 232 Y Rp 3 6 31 Rp 2 5 29 Ht 3 2.5 4 31 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 AC ACcede MR Y Rp 3 Rp 0 6 33 1 4 Ht 6 4.2 9 100 1 1.3 2 1 sh2 Y 4 AC Accensuate MRY Rp 2 Rp 0 5 28 1 3 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 1 1 2 1 sh2 W 3 AC ACcrue 8 44 6 34 8 42 9 48 5 3.7 4 27 7 5.3 3 2 sh2 B 3 AC ACR 7156 BC Rp 0 Rp 0 4 25 2 11 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 W 4 AC ACX 1204 MRW Rp 2 Rp 0 5 26 1 7 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 1 1.5 1 1 sh2 B 3 Sdw Awesome 6 31 5 28 6 31 7 42 2 2.3 8 96 5 3.8 4 1 sh2 Y 4 HM Bandit Rp 8 7 37 Rp 5 7 40 Ht 7 4.5 4 23 2 2.3 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem Basin R Rp 6 7 37 Rp 2 6 37 6 4 3 16 3 3 7 1 sh2 B 6 Bas BC 375 6 32 6 31 4 25 2 13 Ht 4 2.8 8 94 3 3 7 7 sh2 B 5 Bas BC 503 Rp 10 6 32 Rp 1 2 12 Ht 1 1.7 4 29 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 B 5 Bas BC 1735 Rp 4 4 22 Rp 1 4 25 4 3 3 16 1 1.5 2 1 sh2 W 3 Rog Boreal Rp 2 7 37 Rp 1 1 9 Ht 2 2.2 9 100 8 6.3 3 1 sh2 B 3 Rog BSS 0977 VP A Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 12 Ht 4 3 8 96 8 6.3 3 1 sh2 B 3 Rog BSS 0982 Rp 4 6 32 Rp 2 8 44 8 4.7 4 23 3 2.8 2 1 sh2 B 3 Rog BSS 5390 5 26 6 31 6 34 7 41 1 1.5 8 91 1 1.3 3 1 sh2+ B 4 Cr Bueno Rp 2 Rp 0 6 31 4 25 2 2.2 9 100 2 2 3 1 sh2 Y 4 DM C411 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 31 2 2.2 3 17 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 B 3 HM Candy Corner Rp 7 7 37 Rp 4 6 36 6 4 4 26 6 4.3 2 1 sh2 B 4 HM Cavalry Rp 4 5 30 Rp 1 1 9 Ht 5 3.7 4 27 1 1.5 1 1 sh2 Y 3 Sem Challenger 7 37 7 35 6 34 2 16 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 1 1.5 2 1 sh2 Y 3 Sem Challenger 6 33 7 38 5 28 2 14 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog Code 902 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 1 5 Ht 9 5.2 3 12 1 1.5 2 1 sh2 Y 2 Rog Code 905 7 39 8 39 6 35 7 41 6 4 7 89 4 3.5 1 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Code 907 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 24 3 20 Ht 4 3 9 100 4 3.5 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 909 Rp 1 Rp 0 5 28 2 14 Ht 4 2.8 4 33 3 3 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 910 Rp 2 Rp 0 6 33 3 21 Ht 4 2.8 2 3 3 2.5 2 1 Continued on next page 137

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 5 Rog Code 911 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 11 Ht 2 1.8 2 9 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 912 Rp 1 Rp 0 3 20 4 26 Ht 7 4.3 3 16 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 913 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 28 Ht 3 2.7 8 95 5 4 2 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Code 916 6 30 7 36 6 32 3 19 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 917 3 18 3 19 3 19 3 21 Ht 6 4.2 5 46 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 918 Rp 1 Rp 0 3 17 5 32 Ht 5 3.5 6 53 3 3 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Code 919 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 23 4 22 Ht 6 4 9 100 6 4.3 3 1 sh2 Y 2 Rog Code 929 6 33 6 32 6 33 6 35 Ht 9 5 9 100 3 3 2 1 sh2 Y 2 Rog Code 930 Rp 0 3 19 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 6 4.8 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Code 931 Rp 3 Rp 0 6 33 9 53 7 4.5 5 42 1 1.8 1 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 932 Rp 5 6 34 Rp 5 1 8 Ht 4 2.8 7 89 1 1.5 2 1 sh2 B 4 Rog Code 933 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 7 38 9 5 8 95 2 2.3 6 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 934 Rp 1 Rp 0 3 18 5 28 Ht 4 3.2 4 27 5 4 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 935 Rp 2 7 35 Rp 2 3 19 Ht 6 3.8 9 100 5 4 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 938 7 35 7 35 6 34 6 35 6 4.2 5 50 2 2 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 939 7 36 8 39 7 36 5 32 Ht 6 4.2 4 28 7 5 3 2 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 940 Rp 1 Rp 0 5 28 5 31 Ht 8 4.8 5 50 3 2.5 6 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 941 7 35 7 36 6 34 7 38 4 3.2 2 10 8 5.8 8 7 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 942 Rp 0 1 9 4 2.8 6 54 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog Code 943 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 3 17 Ht 5 3.7 4 35 2 2 3 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog Code 944 Rp 2 Rp 0 4 25 2 16 1 1.2 5 39 6 4.3 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog Code 947 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 8 1 2 Ht 5 3.5 3 16 6 4.3 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Code 948 Rp 3 4 22 Rp 1 9 53 6 3.8 9 100 2 2 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 949 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 3 20 Ht 2 2.3 4 23 3 3 3 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog Code 950 7 36 4 23 Ht 8 4.7 9 100 6 4.8 3 1 sh2 B 4 Rog Code 951 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 36 9 5 7 89 5 3.8 7 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 953 Rp 4 7 36 Rp 4 5 30 2 2 9 100 1 1.3 2 1 sh2 W 3 Rog Code 954 Rp 1 5 26 Rp 2 3 20 Ht 4 3.2 3 15 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Code 959 Rp 5 7 37 Rp 6 3 18 Ht 4 3 3 14 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 B 3 Rog Code 960 Rp 3 3 17 Rp 2 3 21 2 2 7 80 1 1.5 1 1 sh2 W 3 AC Constellation 9 50 9 43 9 60 7 40 4 3.2 9 100 6 4.5 2 1 sh2+ B 2 Cr CSABF4-157 8 45 9 43 9 56 5 31 5 3.5 9 100 7 5 1 1 sh2+ Y 4 Cr CSAYP6-225 6 33 8 40 8 41 5 31 Ht 1 1.5 9 100 6 4.5 8 8 sh2 Y 5 Cr CSHYP6-229 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 22 4 2.8 9 100 1 1 3 1 sh2 W 5 Sem Devotion 6 30 6 33 6 31 4 26 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 5 4 4 1 sh2 Y 4 DM DMC 21-84 Rp 2 5 27 Rp 1 5 30 Ht 3 2.7 3 17 7 5.3 2 1 sh2 Y 4 DM DMX 21-87 Rp 1 4 25 Rp 1 5 27 2 2 5 40 6 4.8 3 1 sh2 B 3 Sem EX 0870 5788 Rp 10 7 36 Rp 3 6 36 5 3.5 4 24 5 4 5 1 Continued on next page 138

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 4 Cr Fortitude Rp 4 7 38 Rp 4 3 20 Ht 6 4.2 9 100 5 3.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 SnRv Galaxy Rp 20 8 40 Rp 6 4 25 Ht 7 4.5 9 100 4 3.5 2 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Garrison Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 1 10 Ht 2 2.2 3 16 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 202 Rp 1 Rp 0 4 22 5 32 4 3 4 24 1 1.3 3 1 sh2 B 4 GG Green Giant Code 214 Rp 3 5 29 Rp 1 6 34 3 2.5 7 85 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 215 Rp 1 Rp 0 3 18 6 34 9 5.2 4 32 1 1 3 1 sh2 Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 216 Rp 2 Rp 0 6 33 5 32 4 3 7 90 5 3.8 3 1 sh2 Y 2 GG Green Giant Code 221 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 35 8 4.8 9 100 7 5 2 1 sh2 Y 2 GG Green Giant Code 222 Rp 1 Rp 0 3 20 5 29 Ht 5 3.7 9 100 6 4.8 2 1 sh2 Y 3 GG Green Giant Code 223 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 1 4 25 5 3.5 9 100 2 2.3 3 1 sh2 Y 4 GG Green Giant Code 226 4 20 6 34 5 29 5 30 5 3.7 8 97 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 W 4 GG Green Giant Code 227 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 14 5 31 5 3.3 6 79 4 3.3 2 1 sh2 W 4 GG Green Giant Code 228 Rp 2 5 27 Rp 1 8 43 6 3.8 9 100 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog GSS 0951 Rp 1 Rp 0 4 25 4 25 Ht 5 3.7 9 100 2 2 3 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog GSS 0952 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 22 2 11 Ht 5 3.7 9 100 8 5.8 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog GSS 0966 A Rp 1 Rp 0 5 26 2 11 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 9 6.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog GSS-0974-c Rp 2 Rp 0 5 29 2 15 Ht 4 2.8 6 74 1 1.5 4 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog GSS 1477 Rp 2 5 27 Rp 2 4 22 Ht 4 3 3 12 3 2.8 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog GSS 2259P Rp 9 Rp 0 5 30 4 24 Ht 4 2.8 3 12 3 2.8 5 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog GSS 3404 Rp 4 7 35 Rp 7 4 24 Ht 6 4.2 4 27 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog GSS 4644-C 3 16 6 34 5 29 3 21 Ht 8 4.7 9 100 2 2 7 1 sh2 Y 2 Rog GSS 5610 6 31 6 34 8 41 6 34 Ht 7 4.3 8 96 2 2.3 2 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog GSS 5649 Rp 6 6 34 Rp 4 4 25 Ht 6 3.8 3 19 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog GSS 5698 Rp 6 5 29 Rp 5 4 25 Ht 5 3.3 8 94 2 2 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog GSS 5729 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 27 5 3.7 4 29 4 3.3 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog GSS 6352 Rp 5 7 38 Rp 5 2 14 Ht 5 3.3 3 16 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 Y 2 Rog GSS 7158 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 5 29 Ht 3 2.5 4 33 3 2.8 1 3 sh2 Y 2 Rog GSS 7314 8 43 6 32 7 37 9 52 5 3.7 8 92 6 4.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog GSS 7568 Rp 3 6 31 Rp 2 7 39 7 4.5 4 26 4 3.5 2 1 Continued on next page 139

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 5 Rog GSS 8369 Rp 2 Rp 0 5 27 4 22 Ht 6 4.2 8 95 2 2 8 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog GSS 8529 6 32 6 34 7 37 5 30 2 2 4 32 7 5 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog GSS 8812 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 24 5 3.5 1 0 1 1.5 2 2 sh2 Y 5 Rog GSS 9641 Rp 1 Rp 0 6 32 3 17 Ht 2 2 6 58 7 5 4 1 sh2 B 4 SnRv HB 1635 OP Rp 12 9 43 Rp 11 5 32 6 4.2 8 96 3 3 2 1 sh2 B 4 SnRv HB 2630 OM Rp 11 7 38 Rp 10 5 32 7 4.5 9 100 2 2.3 1 1 sh2 B 5 SnRv HB 4828 LN Rp 4 5 28 Rp 1 5 28 8 4.7 9 100 2 2 2 1 sh2 W 4 Rog Heavenly Rp 1 7 36 Rp 4 7 42 6 3.8 4 26 4 3.3 2 1 sh2 W 4 HM HMX 1368 WS Rp 1 6 32 Rp 3 7 39 5 3.3 4 23 1 1.5 2 1 sh2 W 3 HM HMX 6360 WS 7 36 6 32 6 35 8 46 3 2.7 3 12 2 2.3 2 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 6386 S Rp 3 Rp 0 6 33 5 31 Ht 3 2.7 3 14 5 4 8 8 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 7368 S 6 33 5 27 5 27 5 27 7 4.3 9 100 3 2.8 1 1 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 7389 S Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 22 7 4.3 9 100 3 3 6 1 sh2 B 3 HM HMX 8343 BS 4 24 4 23 4 25 7 38 Ht 5 3.5 9 100 6 4.3 3 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 8346 S 5 29 5 29 6 31 2 12 5 3.5 9 100 1 1.8 1 1 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 8372 S 8 43 7 38 7 39 3 19 5 3.7 9 100 6 4.3 4 1 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 8373 S 8 45 8 39 8 44 3 20 6 4 9 100 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 W 3 HM HMX 9347 S 5 29 6 32 6 32 1 6 4 3 9 100 1 1.3 2 1 sh2 W 4 HM HMX 9349 S 7 38 8 41 8 41 1 4 Ht 5 3.5 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 B 3 HM HMX 9350 S Rp 4 Rp 0 9 46 7 39 6 3.8 3 14 3 2.5 3 1 sh2 B 2 HM HMX 9351 S 5 29 5 27 5 30 3 20 3 2.5 9 100 1 1.5 1 1 sh2 B 3 HM HMX 9353 S 9 50 6 31 9 49 2 13 5 3.7 9 100 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 2 HM HMX 9354 S Rp 1 Rp 0 6 35 6 34 Ht 5 3.7 8 96 5 4 2 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 9356 S Rp 0 Rp 0 4 25 4 22 Ht 5 3.7 5 50 2 2 2 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 9386 S Rp 1 5 28 Rp 1 5 31 8 4.7 2 6 1 1.5 6 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 9387 S Rp 4 6 31 Rp 2 2 13 Ht 2 2.2 6 55 1 1.5 3 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 9388 S Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 3 19 Ht 1 1.7 9 100 1 1.3 4 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 9389S Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 2 12 Ht 6 4 3 14 2 2 6 1 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 9390 S Rp 5 7 35 Rp 3 2 11 Ht 7 4.3 4 21 1 1.5 3 1 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 9391 S Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 13 7 4.3 5 41 4 3.5 5 2 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 9392 S Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 2 14 4 3.2 4 30 3 2.8 1 1 sh2 Y 4 HM HMX 9393 S Rp 4 5 28 Rp 3 3 20 6 4 4 21 4 3.3 4 1 sh2 Y 3 HM HMX 9394 S Rp 4 6 33 Rp 3 2 12 Ht 5 3.7 3 17 2 2.3 3 1 sh2 B 5 Cr Holiday Rp 8 5 30 Rp 3 1 8 Ht 2 2.3 9 100 1 1.5 2 1 sh2 W 5 Cr How Sweet It Is 7 37 7 37 7 37 5 28 5 3.5 9 100 5 3.8 6 1 sh2 W 4 SnRv HW 2545 OM Rp 10 7 35 Rp 4 4 26 Ht 6 4 6 66 3 3 7 2 sh2 Y 5 SnRv HY 0850 ON 5 29 5 30 2 13 Ht 7 4.5 9 100 1 1.5 4 1 Continued on next page 140

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 4 SnRv HY 0882 OP Rp 14 9 43 Rp 7 5 29 Ht 9 5.7 8 93 3 2.8 2 1 sh2 Y 2 SnRv HY 1027 OP 5 28 5 29 5 26 2 16 Ht 5 3.5 9 100 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 1 SnRv HY 1089 OM Rp 3 6 34 Rp 6 3 20 Ht 9 5 9 100 5 4 3 3 sh2 Y 2 SnRv HY 1122 OP Rp 12 7 36 Rp 6 8 43 8 4.8 9 100 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 SnRv HY 1481 OM Rp 12 7 38 Rp 6 3 18 Ht 9 5.5 8 93 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 SnRv HY 1516 OM Rp 9 8 41 Rp 7 3 21 Ht 7 4.3 9 100 3 3 2 1 sh2 Y 3 SnRv HY 1656 ON Rp 8 7 37 Rp 4 7 39 9 6 9 100 8 5.5 1 1 sh2 W 3 HM Ice Queen Rp 9 8 42 Rp 3 6 36 5 3.5 2 10 6 4.3 1 1 sh2 W 3 HM Iceberg 7 39 8 40 7 36 6 34 4 2.8 4 21 2 2.3 3 1 sh2 W 3 Sak K2-501B 7 38 6 34 7 38 8 46 5 3.5 8 97 5 4 2 1 sh2 W 3 Sak K7-318 Rp 3 6 34 Rp 3 5 28 4 2.8 9 100 4 3.3 2 1 sh2 B 3 Rog Legion Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 1 9 Ht 4 2.8 2 6 3 2.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Magnum II 6 31 6 32 4 23 3 18 Ht 3 2.7 8 97 3 3 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Cr Marvel Rp 4 7 35 Rp 7 5 32 5 3.5 9 100 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Cr Marvel Edge Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 2 5 30 4 2.8 8 92 5 4 2 1 sh2 Y 4 HM Max Rp 7 8 41 Rp 12 5 31 4 3.2 4 22 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 Y 5 HM Megaton Rp 7 7 36 Rp 1 5 29 7 4.5 4 22 3 3 2 1 sh2 Y 2 Cent Mirai 003 5 29 4 25 6 32 8 44 4 3.2 4 29 7 5 3 1 sh2 Y 1 Cent Mirai 131 Y 4 21 4 24 5 26 3 21 4 3 8 97 8 6 3 1 sh2 Y 1 Cent Mirai 148 Y 5 26 4 23 5 27 4 22 3 2.7 9 100 8 6 2 1 sh2 B 2 Cent Mirai 308 BC 5 25 4 21 4 24 6 35 2 2.3 8 97 9 7.5 3 3 sh2 B 2 Cent Mirai 336 BC 7 35 6 31 5 27 5 31 1 1.7 9 100 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 B 4 Cent Mirai 350 BC 5 29 6 31 5 28 3 19 Ht 2 1.8 9 100 5 3.8 1 1 sh2 B 3 Sem Obsession Rp 3 4 23 Rp 1 3 18 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 2 2 1 1 sh2 B 3 Sem Obsession Rp 5 4 25 Rp 2 2 16 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 2 2 1 1 sh2 B 4 Sem Obsession -R Rp 3 5 27 Rp 2 3 17 Ht 1 1.7 8 96 4 3.5 2 1 sh2 B 3 Cr Optimum 6 32 6 31 8 41 5 28 6 4 9 100 6 4.3 2 1 sh2 Y 5 Rog Overland Rp 1 Rp 0 5 26 2 11 Ht 3 2.5 7 88 5 4 5 1 sh2 Y 2 Sem Passion Rp 2 5 30 Rp 1 3 20 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 2 2.3 3 1 sh2 B 4 HM Polaris Rp 7 7 37 Rp 4 6 35 4 3.2 4 34 3 2.5 4 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Prime Plus Rp 6 6 34 Rp 5 1 7 Ht 2 2.2 9 100 9 7.3 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Rog Protégé Rp 0 Rp 0 4 22 5 27 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 5 3.8 3 1 sh2 B 4 Sem QHB 6RH 1074 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 15 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 2 2.3 2 1 sh2 W 4 Sem QHW 6RH 1051 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 34 Ht 6 3.8 2 6 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 W 4 Sem QHW 6RH 1058 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 0 6 33 Ht 6 3.8 2 7 6 4.3 4 4 sh2 Y 5 Sem QHY 6SH 1065 Rp 2 5 30 Rp 2 4 26 Ht 6 3.8 5 42 5 4 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Cr Rana Rp 2 6 31 Rp 3 2 12 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 1 1.8 2 1 Continued on next page 141

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 4 HM Ranger 8 48 9 44 8 41 1 8 Ht 9 5 5 36 3 2.5 5 3 sh2 Y 2 Rog Ravelin Rp 1 5 27 Rp 1 7 40 Ht 6 3.8 7 89 6 4.3 2 1 sh2 Y 5 PV Rebecca Rp 6 8 40 Rp 5 2 14 Ht 3 2.5 6 63 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 HM Rustler Rp 11 7 36 Rp 4 5 32 Ht 4 3 4 32 1 1.3 1 1 sh2 Y 4 Cr Samurai Rp 4 5 29 Rp 2 4 24 Ht 5 3.3 1 0 6 4.3 4 1 sh2 B 4 Sem SEM 1 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 15 Ht 2 1.8 9 100 4 3.3 1 1 sh2 B 4 Sem SEM 2 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 1 2 15 Ht 2 2 9 100 3 2.5 1 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 3 Rp 2 4 23 Rp 1 6 35 4 3.2 2 4 2 2 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 4 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 6 33 Ht 6 3.8 6 79 2 2.3 9 8 sh2 B 3 Sem SEM 7 Rp 2 5 27 Rp 1 5 31 Ht 5 3.7 8 95 1 1.8 3 1 sh2 W 4 Sem SEM 8 6 30 7 37 5 29 4 23 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 3 2.8 8 7 sh2 Y 5 Sem SEM 9 Rp 3 5 26 Rp 1 7 38 3 2.7 1 0 6 4.8 3 1 sh2 Y 5 Sem SEM 10 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 1 9 Ht 6 3.8 9 100 2 2 1 1 sh2 Y 5 Sem SEM 11 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 13 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 1 1.5 3 1 sh2 W 3 Sem SEM 13 4 22 5 28 4 22 5 28 Ht 6 4.2 9 100 4 3.3 4 2 sh2 Y 5 Sem SEM 14 Rp 6 7 37 Rp 3 4 23 Ht 6 4.2 2 7 4 3.3 2 1 sh2 B 3 Sem SEM 16 Rp 2 Rp 0 3 20 5 28 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 6 4.5 4 1 sh2 B 3 Sem SEM 17 Rp 2 Rp 0 2 15 4 26 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 5 4 4 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 18 Rp 2 Rp 0 Rp 0 3 19 Ht 6 4.2 9 100 3 2.5 2 1 sh2 Y 3 Sem SEM 20 5 26 5 30 5 26 4 26 6 3.8 8 97 3 2.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 21 Rp 5 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 22 5 3.5 9 100 4 3.3 3 1 sh2 Y 3 Sem SEM 22 Rp 9 7 38 Rp 8 6 33 6 3.8 6 57 5 4 2 1 sh2 B 3 Sem SEM 24 Rp 1 Rp 0 5 27 6 35 5 3.5 9 100 5 4 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 25 Rp 2 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 16 Ht 4 2.8 9 100 3 3 2 1 sh2 B 4 Sem SEM 26 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 4 22 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 1 1.8 1 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 27 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 14 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 4 3.5 2 1 sh2 B 3 Sem SEM 28 Rp 1 Rp 0 6 33 5 27 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 W 3 Sem SEM 29 Rp 1 Rp 0 3 19 6 34 Ht 5 3.7 9 100 5 3.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 30 Rp 1 Rp 0 Rp 0 2 16 Ht 6 3.8 8 97 2 2 2 2 sh2 Y 5 Sem SEM 32 Rp 2 Rp 0 3 17 5 27 Ht 6 4.2 9 100 1 1.8 1 1 sh2 Y 3 Sem SEM 33 Rp 5 7 35 Rp 10 3 20 Ht 6 4 5 48 6 4.5 3 1 sh2 B 5 Sem SEM 34 Rp 1 Rp 0 5 29 5 30 Ht 7 4.3 9 100 4 3.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 35 6 31 6 33 6 34 4 25 Ht 8 4.8 9 100 2 2.3 2 1 sh2 B 5 Sem SEM 36 5 28 5 28 4 21 4 22 Ht 5 3.7 7 85 1 1.8 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Sem SEM 37 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 0 7 40 5 3.7 2 10 2 2.3 5 1 sh2 Y 3 Sem SEM 40 Rp 0 Rp 0 Rp 1 8 43 8 4.7 5 50 2 2 3 1 Continued on next page 142

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 W 4 Sem SEM 41 Rp 3 5 26 Rp 1 3 17 Ht 2 1.8 9 100 4 3.3 2 1 sh2 B 5 Sem SEM 42 5 26 5 28 3 19 4 23 Ht 5 3.5 8 97 2 2.3 1 1 sh2 Y 5 HM Sentinel Rp 3 7 37 Rp 3 1 9 Ht 4 3 5 39 3 2.8 3 1 sh2 Y 5 Sem Shimmer Rp 3 6 32 Rp 2 2 15 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 2 2 3 1 sh2 Y 5 Sem SHY 6RH 1034 Rp 3 5 28 Rp 2 6 34 3 2.7 1 0 6 4.3 2 1 sh2 Y 1 Sem Signet 8 41 5 27 5 27 5 32 4 2.8 9 100 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 Y 1 Sem Signet 7 38 5 27 4 21 5 31 4 3 9 100 4 3.5 1 1 sh2 W 4 HM Snow White 9 63 9 56 9 73 6 36 6 3.8 6 67 3 2.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 SnRv Spaceship 5 25 6 31 3 20 3 19 Ht 6 4.2 9 100 1 1 3 1 sh2 B 2 AC Summer Sweet 7102 R Rp 9 6 32 Rp 7 6 34 Ht 5 3.5 9 100 8 5.8 3 1 sh2 W 2 AC Summer Sweet 7111 W 8 43 7 35 8 43 6 36 Ht 5 3.3 9 100 7 5.3 4 1 sh2 W 4 AC Summer Sweet 7641 MR W Rp 2 Rp 0 6 33 1 7 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 1 1 3 1 sh2 W 4 AC Summer Sweet 7641 W Rp 6 8 39 Rp 2 1 10 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 1 1.8 3 2 sh2 Y 4 AC Summer Sweet 7650 Y Rp 7 8 41 Rp 5 1 9 Ht 1 1.3 9 100 3 2.5 2 3 sh2 W 4 AC Summer Sweet 8101 MR W Rp 2 Rp 0 5 26 1 7 Ht 4 3.2 9 100 1 1.3 2 1 sh2 W 4 AC Summer Sweet 8101 R Rp 4 8 40 Rp 3 2 12 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 1 1.5 3 1 sh2 B 4 AC Summer Sweet 8102 R Rp 1 8 39 Rp 2 2 15 Ht 3 2.7 9 100 1 1 1 1 sh2+ B 3 AC Summer Sweet MS 502 BC 7 36 9 43 7 36 6 37 8 4.7 9 100 6 4.3 3 1 sh2+ Y 3 AC Summer Sweet MS 820 Y 6 32 6 32 6 31 7 42 5 3.3 9 100 3 2.8 3 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Supersweet Jubilee 6 31 6 34 6 33 9 48 9 5.8 9 100 5 4 6 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Supersweet Jubilee Plus Rp 5 6 33 Rp 3 9 49 9 5.8 8 96 6 4.3 7 1 sh2 Y 4 HM Suregold Rp 6 7 35 Rp 4 6 35 5 3.7 5 47 4 3.3 5 1 sh2 Y 4 HM Suregold Rp 7 7 37 Rp 7 6 37 6 3.8 6 63 4 3.3 5 1 sh2 W 4 Sem SVR 0870 5770 Rp 4 7 38 Rp 2 5 27 5 3.5 3 17 6 4.5 8 8 sh2 Y 2 Sem SVR 0870 5808 Rp 7 6 33 Rp 3 7 38 4 2.8 4 30 4 3.5 2 1 sh2 W 4 Cr Symmetry Rp 1 4 25 Rp 1 4 26 4 3.2 4 28 3 2.5 5 1 sh2+ W 5 Cr Tempest 6 33 6 33 6 33 5 28 5 3.3 9 100 2 2 3 1 Continued on next page 143

Table 7 (continued) ET KC RM SdCo Hybrid Common Rust Northern Leaf Stewart s MDM Southern Herbicide avirulent D-virlnt G-virlnt Blight Wilt A & B Leaf Blight Callisto Laudis Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % Rxn % HT Rxn rate Rxn % Rxn rate Rxn Rxn sh2 Y 5 Cr Tribute Rp 6 7 37 Rp 3 1 6 Ht 3 2.5 9 100 1 1.5 1 1 sh2 Y 2 IFS Vision 8 44 9 43 9 58 9 49 5 3.7 9 100 3 2.8 2 1 sh2 W 3 Sdw White Saturn 5 25 5 30 3 20 5 31 Ht 2 2.2 8 96 6 4.5 2 1 sh2 Y 4 Rog Winstar Rp 1 6 33 Rp 1 1 7 Ht 5 3.7 9 100 8 5.5 3 1 sh2 W 3 Rog WSS 1830 Rp 2 Rp 0 5 29 2 12 Ht 2 2.3 4 35 8 5.5 3 1 sh2 W 3 Rog WSS 3801 Rp 1 5 27 Rp 1 4 22 Ht 5 3.3 4 22 7 5 3 1 sh2 W 4 Rog WSS 3826 Rp 2 Rp 0 6 34 4 22 5 3.5 5 50 5 3.8 2 1 sh2 W 4 SnRv ZHW 1622 OP Rp 5 6 31 Rp 2 3 20 5 3.5 9 100 2 2 4 1 * excluding Rp hybrids 31. 30. mean 32.5 28 3.3 67.2 3.25 4 9 11. sd 9.4 6.7 12 0.95 37.7 1.39 3 BLSD 9.1 6.7 7.5 10 1.52 31.6 1.17 1Q 27 0 25 20 2.7 27.5 2 2Q 32 29 30 29 3.3 94 3.3 3Q 37 35 35 36 4 100 4.3 Rxn classification of hybrid disease reactions: 1=resistant 3=moderately resistant 5=moderate 7=moderately susceptible 9=susceptible Rate disease rating: 0 to 100% leaf area infected (avirulent rust, D-virulent rust, G- virulent rust, NLB) 1 to 9 scale (Stewart s wilt, SLB) 0 to 100% incidence of infected plants (MDM) Seed source: AC=Abbott & Cobb Bas=Basso Cent=Centest Cr=Crookham DM=Del Monte GG=Green Giant HM=Harris Moran IFS=Illinois Foundation Seeds MM=Mesa Maize PV=Pop Vriend Rog=Rogers (Syngenta) Sak=Sakata Sdw=Seedway Sem=Seminis SnR=Snowy River 144

Sugar-enhanced Sweet Corn Cultivar Evaluation for Northern Indiana, 2009 Elizabeth T. Maynard, Purdue University, Westville, Indiana 46391 Indiana growers harvested sweet corn for fresh market sales from 5,400 acres in 2008, with an average yield of 70 cwt/a (166 crates or 3.5 tons per acre) and total value of $11.7 million (USDA-NASS Indiana Agricultural Statistics, 2008-2009). Indiana ranks 17 th among states for production of fresh market sweet corn. The 2007 USDA Ag Census reported 603 Indiana farms producing sweet corn for fresh markets and 51 farms selling to processors. Sweet corn fields for fresh market sales are located throughout the state. In northern Indiana, bicolor corn is most commonly grown. Varieties with improved eating quality are of interest to both producers and consumers. Producers are also interested in yield, ear size, appearance, and agronomic characteristics. This paper reports on 15 sugar enhanced and synergistic sweet corn cultivars and experimental lines that were evaluated at the Pinney-Purdue Agricultural Center in Wanatah, Indiana. Materials and Methods The trial was conducted on a Tracy sandy loam. The fall 2008 soil test showed 1.2% organic matter, ph 6.4, and 25 ppm phosphorus (P), 93 ppm potassium (K), 165 ppm magnesium (Mg), 600 ppm calcium (Ca). Prior to planting wheat as a cover crop, we applied 20, 30, and 45 lb./a N, P 2 O 5 and K 2 O, plus 7.8 lb./a S, and 0.8 lb./a Zn. In spring 2009, wheat was treated on May 1 with glyphosate and worked in on May 8 and 11. Fertilizer (200 lb./a 6-24-24) was broadcast to provide 12 lb. N, 48 lb. P 2 O 5, and 48 lb. K 2 O per acre. The trial was set up as a randomized complete block design with three replications. Cultivars were assigned to individual plots one row wide (30 inches) by 30 feet long. Corn was seeded May 19, 2009, with a finger pick-up planter set to drop 23,200 seeds per acre, and later thinned to 35 plants per 30-foot row (20,328 plants per acre). N (at 20.3 lb./a) and P (at 18.2 lb./a P 2 O 5 ) were applied at planting from 19-17- 0 (10 gal. /A), and an additional 70 lb./a N from urea ammonium nitrate solution was injected June 22. Tefluthrin (Force 3G) was applied at planting to control corn rootworms. Weeds were controlled with atrazine (Atrazine 4L) and s-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum) applied and incorporated before seeding, cultivation, and hand weeding. Irrigation was applied during the growing season as needed. Insecticides were applied as needed to control caterpillars. Emergence was recorded 10 and 24 days after planting (DAP), before thinning. Early plant vigor was evaluated 31 DAP. Seventy-three DAP, just before harvest, plant vigor, height, and degree of tiller formation, and the height from the soil to the middle of the ear was measured for three ears per plot. Each plot was harvested when corn reached marketable stage. The weights and numbers of marketable ears were recorded. Three ears from each plot were selected to evaluate degree of husk cover, husk tightness, degree of tip fill, overall attractiveness, average ear diameter, length after husking, and shank length. One person rated the flavor of each entry. Rating scales are described below and in table footnotes. Quantitative data with equal variance across treatments were analyzed using ANOVA followed by mean separation using Fisher s protected least significant difference at P 0.05. Relationships between yield components, ear and plant characteristics, and average days to harvest were analyzed using linear regression. 145

Characteristic Husk Cover Husk Tightness Tip Fill Rating Scale 5=more than 2 inches cover. 4=1.25-2 inches. 3=0.75-1.25 inches. 2=less than 0.75 inch. 1=ear exposed. 3=tight. 2=firm. 1=loose. 5=kernels filled to tip of cob. 4=less than 0.5 inch unfilled. 3=0.5-1 inch unfilled. 2=more than 1 inch unfilled. 1=more than 2 inches unfilled. Results and Discussion The growing season was drier and cooler than normal. The USDA-NASS Indiana Crop and Weather Reports documented that from May 18 to August 16, 1,628 growing degree days (GDD) accumulated, 134 fewer than normal. Rainfall during that period totaled 7.27 inches, 4.43 inches below normal. Warm soil temperatures just after planting led to rapid emergence, and by 10 DAP emergence averaged 95% of the intended seeding rate. Nine varieties had more than 95% emergence and did not differ significantly from CSEBF7-253, which had the highest at 107% (Table 1). Two varieties, Navajo and Luscious, had emergence less than 75%, significantly lower than all of the others. For these varieties, low emergence led to final stands of 78% and 79% of the desired population, respectively; other varieties were within 90% of the desired stand after thinning. Differences in early vigor were readily apparent and were reflected in scores ranging from 3 (Navajo and Luscious) to 8.3 (BC 0822) on the 9-point rating scale (Table 1). Six varieties received ratings not significantly different than BC 0822. Fastlane and Providence had low vigor, not significantly different from Navajo and Luscious. Plant vigor near harvest ranged from 3 to 8, but did not necessarily correspond to early vigor. Montauk, Providence, and BC 0822 appeared the most vigorous, and Fastlane the least (Table 1). Three of the four earliest varieties were among varieties with the lowest vigor ratings at harvest. Most varieties produced tillers, except Fastlane, which consistently had few or none. CSYBF7-257, and to a lesser extent, Vitality, consistently produced long tillers (Table 1). Results for yield and ear quality are presented in Table 2. Marketable yield averaged 7.7 tons per acre. Montauk produced the highest yield, 10.8 tons per acre. Providence and GH 0851 produced significantly less at 9.8 and 9.7 tons per acre, respectively. CSEBF7-253 was fourth, at 9.0 tons per acre, and along with the three above it, significantly more than the other 11 varieties in the trial. Half of the varieties produced between 6.5 and 9.0 tons per acre: CSEYF7-248, BC 0822, CSYBF7-257, CSYBF7-256, CSQBF7-262, Luscious, and Navajo. Vitality, HMX 6358BES, Fastlane, and Trinity produced from 5.7 to 6.3 tons per acre, significantly less than all except Navajo. The number of marketable ears ranged from 1,210 to 1,678 dozen per acre, and averaged 1,550. Eleven varieties produced more than 1,564 dozen per acre, including CSQBF7-262, GH 0851, CSYBF7-257, Providence, Montauk, CSYBF7-256, CSEBF7-253, BC 0822, Trinity, HMX 6385BES, and Vitality. Navajo and Luscious produced the fewest ears per acre, due at least in part to the low plant stand. Average weight per ear ranged from 0.61 lb. (Vitality) to 1.09 lb. (Montauk). Average ear weight and yield in tons per acre were both correlated with days to harvest: later-maturing varieties tended to produce heavier ears and more tons per acre. Luscious and Navajo produced ears a little heavier than would be expected based on their harvest dates, and BC 0822 produced ears a little lighter than would be expected based on its harvest date. 146

Ear length ranged from 7.3 to 8.5 inches, and diameter ranged from 1.7 to 2.1 inches. The longest ears were produced by Providence, GH 0851, Montauk, CSEYF7-248, and CSEBF7-253 (8.3 to 8.5 inches). CSYBF7-257, HMX 6358BES, and BC 0822 produced ears 7.7 to 7.9 inches long. The shortest ears ranged from 7.3 to 7.6 inches and included Trinity, Vitality, Navajo, CSQBF7-262, CSYBF7-256, Fastlane and Luscious. Varieties that had ears with a diameter of 2 inches or greater included Luscious, Montauk and Navajo. Fastlane, Vitality, Trinity, and CSYBF7-257 had the narrowest ears at 1.7 to 1.8 inches. Shank length ranged from 2.8 inches 5.4 inches and averaged 4.0 inches (Table 1). Varieties with the longest shanks included Montauk, Providence, Fastlane, and GH 0851 (4.7 to 5.4 inches). Varieties with the shortest shanks included HMX 6358BES, Vitality, CSQBF7-262 and Trinity (2.8-3.3 inches). Ear length and shank length were positively correlated with days to harvest. HMX 6458BES and CSEYF7-248 produced longer ears, and BC 0822 produced shorter ears than would be expected based on their harvest dates. Fastlane had much longer shanks than expected based on harvest date. Ear height, measured from the ground to mid-ear, ranged from 19.7 inches for HMX 6358BES, to 32.6 inches for Montauk and was correlated with harvest date later varieties tended to have higher ears. CSYBF7-257 had ears closer to the ground than would be expected based on harvest date. Husk cover ratings averaged 3.8. Ten varieties averaged 4 or better, indicating at least 1.25 inches of husk cover: Luscious, BC 0822, CSQBF7-262, CSYBF7-256, GH 0851, Navajo, CSEBF7-253, Providence, and CSEYF7-248. CSYBF7-257, Trinity, and Vitality averaged between 2.8 and 3.4, indicating 0.75 to 1.25 inches of cover on most ears. Two varieties, HMX6358BES and Fastlane, averaged less than 2.5, indicating some ears with less than 0.75 inch of husk cover. Husk cover was correlated with harvest date: later varieties tended to have better husk cover. The husks of Fastlane, HMX 6358BES, Luscious, BC 0822 were loose around the ear tip. Tip fill ratings averaged 4.1. Navajo, Vitality, GH 0851, CSYBF7-256, CSYBF7-257, HMX 6358BES had good tip fill, averaging 4.3 or more, indicating that most ears had ears with less than 0.5 inch of the tip unfilled. These varieties were significantly better than Montauk, Fastlane, BC 0822, CSQBF7-262, and CSEYF7-248, which ranged from 3.4 to 3.8, indicating some ears with more than 0.5 inch of unfilled kernels. Luscious, CSEBF7-253, and Trinity had good tip fill, indicating ears with about 0.5 inch of unfilled kernels. Providence had the worst tip fill rating at 3.0 (0.5 to 1 inch unfilled kernels), though not significantly lower than CSEYF7-248. For overall ear quality in terms of appearance, CSEBF7-253 received the highest rating. Other varieties above the 6.0 average included BC 0822, CSEYF7-248, Navajo, Montauk, CSYBF7-256, and CSYBF7-257. Fastlane, Trinity, and CSQBF7-262 received the lowest ratings for overall ear appearance. Varieties that received flavor ratings of very good to excellent, or better, included BC 0822, CSYBF7-256, CSYBF7-257, GH 0851, and Providence. Fastlane consistently received a rating of very good. Often, producers select one or two varieties in each maturity range so it is helpful to compare varieties of similar maturity. Among the four earliest varieties in this trial, yield did not differ significantly whether measured in dozens or tons per acre. HMX 6358BES and Fastlane produced longer ears than the other two early varieties. HMX 6358BES had reasonable ear quality, but Fastlane had poor husk cover. Vitality and Trinity produced ears of similar length and reasonable quality, but short flag leaves on Trinity might reduce its attractiveness to some buyers. Among five entries harvested 78 to 80 DAP, yields tended to be lower for Navajo and 147

Luscious, associated with lower plant stands. Ear quality was generally acceptable to good. Among the four bicolor entries harvested 83 or more days after planting, yield in dozens per acre did not differ significantly, but Montauk produced the greatest and BC 0822 the least yield in tons per acre. Montauk and Providence produced the longest, and BC 0822 the shorter ears in this maturity class. Ear quality was generally reasonable. Careful evaluation of results presented in Tables 1 and 2 combined with results from other locations and years should aid producers in selecting varieties best suited to their operations. Acknowledgments J. Leuck and Pinney-Purdue Agricultural Center staff managed field operations. P. Begley, A. Dishman, R. Shay, J. Sheets, and J. Smiddy assisted with field work and analysis. The seed companies listed in Table 2 provided financial support and/or seed. 148

Table 1. Emergence, final stand, plant vigor, tillering, plant height, and ear shank length for 15 sugar-enhanced and synergistic sweet corn varieties in northern Indiana, 2009. Varieties listed in order of harvest date within color. Final Stand Plant Vigor y Cultivar Emergence z plants/a June 19 July 31 Tillers x Height Class w Shank Length v Fastlane 91 19,554 4.0 3.0±0.6 1.0±0.0 2.0±0.0 5.1 HMX 6358BES 92 20,328 7.3 5.7±0.7 3.0±0.6 2.0±0.0 2.8 Vitality 92 20,328 6.7 4.0±0.6 3.7±0.3 2.0±0.0 2.8 Trinity 100 20,328 6.0 4.0±0.6 1.3±0.3 2.0±0.0 3.3 Navajo 74 15,875 3.0 4.7±0.3 2.3±0.3 2.0±0.0 3.7 CSQBF7-262 95 20,328 7.7 4.7±0.3 2.7±0.3 2.0±0.0 3.1 CSYBF7-256 101 20,134 5.7 4.0±0.6 1.7±0.7 2.0±0.0 3.9 CSYBF7-257 105 20,328 5.7 5.3±0.3 4.0±0.6 2.0±0.0 4.4 Luscious 71 16,069 3.0 6.7±0.3 2.0±0.6 2.7±0.3 4.0 CSEBF7-253 107 20,328 7.3 7.3±0.3 1.7±0.3 3.0±0.0 3.7 BC 0822 97 20,134 8.3 7.7±0.3 2.0±0.0 3.0±0.0 4.1 Montauk 101 20,328 5.7 8.0±0.0 3.3±0.3 3.0±0.0 5.4 Providence 101 20,134 4.7 8.0±0.0 2.0±0.0 2.7±0.3 5.2 CSEYF7-248 94 20,134 6.7 7.3±0.3 2.0±0.0 3.0±0.0 4.3 GH 0851 102 20,328 7.3 6.7±0.9 3.3±0.7 2.3±0.3 4.7 Grand Mean 95 19,645 5.9 5.8 2.4 1.9 4.0 LSD.05 u 12 2.2 0.8 z Percentage of intended seeding rate (23,200 seeds per acre). Planted May 19, 2009, emergence data May 29. y 1=very weak, 5=average, 9=very vigorous. Mean ± standard error if AOV not performed. x 1=no or very few tillers, 3=tillers common but not tall enough to interfere with harvest, 5=tillers tall enough to interfere with harvest on most plants. Mean ± standard error. w 1=less than 5 feet. 2=5 to 6 feet, 3=more than 6 feet. Mean ± standard error. v Measured from attachment to stalk to base of ear; average of three ears per replication. u Means differing by more than this amount are significantly different at P.05 based on Fisher s Protected LSD. AOV not performed. 149

Table 2. Yield, ear size, and quality of synergistic and sugar-enhanced sweet corn in northern Indiana, 2009. Varieties listed in order of harvest date within color. Cultivar Seed Days to Harvest y Source z Color Pred. Actual Yield of GDD to Marketable Harvest x Ears doz/a ton/a Avg. Ear Weight lb Ear Length in Ear Dia. in Ear Ht. in Husk Cover w Husk Tightness w Tip Fill w Overallw Flavor v Fastlane ST BI 67 74 1,293 1,452 6.2 0.72 7.6 1.7 22.4 1.6 1.0±0.0 3.8 3.3±0.3 VG HMX6358BES HM BI 66 76 1,328 1,565 6.0 0.64 7.9 1.8 20.4 2.3 1.1±0.1 4.8 5.0±0.6 VG-F Vitality RU BI 67 76 1,328 1,565 5.7 0.61 7.3 1.8 21.6 2.8 1.7±0.2 4.4 5.7±0.3 VG-G Trinity CR BI 75 76 1,328 1,581 6.3 0.66 7.3 1.8 19.7 3.4 1.8±0.2 4.0 4.0±0.0 E-G Navajo ST BI 67 78 1,359 1,242 6.6 0.88 7.4 2.0 22.6 4.4 2.0±0.2 4.3 7.0±0.0 G-F CSQBF7-262 CR BI 78 1,359 1,678 7.2 0.71 7.4 1.8 21.4 4.1 1.8±0.2 3.7 4.3±0.3 VG-G CSYBF7-256 CR BI _ 80 1,413 1,646 7.7 0.78 7.5 1.9 23.3 4.1 1.6±0.3 4.8 7.3±0.3 VG-E CSYBF7-257 CR BI _ 80 1,413 1,662 7.9 0.80 7.9 1.8 20.4 3.4 1.4±0.3 4.8 7.3±0.3 E-VG Luscious RU BI 75 80 1,413 1,210 7.1 0.98 7.6 2.1 26.6 4.0 1.1±0.1 4.1 7.7±0.3 F CSEBF7-253 CR BI _ 83 1,472 1,629 9.0 0.92 8.3 1.9 25.6 4.6 2.0±0.0 4.0 8.0±0.0 G BC 0822 SY BI 77 84 1,492 1,581 8.0 0.85 7.7 1.8 27.1 4.0 1.1±0.1 3.7 6.3±0.7 VG-E Montauk ST BI 78 85 1,512 1,646 10.8 1.09 8.3 2.1 32.6 4.9 2.4±0.3 3.9 7.3±0.3 VG-E Providence RU BI 82 87 1,561 1,662 9.8 0.99 8.5 1.8 28.6 4.8 2.3±0.3 3.0 5.0±0.0 E-VG CSEYF7-248 CR Y _ 81 1,439 1,452 8.0 0.93 8.3 1.9 28.8 4.9 2.7±0.7 3.4 6.7±0.7 G GH 0851 SY Y 81 86 1,534 1,678 9.7 0.97 8.4 1.8 27.3 4.2 2.7±0.2 4.6 5.7±0.3 E,-VG Grand Mean 1550 7.7 0.83 7.8 1.9 24.6 3.8 1.8 4.0 6.0 LSD.05 u 0.7 0.06 0.4 0.09 3.4 1.0 0.7 r 2t ns 0.87 0.72 0.61 ns 0.67 0.59 z Seed Source: CR=Crookham, HM=Harris Moran, RU=Rupp, ST=Stokes, SY=Syngenta. y Days from planting to harvest. Predicted number is from seed supplier. x GDD=corn growing degree days. w Husk cover, tip fill: 1=worst, 5=best. Husk tightness: 1=loose, 3=very tight. Overall: 1=worst, 9 =best. Mean ± standard error if no AOV. v Flavor: F=fair, G=good, VG=very good, E=excellent. Summary of ratings by one person for three ears per cultivar. u Means differing by more than this amount are significantly different at P.05 based on Fisher s Protected LSD. AOV not performed. t r 2 for regression vs. actual days to harvest is the proportion of variability explained by days to harvest. ns=regression not significant at P.05. 150

Supersweet Sweet Corn Cultivar Evaluation for Northern Indiana, 2009 Elizabeth T. Maynard, Purdue University, Westville, Indiana 46391 Indiana growers harvested sweet corn for fresh market sales from 5,400 acres in 2008, with an average yield of 70 cwt/a (166 crates or 3.5 tons per acre) and total value of $11.7 million (USDA-NASS Indiana Agricultural Statistics, 2008-2009). Indiana ranks 17 th among states for production of fresh market sweet corn. The 2007 USDA Ag Census reported 603 Indiana farms producing sweet corn for fresh markets and 51 farms selling to processors. Sweet corn fields for fresh market sales are located throughout the state. In northern Indiana, bicolor corn is most commonly grown. Varieties with improved eating quality are of interest to both producers and consumers. Producers are also interested in yield, ear size, appearance, and agronomic characteristics. This paper reports on 18 supersweet (sh2) sweet corn cultivars and experimental lines that were evaluated at the Pinney-Purdue Agricultural Center in Wanatah, Indiana. Materials and Methods The trial was conducted on a Tracy sandy loam. The fall 2008 soil test showed 1.2% organic matter, ph 6.4, and 25 ppm phosphorus (P), 93 ppm potassium (K), 165 ppm magnesium (Mg), and 600 ppm calcium (Ca). Prior to planting wheat as a cover crop, we applied 20, 30, and 45 lb./a N, P 2 O 5, and K 2 O, plus 7.8 lb./a S and 0.8 lb./a Zn. In spring 2009. wheat was treated on May 1 with glyphosate and worked in on May 8 and 11. Fertilizer (200 lb./a 6-24-24) was broadcast to provide 12 lb. N, 48 lb. P 2 O 5, and 48 lb. K 2 O per acre. The trial was set up as a randomized complete block design with three replications. Cultivars were assigned to individual plots one row wide (30 inches) by 30 feet long. Corn was seeded May 19, 2009, with a finger pick-up planter set to drop 23,200 seeds per acre, and later thinned to 35 plants per 30-foot row (20,328 plants per acre). N (at 20.3 lb./a) and P (at 18.2 lb./a P 2 O 5 ) were applied at planting from 19-17-0 (10 gal. /A), and an additional 70 lb./a N from urea ammonium nitrate solution was injected June 22. Tefluthrin (Force 3G) was applied at planting to control corn rootworms. Weeds were controlled with atrazine (Atrazine 4L) and s-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum) applied and incorporated before seeding, cultivation, and hand weeding. Irrigation was applied during the growing season as needed. Insecticides were applied as needed to control caterpillars. Emergence was recorded 10 and 24 days after planting (DAP), before thinning. Early plant vigor was evaluated 31 DAP. Just before harvest, at 78 DAP, plant vigor, height, and degree of tiller formation were evaluated, and the height from the soil to the middle of the ear was measured for three ears per plot. Each plot was harvested when corn reached marketable stage. The weights and numbers of marketable ears were recorded. Three ears from each plot were selected to evaluate degree of husk cover, husk tightness, degree of tip fill, overall attractiveness, shank length, and average ear diameter and length after husking. One person rated the flavor of each entry. Rating scales are described below and in the table footnotes. Quantitative data with equal variance across treatments were analyzed using ANOVA followed by mean separation using Fisher s protected least significant difference at P 0.05. Relationships between yield components, ear and plant characteristics, and average days to harvest were analyzed using linear regression. 151

Characteristic Husk Cover Husk Tightness Tip Fill Rating Scale 5=more than 2 inches cover. 4=1.25-2 inches. 3=0.75-1.25 inches. 2=less than 0.75 inch. 1=ear exposed. 3=tight. 2=firm. 1=loose. 5=kernels filled to tip of cob. 4=less than 0.5 inch unfilled. 3=0.5-1 inch unfilled. 2=more than 1 inch unfilled. 1=more than 2 inches unfilled. Results and Discussion The growing season was drier and cooler than normal. Indiana Crop and Weather Reports from USDA-NASS reported 1,628 growing degree days (GDD) from May 18 to August 16, 134 fewer than normal. Rainfall during that period totaled 7.27 inches, 4.43 inches below normal. Emergence 10 DAP averaged 85% of the intended seeding rate and changed little over the next 10 days. Seven varieties had more than 87% emergence and did not differ significantly from Legion, which had the highest at 103% (Table 1). Five varieties had emergence less than 83%, not significantly different from Fantastic, the lowest at 68%. Differences in early vigor were reflected in scores ranging from 3 (Fusion) to 8 (Legion) on the 9-point rating scale (Table 1). In addition to Legion, six varieties received ratings more than the average of 5.8: 2171, 2170, 274A, Ravelin, and HMX 8346S. Cultivars with early vigor less than 5 included Optimum, HMX 7368D, and Fusion. Plant vigor near harvest spanned a smaller range, from 4.3 to 5.7, and did not necessarily correspond to early vigor. Most varieties consistently produced tillers, except Attraction, which had few or none. BSS 0982 consistently produced long tillers (Table 1). Results for yield and ear quality are presented in Table 2. Marketable yield averaged 7.0 tons per acre. Awesome produced the highest yield, 8.5 tons per acre, but 274A, Fusion, Legion, and HMX 83465S did not differ significantly. These four varieties also did not differ significantly from 11 others. CSABF4-157 produced the lowest yield per acre: 4.3 tons. The number of marketable ears ranged from 1,000 to 1,646 dozen per acre, and averaged 1,443. Eleven varieties produced more than 1,452 dozen per acre, including Ravelin, Optimum, 2673, BSS 0982, 2171, Bueno GFJ, Awesome, HMS 8346S, HMX 8343 S, HMX 7368D, and Legion. CSABF4-157 produced the fewest ears per acre. The number of ears produced was correlated with actual days to harvest. Average weight per ear ranged from 0.71 lb. (CSABF4-157) to 0.98 lb. (Fusion) (Table 2). Fusion and 274A had the largest ears by weight, while six varieties were less than 0.77 lb. and did not differ significantly from CSABF4-157. Ear length ranged from 6.8 to 8.1 inches, and diameter ranged from 1.8 to 2.0 inches. The longest ears were produced by 2170, 274A, and Ravelin (7.8 to 8.1 inches). The shortest ears ranged from 6.8 to 7.2 inches and included HMX 7376D, HMX 8346S, Attraction, 2171, and 2673. Varieties with ears 1.9 inches or more in diameter included 2573, 274A, Attraction, Awesome, BSS 0982, Fantastic, Fusion, HMX 7368D, HMX 8346S, and Optimum. CSABF4-157, HMX 8343S, and Legion had ears less than 1.8 inches wide. Shank length ranged from 3.3 inches to 5.2 inches and averaged 4.1 inches (Table 1). Varieties with the longest shanks included Awesome, Legion, 2573, and Fantastic (4.4 to 5.2 inches). Varieties with the shanks less than the average included HMX 7368D, CSABF4-157, Bueno GFJ, 2171, HMX 8346S, 274A, Attraction, 2673, and Ravelin. Ear height, measured from the ground to mid-ear, ranged from 21.6 inches for 274A, to 32.1 inches for Legion and was correlated with harvest date later varieties tended to have higher ears. 152

Husk cover ratings averaged 3.3 (Table 2). Six varieties averaged 4 or better, indicating at least 1.25 inches of husk cover: 2170, Optimum, Bueno GFJ, BSS 0982, Fusion and HMX 7368D. Four varieties, CSABF4-157, 2673, HMX 83443S, and Legion, averaged below 2.5, indicating most ears with less than 0.75 inches of husk cover. The husks of Fantastic, CSABF4-157, 2573, Fusion, and Legion were loose around the ear tip. Tip fill ratings averaged 4.8, and no varieties received a rating below 4, indicating no varieties had more than inch of unfilled tip. For overall ear quality in terms of appearance, Fusion and HMX 8346S received the highest ratings. Other varieties above the 6.1 average included 2171, 2170, Fantastic, Optimum, Bueno GFJ, Awesome, Ravelin, and HMX 7368D. CSABF4-157 2573, and Legion received the lowest ratings for overall appearance. Varieties that consistently received flavor ratings of very good to excellent or better included 2573, Attraction, HMX 8346S, and HMX 7368D (Table 2). Varieties consistently noted to have a tough or very tough pericarp included Fusion, Legion, and Ravelin (data not shown). Often producers select one or two varieties in each maturity range, so it is helpful to compare varieties of similar maturity. Among the five bicolor varieties harvested 79 to 80 DAP, 2171 produced more marketable ears per acre than Fantastic or CSABF4-157; and 2170 and 274A produced ear numbers in between 2171 and Fantastic. Among these five varieties, 2170 and 274A had the longest ears and 2171 the shortest. Husk cover and tightness tended to be better for 2170 than for the other early varieties. Six bicolor varieties were harvested 81 to 83 DAP. The most productive, HMX 8343S, produced significantly more marketable ears per acre than the least productive, 2573. Awesome, Bueno GFJ, 2673, and Optimum didn t differ significantly from either HMX 8343S or 2573. Ear length for this group ranged from 7.2 to 7.6 inches. Optimum, Bueno GFJ, and Awesome were judged to have better husk cover and tighter husks than the other three varieties in this maturity range. Of the four bicolor varieties harvested 84 or more days after planting, Legion produced significantly more marketable ears per acre than Fusion, and BSS 0982 and Attraction were in the middle. Attraction had the shortest ears in this group at 6.9 inches; the other three had ears 7.3-7.5 inches long. Legion had the narrowest ears of this group. Fusion and BSS 0982 had good to very good husk cover and Attraction had acceptable husk cover, while husk cover for Legion was only fair. Three yellow varieties were harvested 80 to 84 DAP: Ravelin, HMX 8346S, and HMX 7368D. They didn t differ significantly in number of marketable ears produced. Ears of Ravelin averaged nearly an inch longer than ears of the HMX lines. Husk cover was acceptable on all three varieties, but better on the HMX lines than on Ravelin. Careful evaluation of results presented in Tables 1 and 2 combined with results from other locations and years should aid producers in selecting varieties best suited to their operations. Acknowledgments J. Leuck and Pinney-Purdue Agricultural Center staff managed field operations. P. Begley, A. Dishman, R. Shay, J. Sheets, and J. Smiddy assisted with field work and analysis. The seed companies listed in Table 2 provided financial support and/or seed. 153

Table 1. Emergence, final stand, early and late plant vigor, tillering, plant height, and ear shank length for 18 supersweet sweet corn varieties in northern Indiana, 2009. Varieties listed in order of harvest date within color. Cultivar Emergence z Final Stand Plant Vigor y plants/a June 19 Aug. 5 Tillers x Height Class w Shank Length v 2171 88 20,134 7.0±0.0 4.7±0.7 2.7±0.3 2.0±0.0 3.8 2170 85 19,554 6.3±0.7 4.3±0.3 3.0±0.6 2.0±0.0 4.1 274A 83 18,392 7.7±0.9 5.0±0.0 2.3±0.3 1.7±0.3 4.0 Fantastic 68 16,069 5.7±1.2 4.7±0.3 3.3±0.9 2.0±0.0 4.4 CSABF4-157 84 18,005 5.7±0.7 4.3±0.3 2.0±0.6 1.3±0.3 3.3 2573 71 17,811 5.0±0.0 5.0±0.0 3.0±0.0 2.0±0.0 4.5 Optimum 92 19,941 4.7±0.3 5.0±0.0 3.7±0.3 2.7±0.3 4.1 2673 89 19,941 5.7±0.9 5.0±0.0 3.3±0.3 2.0±0.0 4.0 Bueno GFJ 83 19,360 5.3±0.9 4.7±0.3 3.7±0.3 3.0±0.0 3.6 Awesome 88 19,941 5.7±0.7 5.3±0.3 2.7±0.3 1.7±0.3 5.2 HMX 8343S 93 20,328 5.3±0.9 5.7±0.3 3.0±0.6 2.3±0.3 4.4 Attraction 78 18,198 5.3±0.9 5.3±0.3 1.3±0.3 1.7±0.3 4.0 BSS 0982 87 19,554 5.3±0.9 4.7±0.3 4.3±0.3 3.0±0.0 4.2 Fusion 72 16,843 3.0±0.0 5.7±0.3 2.3±0.3 2.7±0.3 4.3 Legion 103 20,328 8.0±0.0 5.7±0.9 1.7±0.3 3.0±0.0 5.0 Ravelin 84 19,360 7.0±0.6 4.3±0.3 3.0±0.0 2.0±0.0 4.1 HMX 8346S 101 20,328 6.7±0.9 5.7±0.3 3.0±0.6 3.0±0.0 4.0 HMX 7368D 85 20,328 4.7±0.3 5.7±0.3 2.7±0.3 2.3±0.3 3.3 Grand Mean 85 19,134 5.8 5.0 2.8 2.2 4.1 LSD.05 u 16 0.8 z Percentage of intended seeding rate (23,200 seeds per acre). Planted May 19, 2009, emergence data May 29. y 1=very weak, 5=average, 9=very vigorous. Mean ± standard error. x 1=no or very few tillers, 3=tillers common but not tall enough to interfere with harvest, 5=tillers tall enough to interfere with harvest on most plants. Mean ± standard error. w 1=less than 5 feet, 2=5 to 6 feet, 3=more than 6 feet. Mean ± standard error. v Measured from attachment to stalk to base of ear; average of three ears per replication. u Means differing by more than this amount are significantly different at P.05 based on Fisher s Protected LSD. AOV not performed. 154

Table 2. Yield, ear size, and quality of supersweet and augmented supersweet sweet corn in northern Indiana, 2009. Varieties listed in order of harvest date within color. Cultivar Days to Seed Harvest y Source z Color Pred. Actual Yield of GDD to Marketable Harvest x Ears doz/a ton/a Avg. Ear Weight lb 2171 ST BI 71 79 1,379 1,516 6.9 0.75 7.1 1.9 24 3.0±0.2 1.7±0.2 4.9±0.1 6.3±0.3 VG-G 2170 RU BI 71 80 1,394 1,339 7.0 0.87 8.1 1.9 25 4.1±0.3 1.9±0.3 4.8±0.2 6.7±0.3 VG 274A ST BI 74 80 1,394 1,355 7.7 0.96 7.9 2.0 22 2.8±0.5 1.3±0.3 5.0±0.0 6.0±1.0 VG-G Fantastic ST BI 75 80 1,394 1,275 6.9 0.91 7.5 1.9 24 2.7±0.2 1.6±0.1 4.9±0.1 6.7±0.3 VG-G CSABF4-157 CR BI 80 1,394 1,000 4.3 0.71 7.7 1.8 23 2.0±0.0 1.1±0.1 5.0±0.0 4.0±0.0 VG 2573 RU BI 73 81 1,410 1,355 6.5 0.79 7.3 1.9 23 2.9±0.4 1.4±0.3 5.0±0.0 4.7±0.7 VG-E Optimum CR BI 78 81 1,410 1,468 6.7 0.77 7.6 1.9 24 4.0±0.2 2.2±0.4 4.9±0.1 7.0±0.0 VG 2673 RU BI 73 82 1,437 1,468 6.8 0.77 7.2 2.0 22 2.3±0.7 1.6±0.3 4.9±0.1 5.3±1.3 E-G Bueno GFJ CR BI 84 82 1,437 1,533 7.3 0.79 7.5 1.9 25 4.0±0.2 2.2±0.4 4.8±0.1 6.7±0.3 E-G Awesome SW BI 74 83 1,464 1,565 8.5 0.91 7.4 2.1 23 3.7±0.2 2.3±0.5 5.0±0.0 7.0±0.0 VG HMX 8343S HM BI 75 83 1,464 1,630 7.3 0.75 7.6 1.8 31 2.4±0.3 1.8±0.2 4.8±0.2 5.0±0.6 VG-G Attraction RU BI 76 84 1,490 1,371 6.8 0.82 6.9 2.0 23 3.2±0.3 2.0±0.5 4.8±0.1 5.0±1.0 VG-E BSS 0982 SY BI 80 84 1,490 1,484 7.1 0.80 7.3 2.0 25 4.1±0.2 2.1±0.1 4.6±0.1 6.0±0.6 VG Fusion RU BI 75 85 1,508 1,307 7.7 0.98 7.4 2.0 23 4.7±0.2 1.4±0.3 4.8±0.1 7.7±0.3 VG Legion SY BI 79 87 1,543 1,646 7.4 0.75 7.5 1.8 32 2.4±0.4 1.3±0.3 4.3±0.2 4.7±0.3 G Ravelin SY Y 72 80 1,394 1,452 6.8 0.78 7.8 1.9 27 3.0±0.2 2.0±0.0 4.2±0.2 7.0±0.6 G-VG HMX 8346S HM Y 75 84 1,490 1,581 7.4 0.78 6.9 1.9 29 3.6±0.2 1.9±0.3 5.0±0.0 7.7±0.3 VG-E HMX 7368D HM Y 77 84 1,490 1,630 7.2 0.74 6.8 2.0 30 4.1±0.3 1.9±0.1 4.9±0.1 6.3±0.7 E-VG Grand Mean 1,443 7.0 0.81 7.4 1.9 25 3.3 1.8 4.8 6.1 LSD.05 u 231 1.2 0.06 0.4 0.08 2.6 r 2t 0.23 ns ns ns ns 0.28 Ear Length in Ear Dia. in Ear Ht. in Husk Cover w z Seed ource: CR=Crookham, HM=Harris Moran, RU=Rupp, ST=Stokes, SW=Seedway, SY=Syngenta. y Days from planting to harvest. Predicted number is from seed supplier. x GDD=corn growing degree days. w Husk cover, tip fill: 1=worst, 5=best. Husk tightness: 1=loose, 3=very tight. Overall: 1=worst, 9 =best. Mean ± standard error. v Flavor: F=fair, G=good, VG=very good, E=excellent. Summary of ratings by one person for three ears per cultivar. u Means differing by more than this amount are significantly different at P.05 based on Fisher s Protected LSD. AOV not performed. t r 2 for regression vs. actual days to harvest is the proportion of variability explained by days to harvest. ns=regression not significant at P.05. Husk Tightness w Tip Fill w Overall w Flavorv 155

Corn Earworm Control Study 2009 Vince Lawson and Henry G. Taber ISU Muscatine Island Research Farm, Fruitland, Iowa Introduction Sweet corn growers frequently have to apply four to six insecticide sprays during the corn silking period to achieve the clean, worm-free, ears demanded by consumers. Insecticides in the pyrethroid class are used extensively for this purpose and reports that the corn earworm (CEW) population is developing resistance to pyrethroid insecticides is cause for concern and necessitates that we reevaluate our approaches and products for controlling CEW. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of current and newly released insecticides for controlling CEW. New, non-pyrethroid insecticides tested in this evaluation are Belt from Bayer, Coragen from Dupont, and Radiant from Dow. A Bt hybrid, Attribute BC 0805, was also included in the study as a treatment comparison with Providence, a non-bt hybrid, and the insecticide treatments. Materials and Methods Planting and Plot Design The trial was planted on July 2, 2009, so corn ears would be silking during late August when peak CEW activity usually occurs. Plot design was a randomized complete block with three replications. A plot consisted of three rows spaced 30 inches apart and 25 feet long. After emergence plots were thinned to a uniform population of 26,000/acre. Fertility and Irrigation Water was applied as needed by center pivot irrigation system to supplement rainfall. Fertilizer was applied preplant incorporated at rate of 60 lbs./a nitrogen (N) and 100 lbs./a potassium (K 2 O). After corn emergence, an additional 60 lbs./a of N (UAN) was applied through the irrigation system. Weed Control Dual II Magnum, Atrazine 4L, and Callisto herbicides were applied crop preemergence. Treatments Insecticide treatments were started on August 24 (spray 1) when corn was at the row tassel stage of development and ears starting to show silk emergence. Five more spray applications were made on a three- to four-day schedule (August 28, 31; and September 4, 7, 11) to keep emerging silks protected. Insecticides were applied with a backpack CO 2 pressurized sprayer with two nozzle booms aimed at the ear region of corn plant. When sweet corn ears reached a marketable size, 20 were harvested from each plot and carefully husked to count worms and ascertain worm damage to kernels. Results and Discussion Worm pressure was strong at the start of corn silking with two wire traps using Trece pheromone lures averaging 20 CEW moths a night per trap. This number gradually decreased to less than one moth per night by harvest and data collection. Every single ear examined from Treatment 3 156

plots (conventional hybrid, no insecticide application) was infested with worms! Approximately 80% of larvae found in ears were identified as CEW while the rest were fall armyworms. The top six treatments (16, 11, 12, 2, 15, 8) in Table 2 that were most effective at reducing the number of worms in the ear and worm-damaged kernels mixed or alternated products with different modes of action. This raises some interesting questions as to why, but several products in this study seemed to work better in treatments that included two modes of action for worm control. There were two treatments utilizing the Bt hybrid BC 0805 in the study. Treatment 1 consisted of BC 0805 and no insecticide applications. The Bt hybrid, when used by itself without insecticides, provided a fair amount of worm control but small to medium-sized CEWs and fall armyworms were still found in 18% of the ears. Treatment 2 also utilized BC 0805, but with the addition of Brigade insecticide sprays to ear silks on August 24 and again on August 31. These two insecticide applications improved control to 96% and reduced the amount of kernel damage to 0.4 kernels per ear on average. This level of control was equal to the best insecticide treatments and confirms that using a Bt hybrid is an effective strategy for controlling worms, but doesn t entirely eliminate the need for insecticide treatment during periods of strong worm pressure. The new, non-pyrethroid, insecticides Belt (treatments 9 and 15), Coragen (treatments 7 and 12) and Radiant (treatments 8 and 13) provided good worm control when used in treatments that mixed products and mode of actions. Belt (treatment 9), when used alone, did not provide the level of worm control expected based on previous experience. The reason for this is unknown. It could be heavier worm pressure this year or possibly that the three- to four-day spray schedule used in this study was too long of interval between treatment applications. A Bayer Company representative advised the use of a surfactant or methylated seed oil with Belt in the future. Please note that Coragen is not labeled for use on sweet corn at this time but registration is expected in the future. Belt and Radiant are labeled for use on sweet corn but have label restrictions on the amount of product applied per season and number of consecutive applications, so read labels carefully before use. 157

Table 1. Treatment descriptions and application schedule. Hybrid Treatment (active ingredient) Application* 1 BC 0805 Bt hybrid No insecticide application 2 BC 0805 Bt hybrid + Brigade (bifenthrin) - 6.4 oz/a Sprays 1 and 3 3 Providence Conventional hybrid No insecticide application 4 Providence Sevin XLR (carbaryl) - 1.5 qt/a Sprays 1-6 5 Providence Mustang Max (zeta-cypermethrin) - 4.0 fl oz/a Sprays 1-6 6 Providence Hero (bifenthrin+zeta-cypermethrin) - 4.4 fl oz/a Sprays 1-6 7 Providence Coragen (rynaxypyr) - 5.0 fl oz/a + MSO 1% v/v Sprays 1-6 8 Providence Radiant SC (spinetoram) - 6 fl oz/a Hero (bifenthrin+zeta-cypermethrin) - 10 fl oz/a 9 Providence Belt (flubendiamide) - 3.0 fl oz/a Sprays 1-6 10 Providence Baythroid (beta-cyfluthrin) - 2.8 fl oz/a Sprays 1-6 11 Providence Mustang Max (zeta-cypermethrin) - 4.0 fl oz/a + Lannate (methomyl) - 24 oz/a Sprays 1-6 12 Providence Coragen (rynaxypyr) - 5.0 fl oz/a + MSO 1% v/v Hero (bifenthrin+zeta-cypermethrin) - 10 fl oz/a Radiant Sprays 1, 2, 4, 5 Hero Sprays 3 and 6 Coragen Sprays 1, 3, 5 Hero Sprays 2, 4, 6 13 Providence Radiant SC (spinetoram) 6 fl oz/a Spray 1-6 14 Providence Brigade (bifenthrin) 2.1 fl oz/a Spray 1-6 15 Providence Belt (flubendiamide) 3.0 fl oz/a Hero (bifenthrin+zeta-cypermethrin) 8.0 fl oz/a Belt Sprays 1, 3, 5 Hero Sprays 2, 4, 6 16 Providence Baythroid (beta-cyfluthrin) - 2.8 fl oz/a + Lannate (methomyl) - 24 fl oz/a Sprays 1-6 *Treatment application dates: August 24 (Spray 1), August 28 (Spray 2), August 31 (Spray 3), September 4 (Spray 4), September 7 (Spray 5), September 11 (Spray 6). 158

Table 2. % control, mean number of worm-damaged kernels and mean number of worms per ear by treatment at harvest on September 21, 2009. Treatments % Control (worm-free ears) Number of Worm-damaged Kernels per Ear Number of Worms per Ear 16 Baythroid + Lannate 98 0.1 0.02 11 Mustang Max + Lannate 98 0.3 0.04 12 Coragen / Hero 96 0.3 0.07 2 BC 0805 Bt hybrid + Brigade 96 0.4 0.11 15 Belt / Hero 96 0.4 0.09 8 Radiant / Hero 96 0.8 0.09 6 Hero 93 0.9 0.11 13 Radiant 91 1.2 0.18 14 Brigade 91 1.6 0.16 7 Coragen + MSO 89 0.9 0.18 5 Mustang Max 84 2.3 0.22 1 BC 0805 Bt hybrid 78 2.0 0.64 10 Baythroid 51 5.5 0.58 9 Belt 51 6.7 0.64 4 Sevin XLR 49 9.8 0.69 3 Providence, No insecticide 0 29.1 1.38 LSD 5% 14 3.2 0.21 159

Sweet Corn Cultivar Trial 2009 Vince Lawson, ISU Muscatine Island Research Farm, Fruitland, Iowa 52749 Introduction The 2009 sweet corn cultivar trial was conducted to identify cultivars with good ear characteristics for local marketing or short-distance shipping. This year s trial focused on the bicolor, high-quality shrunken 2 (sh2) types, often referred to as augmented or improved sh2. The best cultivars in this class provide improved flavor and tenderness over conventional sh2 hybrids. They need isolation from other corn genotypes in the field and careful handling at harvest, but reward the grower with the best combination of gourmet eating quality and extended shelf life that is available. Materials and Methods Planting and Plot Design The trial was planted on April 23, 2009, on a dark-colored, loamy-sand soil type. Plot arrangement was a randomized complete block design with four replications. A plot consisted of two rows spaced 30 inches apart and 25 feet long. After emergence, plants were thinned to approximately eight inches apart and a uniform population of 26,000/acre. Fertility and Irrigation Water was applied as needed by center pivot irrigation system to supplement rainfall. Fertilizer was applied preplant incorporated at rate of 60 lbs. nitrogen (N) and 100 lbs. potassium (K 2 O). After crop emergence 45 lbs. nitrogen (UAN) was sidedressed on May 21 and again on June 9. Pest Control Weeds were controlled with Dual II Magnum, Atrazine 4L, and Callisto herbicides applied crop preemergence. Caterpillars in the ears were controlled by spraying Mustang Max or Belt insecticide every three to four days once ear silking started. Results and Discussion Cultivars are ranked by relative maturity from early to late in Tables 1 and 2. Several entries had good emergence and seedling vigor even though the soil was wet and temperatures were in the low 50s after planting. The seedling vigor of XTH 2170, XTH 2171, 274A, Sweet Surprise, Awesome, and XTH 2281 especially stood out and they were given excellent ratings in Table 1. XTH 2170 was the first cultivar to be harvested while BSS 0982 and Bueno took almost 10 days longer to reach marketable maturity. Sweet Surprise, Awesome, Obsession, XTH 2281, Bueno, and BSS 0982 produced above average trial yields (Table 2). While all cultivars showed merit the following should be considered for grower trial: XTH 2170 and 274A for early planting and first harvest; Sweet Surprise and Awesome were midseason cultivars that produced impressive yields of attractive ears; Bueno, Obsession, and XTH 2281 were full-season hybrids with good disease resistance. BSS 0982 was the only Bt, insectprotected cultivar in the trial and performed well. Ears were good eating but ear kernels weren t as tender as some of the other entries. Cultivar comments and observations are presented in Table 1. Harvest photographs were taken of each cultivar and are available for viewing on our Web site: http://mirdf.ag.iastate.edu. 160

Table 1. Sweet corn cultivar seed source, seedling vigor ratings, and trial comments. Cultivar Seed Source 1 Seedling Vigor 2 Comments XTH 2170 RI E-G First cultivar to be harvested in trial, nice large ear. 274A RI E Good seedling vigor, strong plant and large ear for early cv. Fantastic ST G-F Uneven maturity but mature ears were nice. XTH 2171 ST E Uneven maturity, mediocre yield. Mirai 301 BC CE G Attractive large ears pulled a little hard from plant. Mirai 308 BC CE G Ears pulled hard, short flag leaves, excellent eating qualities. Optimum RU F Small ears, secondary ears in shank, kernels sweet & tender. Sweet Surprise RI E Vigorous plants, strong yield, attractive ears, good quality. Awesome ST G-E Large dark green flag leaves, a few small secondary ears in shank, attractive husked ears had good eating characteristics. 277A ST F Fair husk cover of ear tip, short ears, deep kernels set trial standard for tenderness and flavor, excellent eating quality. Mirai 350 BC CE F Excellent eating quality, light green husk and short flag lvs. Obsession RI G Attractive large ears, good to excellent eating qualities. XTH 2281 ST E Strong plant and yield, attractive ears, kernels crunchy sweet. Bueno CR G-F Last cultivar to be picked, good yield of attractive ears, kernels crunchy sweet with pleasant corn flavor. BSS 0982 RG F Bt hybrid, long flags and shanks, attractive ears, decent eating quality, maybe more kernel toughness than other cvs. 1 Source: CE=Centest Seeds, CR=Crookham Co., RG=Syngenta Seeds Rodgers Brand, RI =Rispens Seeds, RU= Rupp Seeds, ST=Stokes Seeds. 2 Seedling Vigor rating based on plant size four weeks after planting: E=excellent, G=good, F=fair, P=poor. 161

Table 2. Sweet corn cultivar marketable yield and ear characteristics. Yield Husked Ear Ear Tip Ear Ht. Yield Dozen Ear Wt. Length Dia. Fill Cultivar DTH (inches) (cwt/a) (ears/a) (lbs.) (inches) (inches) Rating 1 XTH 2170 74 28 1,365 119.9 0.47 7.8 1.75 G 274A 76 32 1,453 135.9 0.50 7.7 1.79 F-G Fantastic 76 32 1,392 120.6 0.48 7.4 1.78 G-F XTH 2171 76 27 1,220 97.2 0.43 7.8 1.72 G-F Mirai 301 BC 77 40 1,462 130.7 0.54 7.8 1.90 G-F Mirai 308 BC 77 33 1,336 112.5 0.50 7.7 1.86 F-G Optimum 77 30 1,230 105.3 0.45 7.1 1.78 G-F Swt Surprise 78 33 1,704 160.7 0.53 7.5 1.86 G Awesome 78 36 1,695 157.8 0.51 7.3 1.86 G-F 277A 78 35 1,462 117.4 0.48 7.2 1.80 G Mirai 350 BC 80 36 1,220 107.9 0.49 7.5 1.81 G-F Obsession 82 33 1,695 151.1 0.51 8.0 1.83 G-F XTH 2281 82 39 1,540 139.9 0.49 7.6 1.82 G Bueno 83 34 1,578 135.2 0.47 7.8 1.76 G BSS 0982 83 36 1,559 143.4 0.54 8.0 1.87 G-F Average 1,465 129.4 0.49 7.6 1.81 LSD 5% 279 3.9 0.04 0.2 0.19 1 Tip fill rating: G=good (less than unfilled kernels), F=fair (1/4 1 of unfilled kernels), P=poor (>1 unfilled kernels). 162

N.Y.S. 2008 Processing Sweet Corn Variety Replicated and Observation (su and supersweet Types) Trial Summary James Ballerstein, Research Support Specialist, Horticultural Sciences Stephen Reiners, Associate Professor, Horticultural Sciences New York State Agricultural Experiment Station Cornell University, Geneva, New York The trial was located at the Vegetable Research Farm in Geneva, NY. The objective was to harvest su gene type at 72-75% moisture and the supersweet type at 75-78% moisture. Plot size for the replicated entries was two rows, 40 feet in length, and 30 inches between the rows. Four replications of early to midseason su type cultivars (10) were planted on May 14. These early su cultivars were planted again along with main season su cultivars on June 2. A single planting of the supersweet type (four replications) was planted on June 16. Yield data were taken from a single harvest of 20-foot sections of the two rows of each plot. A subsample of 15 ears was used for ear data. Observation plot size was two rows, 40 feet in length, and 30 inches between the rows. There were two plots of each cultivar at each planting. Planting dates were the same as the replicated plots. Yield data were taken from a single harvest of a 20-foot section of a single row. A subsample of 15 ears was used for ear data. All plantings were sowed with a Monosem vacuum planter with double disc openers. The fertilizer used was a 10-5-10 (with Mn and Zn) at a rate of 350 lbs. per acre. Fertilizer was banded two inches below and two inches to the side of the seeds at planting. Lumax (at the labeled rate) was applied post emergence for weed control. The desired population was 20,900 plants per acre (10 inches in row spacing). One cultivation was done and 250 pounds of 27-0-0 per acre were sidedressed. The varieties Bonus and GH2042 from Syngenta Seeds were used as standards for the su type. Overland from Syngenta Seeds was the supersweet standard. May was cool and dry. Rainfall was below normal until July, when rains began. The third replication of the main su planting had delayed emergence due to rougher soil. The supersweet planting emerged uniformly. Heat units over the growing season were about normal. Minor symptoms of the bacterial disease Stewart s wilt became evident midsummer. Common rust infection was minimal until late in the season. We wish to thank the NYS Vegetable Research Association, Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers, and cooperating seed companies for their financial support of this project. We also wish to thank Mr. Michael Gardinier and Mr. Bob Deemer of FarmFreshFirst for their assistance in planning the trials. Special thanks to Mrs. Wilma Kean, Mr. Russ Harris, Matt Reiners, Josh Decker, Nick Schessl, Ms. Chelsea DeBoldt, and Ms. Sarah Huelik for their assistance in day-today operations. Please address any questions to: 163

Jim Ballerstein NYSAES 630 W. North St. Hedrick Hall Geneva, NY 14456-0462 (315) 787-2223 jwb2@cornell.edu Table 1. Cultivar list. Su Type Cultivar Seed Source GH 2042 Rogers Prelude Crites M EX5414 Seminis GH2171 Rogers GH 4927 Rogers HMX 2390 HM UY3435 Crites M C162 General Mills C151 General Mills C174 General Mills Rocker Rogers GH6462 Rogers GH6377 Rogers Bonus Rogers EX5821 Seminis EX5807 Seminis HMX 7387 HM Tamarack Crookham Captain Crites M C194 General Mills HMX7388 HM C2_35 Crookham C6-205 Crookham Supersweet Type Cultivar Seed Source Overland Rogers Protégé Rogers GSS 1477 Rogers Magnum II Rogers GSS6550 Rogers GSS7051 Rogers HMX 7389S HM Fortitude (3-99) Crookham HY1089 Crites M Galaxy Crites M HY1481 Crites M HB2642 Crites M HW2545 Crites M Cshyp6-223 Crookham ACX5008 A&C ACX7132 A&C C177 General Mills C179 General Mills C6-224 Crookham C6-225 Crookham C7-265 Crookham C7-272 Crookham C7-276 Crookham ACX 5156 A&C Rogers=Syngenta-Rogers Brand, Crites M.=Crites Moscow, Seminis=Seminis Vegetable Seeds- Processor Division, HM=Harris Moran, Crookham=Crookham Co., A&C=Abbott and Cobb 164

Table 2. Maturity data for early su planting date, May 14. Cultivar Heat Units to Silk (base 50) Days To Silk Heat Units to Harvest (base 50) Days to Harvest % Moisture At Harvest Seed Source Maturity Ear Height (in.) Plt. Height (in.) C162 971 64 1,479 89 68.5 na 19 76 UY3435 982 65 1,510 91 71.6 na 22 73 C151 1,027 67 1,516 91 71.6 1800 18 76 GH 2042 984 65 1,530 92 72.3 75 20 75 C174 1,033 67 1,537 93 69.6 1780 21 77 EX 5414 992 66 1,543 93 72.4 74 22 79 Prelude 1,033 67 1,548 94 74.9 na 20 77 GH 4927 1,005 66 1,563 94 71.5 75 21 73 GH 2171 1,013 67 1,593 96 73.0 74 20 78 HMX 2390 1,099 70 1,626 98 74.0 78 23 79 The above data are an average of four replications. This results in variable heat units to harvest that do not match to others with same days to harvest. Ear Height and Plant Height are included in this table because I did not have other plant characteristics for this planting. Heat Units to Silk (base 50): Growing degree day units base 50 F. The accumulation of degree-day units from planting until silk. Days to Silk: The number of days from planting until plots had 50% of the plants showing silks. Heat Units to Harvest (base 50): Growing degree day units base 50 F. The accumulation of degree-day units from planting until harvest. Days to Harvest: The number of days from planting until harvest. % Moisture at Harvest: Percent moisture of the harvest sample. A slurry of cut kernels was dried to determine the percent moisture. Seed Source Maturity: Listed in either heat units or days to harvest. Information provided by the seed company. 165

Table 3. Ear and kernel ratings for early su planting date, May 14. Cultivar Ear Uniformity Rating Ear Shape Rating Oval/ Round Rating Kernel Rowing Rating Kernel Size Rating Kernel Depth (mm) Kernel Depth Rating Flavor Rating Pericarp Rating C162 G-VG CY R-SL O ST-SL I M-L 11 SH OK-G OK B UY3435 G-VG CY R ST-SL I M-L 12 M OK OK B C151 VG CY-SL T R-SL O ST M-L 11 SH OK OK-T B GH 2042 VG-E CY R-SL O ST-SL I M 13 M-D OK-G OK B C174 VG SL T R ST M-L 12 SH OK-G OK B EX 5414 VG CY R-SL O ST-SL I M-L 13 D OK-G S-OK B Prelude VG CY-SL T R ST-SL I S-M 11 M OK-G OK B GH 4927 VG CY R-SL O ST-SL I M 12 M-D OK-G OK-T B GH 2171 G-VG CY R ST M-L 12 M-D OK OK-T CUT HMX 2390 G-VG CY-SL T R-SL O ST-SL I S-M 11 M OK-G T B Market Use Rating All data and ratings are an average of four replications. Ear Uniformity Rating: Ex=excellent (entire sample was the same length, diameter and uniform tip fill), VG=very good, G=good, F=fair, P=poor. Ear Shape Rating: CY=cylindrical, Sl T=slightly tapered, T=tapered. Oval/Round Rating: R=round, Sl O=slightly oval, O=oval. Kernel Rowing Rating: The straightness of the rows of kernels. St=straight, SL I=slightly irregular, IRR=quite irregular. Kernel Size Rating: S=small, M=medium, L=large. Kernel Depth (mm): The measurement of how deep the kernel was in millimeters (determined from breaking five ears in two and measuring the kernel depth. Kernel Depth Rating: S=shallow, M=moderate, D=deep. Flavor Rating: Bl=Blah, OK=acceptable, Good=better than acceptable, SW=sweet. Pericarp Rating: S=soft, OK=acceptable, T=tough. Market Use Rating: Cut=cut kernel, Cob=cobbette, Both=could be used for either. 166

Table 4. Ear and yield data for early su planting, May 14. Cultivar Husk Ext. (in) Ear Length (in) Ear Dia. (in) Kernel Row Range Unfilled Tip (in) Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs) Sample Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs) Sample Husked Ear Weight (lbs) Sample Kernel Weight per Ear (lbs) Plants Per Acre (1,000 ) Ears Per Plant % Moisture Tons Per Acre % Recovery C162 1.2 8.5 2.0 12 20 0.5 0.88 0.90 0.66 0.37 17.4 1.05 68.5 8.0 41 3.4 UY3435 1.2 8.0 2.0 14-20 0.2 0.85 0.90 0.68 0.49 17.2 1.10 71.6 7.9 54 3.7 C151 0.6 8.4 1.9 12 20 0.5 0.84 0.91 0.66 0.40 17.2 1.04 71.6 7.4 44 3.8 GH 2042 0.8 8.1 2.0 14-20 0.1 1.06 0.96 0.70 0.43 19.6 1.01 72.3 10.5 45 4 C174 1.3 8.4 2.0 12 18 0.4 0.90 0.90 0.66 0.38 19.6 1.01 69.6 9.0 43 4.1 EX 5414 0.8 7.9 2.1 14-24 0.2 0.99 1.05 0.78 0.52 17.6 1.08 72.4 9.4 49 3.8 Prelude 1.6 7.5 2.0 16-22 0.0 0.83 0.86 0.61 0.37 17.4 1.10 74.9 7.9 43 3.6 GH 4927 0.1 8.1 2.0 14-20 0.1 0.98 0.96 0.69 0.46 18.5 1.13 71.5 10.0 47 3.7 GH 2171 0.2 7.6 2.1 16-22 0.5 0.91 0.94 0.73 0.47 18.5 1.01 73.0 8.4 50 3.3 HMX 2390 0.8 8.3 2.0 16-24 0.2 0.93 0.91 0.67 0.43 19.3 0.94 74.0 8.5 47 3.8 Husk Ext. (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the distance from the tip of the cob to where the husk opens. A negative measurement indicates exposed kernels. Exposed kernels can make the ear more susceptible to insect or bird feeding. Ear Length (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the husked ear butt to tip. Ear Dia. (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the diameter of the middle of the ear. Kernel Row Range: The range of the number of rows counted on the ear sample. Unfilled Tip (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the tip of the ear that had not formed kernels. Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of an unhusked ear. Determined by the total yield weight divided by total number of ears harvested. Comparing weight per unhusked ear from total harvest to the sample unhusked weight per ear indicates how valid the sampling technique is. Sample Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of an unhusked ear based on the sample 15 ears brought in from the field. Sample Husked Ear Weight (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of a husked ear based on the sample. Sample Kernel Weight per Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of the kernels cut from the ear. Plants per Acre (1,000): Plant population per acre of the harvested plot (multiply number in the column by 1,000). Harvest plot was two rows by 20 ft per replication. Ears per Plant: The number of ears harvested divided by the number of plants in the harvest area. % Moisture: Percent moisture of the harvest sample. A slurry of cut kernels was dried to determine the percent moisture. Tons per Acre: The extrapolated yield of the plot listed as tons per acre. Harvest plot was two rows by 20 ft per replication. % Recovery: Sample kernel weight divided by sample unhusked ear weight. Overall Ear Rating: 5=exceptional, 4=very good, 3=acceptable, 2=unacceptable, 1=very poor. This evaluation was made by considering ear uniformity, ear size, tip fill, and kernel rowing. Overall Ear Rating 167

Table 5. Maturity for main su planting date, June 2. Cultivar Days To Silk Heat Units to Silk (base 50) Days to Harvest Heat Units to Harvest % Moisture at Harvest Seed Source Maturity C162 53 1,042 82 1,565 68.3 1,575 UY3435 53 1,046 83 1,586 68.4 na C151 58 1,161 83 1,594 69.5 1,630 GH 2042 58 1,146 83 1,586 70.5 75 C174 59 1,180 84 1,604 70.3 1,720 EX5414 58 1,142 84 1,609 72.5 74 Prelude 61 1,218 84 1,599 71.9 na GH4927 57 1,126 85 1,620 71.6 75 GH2171 58 1,148 85 1,633 71.3 74 HMX 2390 60 1,203 87 1,651 72.4 78 GH6377 62 1,239 89 1,689 71.3 82-83 C2-35 60 1,188 90 1,698 67.5 na Rocker 64 1,274 90 1,693 69.6 85 Bonus 63 1,266 91 1,716 70.4 83 EX5821 63 1,249 91 1,713 71.8 82 HMX 7387 62 1,239 91 1,716 74.4 na C6-205 63 1,260 91 1,704 69.8 na GH6462 66 1,311 92 1,724 72.6 83 EX5807 63 1,253 92 1,718 71.9 82 Tamarack 64 1,279 92 1,718 72.4 84 (1,428) Captain 64 1,274 93 1,736 74.0 na C194 63 1,261 93 1,736 74.3 1,900 HMX7388 64 1,275 93 1,736 72.8 86 All data and ratings are an average of four replications. Days to Silk: The number of days from planting until plots had 50% of the plants showing silks. Heat Units to Silk (base 50): Growing degree day units base 50 F. The accumulation of degree-day units from planting until silk. Days to Harvest: The number of days from planting until harvest. % Moisture at Harvest: Percent moisture of the harvest sample. A slurry of cut kernels was dried to determine the percent moisture. Seed Source Maturity: Listed in either heat units or days to harvest. Information provided by the seed company. 168

Table 6. Ear and kernel ratings for main su planting date, June 2. Cultivar Ear Unif. Rating Ear Shape Rating Oval / Round Rating Kernel Rowing Rating Kernel Size Rating Kernel Depth (mm) Kernel Depth Rating Flavor Rating Pericarp Rating C162 VG SL T R ST M-L 12 SH OK-G OK-T CUT UY3435 VG CY R ST M 12 M OK T B C151 G-VG CY R ST M 11 SH OK-G T B GH 2042 VG CY R ST-SL IRR M 12 M OK OK B C174 VG CY-SL T R ST M-L 11 SH OK-G OK CUT EX5414 VG CY R ST M 11 M OK-G S-OK B Prelude VG SL T R ST-SL IRR M 11 M G OK-T B GH4927 VG CY R ST M 12 M OK OK B GH2171 VG CY-SL T R ST-SL IRR M 11 M G OK-T B HMX 2390 VG CY-SL T R ST-SL IRR S 12 M OK T B GH6377 VG CY-SL T R ST S-M 12 M OK-G S-OK B C2-35 VG SL T R ST M 11 M B-OK T CUT Rocker G-VG CY R ST M 11 SH OK OK-T B Bonus VG CY R ST S-M 12 SH-M B-OK T B EX5821 VG CY R-SL O ST-SL IRR S-M 12 M-D B T B HMX 7387 VG-E CY-SL T R ST M 12 M B-OK T B C6-205 VG CY R ST S 12 SH-M OK OK B GH6462 VG CY R ST M 11 M OK OK B EX5807 VG CY R ST S 12 M B-OK OK-T B Tamarack VG SL T R ST M 11 M B-OK T CUT Captain VG CY R ST-SL IRR S 12 M OK S-OK B Market Use Rating Continued on next page 169

Table 6 (continued) Cultivar Ear Unif. Rating Ear Shape Rating Oval / Round Rating Kernel Rowing Rating Kernel Size Rating Kernel Depth (mm) Kernel Depth Rating Flavor Rating Pericarp Rating C194 VG SL T-T R ST M 12 M B-OK OK-T CUT HMX7388 VG CY R ST M 12 M B OK-T B Market Use Rating All data and ratings are an average of four replications. Ear Uniformity Rating: Ex=excellent (entire sample was the same length, diameter and uniform tip fill), VG=very good, G=good, F=fair, P=poor. Ear Shape Rating: CY=cylindrical, Sl T=slightly tapered, T=tapered. Oval/Round Rating: R=round, Sl O=slightly oval, O=oval. Kernel Rowing Rating: The straightness of the rows of kernels. St=straight, SL I=slightly irregular, IRR=quite irregular. Kernel Size Rating: S=small, M=medium, L=large. Kernel Depth (mm): The measurement of how deep the kernel was in millimeters (determined from breaking five ears in two and measuring the kernel depth. Kernel Depth Rating: S=small, M=medium, L=large. Flavor Rating: Bl=Blah, OK=acceptable, Good=better than acceptable, SW=sweet. Pericarp Rating: S=soft, OK=acceptable, T=tough. Market Use Rating: Cut=cut kernel, Cob=cobbette, Both=could be used for either. 170

Table 7. Ear and yield data for main su planting date, June 2. Cultivar Husk Ext. (in.) Ear Length (in.) Ear Dia. (in.) Kernel Row Range Unfilled Tip (in.) Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs) Sample Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs) Sample Husked Ear Weight (lbs) Sample Kernel Weight per Ear (lbs) Plants per Acre (1,000) Ears per Plant % Moisture Tons per Acre % Recovery C162 0.6 8.6 2.0 12 20 0.5 1.02 0.93 0.71 0.49 17.5 0.89 68.3 7.9 53 3.6 UY3435 1.2 7.8 2.0 14-20 0.3 0.86 0.85 0.67 0.45 19.2 0.92 68.4 7.7 52 3.6 C151 0.2 8.3 1.9 12 20 0.4 0.89 0.87 0.63 0.41 18.4 0.90 69.5 7.3 47 3.75 GH 2042 0.2 8.0 2.0 12 20 0.1 0.96 0.96 0.70 0.46 17.5 1.05 70.5 8.7 48 4 C174 1.2 8.2 1.9 12 18 0.4 0.84 0.85 0.62 0.39 18.1 1.02 70.3 7.7 46 4.1 EX5414 0.6 8.0 2.1 14-22 0.1 1.03 0.97 0.73 0.45 18.8 0.87 72.5 8.4 45 3.9 Prelude 0.8 7.7 2.0 16-24 0.0 0.86 0.87 0.62 0.40 18.2 0.94 71.9 7.3 45 4.1 GH4927 0.2 8.1 1.9 14-20 0.1 0.99 0.94 0.68 0.41 17.1 1.00 71.6 8.4 44 3.9 GH2171 0.1 7.8 2.1 14-24 0.4 0.89 0.93 0.70 0.43 18.0 0.90 71.3 7.4 46 3.75 HMX 2390 0.0 8.4 1.9 16-22 0.1 0.89 0.91 0.66 0.46 18.0 1.00 72.4 8.0 50 3.9 GH6377 0.4 7.9 2.0 16-24 0.2 0.83 0.85 0.65 0.39 17.3 1.21 71.3 8.7 46 4 C2-35 0.5 8.6 2.0 12 18 0.3 0.98 0.98 0.72 0.47 13.5 1.08 67.5 7.2 48 3.75 Rocker 1.3 7.9 1.9 12 22 0.7 0.88 0.89 0.62 0.35 18.1 0.93 69.6 7.4 40 3.25 Bonus 0.5 7.8 2.0 16-22 0.2 0.85 0.88 0.66 0.39 18.0 0.98 70.4 7.5 44 4.25 EX5821 0.6 8.4 2.0 16-24 0.3 0.96 0.99 0.72 0.41 17.5 0.93 71.8 7.8 42 3.75 HMX 7387 0.2 8.8 1.9 16-20 0.3 1.02 1.01 0.70 0.44 17.9 1.06 74.4 9.5 43 4.2 C6-205 1.4 8.2 2.0 16-24 0.3 0.99 1.01 0.72 0.42 13.5 1.19 69.8 7.8 42 4 GH6462 1.2 7.8 2.0 14-20 0.2 0.83 0.86 0.63 0.38 18.4 1.01 72.6 7.7 44 4 EX5807 0.7 8.2 1.9 16-24 0.3 0.91 0.88 0.65 0.37 19.4 0.98 71.9 8.6 42 3.75 Tamarack 0.9 8.6 2.0 12 20 0.5 0.99 1.02 0.76 0.45 16.2 0.97 72.4 7.8 44 3.9 Captain 0.7 8.3 2.0 16-24 0.1 1.05 1.01 0.73 0.44 18.2 0.91 74.0 8.7 43 3.9 C194 0.1 10.1 2.1 16-20 0.9 1.10 1.11 0.86 0.55 17.5 0.95 74.3 9.2 49 4.2 HMX7388 0.6 8.7 1.9 14-22 0.3 0.96 0.98 0.68 0.44 18.3 0.94 72.8 8.3 45 3.9 Notes on next page Overall Ear Rating Continued on next page 171

Table 7 (continued) Husk Ext. (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the distance from the tip of the cob to where the husk opens. A negative measurement indicates exposed kernels. Exposed kernels can make the ear more susceptible to insect or bird feeding. Ear Length (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the husked ear butt to tip. Ear Dia. (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the diameter of the middle of the ear. Kernel Row Range: The range of the number of rows counted on the ear sample. Unfilled Tip (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the tip of the ear that had not formed kernels. Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of an unhusked ear. Determined by the total yield weight divided by total number of ears harvested. Comparing weight per unhusked ear from total harvest to the sample unhusked weight per ear indicates how valid the sampling technique is. Sample Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of an unhusked ear based on the sample 15 ears brought in from the field. Sample Husked Ear Weight (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of a husked ear based on the sample. Sample Kernel Weight per Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of the kernels cut from the ear. Plants per Acre (1,000): Plant population per acre of the harvested plot (multiply number in the column by 1,000). Harvest plot was two rows by 20 ft per replication. Ears per Plant: The number of ears harvested divided by the number of plants in the harvest area. % Moisture: Percent moisture of the harvest sample. A slurry of cut kernels was dried to determine the percent moisture. Tons per Acre: The extrapolated yield of the plot listed as tons per acre. Harvest plot was two rows by 20 ft per replication. % Recovery: Sample kernel weight divided by sample unhusked ear weight. Overall Ear Rating: 5=exceptional, 4=very good, 3=acceptable, 2=unacceptable, 1=very poor. This evaluation was made by considering ear uniformity, ear size, tip fill, and kernel rowing. 172

Table 8. Plant characteristics for su type based on June 2 planting. Cultivar Plant Uniformity Tillers Ear Position Smut Galls Above the Ear (# plants) Common Rust Rating Stewart s Wilt Rating Plant Height (in.) C162 G N-S 30 0 M M 83 22 UY3435 VG F-L 30 4 M N 84 25 C151 VG N-S 30 0 N M 81 21 GH 2042 VG N-S 30 1 N N 77 25 C174 VG N-S 60 0 N M-MOD 81 24 EX5414 VG F-L 30 0 M N 83 25 Prelude VG F-L 30 0 M M 84 24 GH4927 VG F-L 30 1.5 N N 78 23 GH2171 VG F-L 30 0 N M 82 23 HMX 2390 VG S-L 30 0 M M 81 25 GH6377 VG S-L 30 0 N M 102 31 C2-35 G-VG F-L 30 0.5 MOD N 84 25 Rocker VG N-S 30 0 N M 100 29 Bonus VG F-L 30 0 N N 84 29 EX5821 VG F-L 30 0 N N 93 28 HMX 7387 VG N-S 30 0 M N 92 29 C6-205 G-VG M-L 30 0 N N 86 26 GH6462 VG F-L 30 0 N N 90 28 EX5807 VG-EX N-S 30 0 N N 96 27 Tamarack VG F-L 30 0.5 N N 85 25 Captain VG F-L 30 1 M M 93 28 C194 G-VG F-L 30 0 N N 97 30 HMX7388 VG F-L 30 0 N N 98 31 Ear Ht. (in.) Plant Uniformity: Ex=excellent, VG=very good, G=good. Tillers: N-S=none to small, F-L=few large ones, S-L=some large tillers, M-L=many large tillers. Ear Position: (This may influence mechanical harvest) 30=30 degree from stalk, 45=45 degree from stalk. Common Rust Rating: N= no symptoms seen, M=only a few rust pustules noted, MOD=moderate level of rust infection, SEV=severe amount of rust infection (30% or higher of leaf surface had rust pustules. Stewart s Wilt Rating: M=minor lesions, MOD=moderate level of infection (ears would probably be affected), SEV=severe (some plants were stunted). Plant Height (in.): The measurement of the plant in inches from the base of the stalk to the top of the tassel. Ten plants were measured from each plot. Ear Height (in): The measurement from the base of the stalk to the node at the base of the primary ear. Ten plants were measured from each plot. 173

Additional Comments su Type C162 Early maturity, small diameter plant; good husk extension; long, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with good tip fill; medium to large, shallow kernels; some ears slightly curved (curved ears hurt overall rating); some ears a bit oval; a couple ears infected with smut; very good yield and consistent ear size and yield in both early and later planting. UY3435 Early maturity, small diameter plant; a few plants had smut galls above the ear; good husk extension; very good tip fill; round, cylindrical ears; good yield and recovery; very consistent ear size and yield over both plantings. C151 A few curved ears; early maturity; minimal to poor husk extension in the second planting; long ears with decent tip fill; shallow kernels; straight rows; very consistent overall rating and yield and recovery over both plantings. GH 2042 Early to midseason maturity; early trial standard; some minor plant lodging; good ear weight in both plantings; very good ear uniformity; a few ears infected with common smut; good husk extension in the first planting but minimal in the second planting; very good tip fill in both plantings; cylindrical, round ears (a few slightly oval); very good overall ear ratings in both plantings; very good yield and good recovery in both plantings. C174 Early to midseason maturity; long ear shank; long, slightly tapered ears with medium to large, shallow kernels and straight rows; nice cut kernel product, might be too tapered for cob market; very good yield in the first planting and good yield in the second planting (plant population was a bit less in the second planting); very good overall ear rating; minor to moderate levels of Stewart s wilt infection. EX5414 Early to midseason maturity; slender plant that seems to hold up the heavy ears (some minor lodging in one plot); good husk extension and very good tip fill; large diameter; cylindrical, round (a few slightly oval) ears with medium to deep kernels; a little softer pericarp than most others; good to very good overall ear rating; very good yield and recovery. Prelude Early to midseason maturity; shorter, slightly tapered (mainly near the tip of the ear), round ears with a bit tougher pericarp; good flavor; very good husk extension and excellent tip fill; good to very good overall rating; good yield. GH 4927 Early to midseason maturity; minimal to poor husk extension; very good to excellent tip fill; very consistent ear size and length over both plantings; a few slightly oval ears; a few ears with a slight curve or very one-sided; good to very good overall ear rating; very good to excellent yield. 174

GH 2171 Early to midseason maturity; shorter, large diameter ears with minimal to poor husk extension; not filled but uniformly so; good to very good yield and recovery; possibly too big in diameter for cob market; ear uniformity not quite as good as most others. HM2390 Midseason maturity; bushy plant; long, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with good husk extension in the first planting, but minimal husk extension in the second planting, many ears onesided or slightly curved; very good tip fill in both plantings; tough pericarp; good to very good overall ear rating; nice golden yellow color; consistent over both plantings; very good yield and recovery. GH 6377 Midseason maturity; tall, bushy plants; hard to hand harvest (ears do not snap off); cylindrical to slightly tapered, round ears; minimal husk extension; very good tip fill; straight rows; many second ears; small to medium kernel size; a bit softer pericarp than most others; very good overall ear rating, yield, and recovery. C2-35 An observation entry; midseason maturity; thin stand; long, slightly tapered, round ears with good tip fill; good yield for less than optimum stand; very good recovery although it was quite mature at harvest; moderate level of common rust infection will probably keep it from advancing. Rocker Midseason maturity; tall plants; cylindrical, round ears; ears not quite as uniform as most other cultivars; some ears have a slight curve; acceptable overall ear rating (lack of uniformity hurt the rating); decent yield. Bonus Mid- to main season maturity; main season trial standard; stout, uniform plants; very good tip fill; straight rows; tough pericarp; very good overall rating; consistent, good yield over the years. 5821 Mid- to main season maturity; bushy plant; decent husk extension; good tip fill; long, round to slightly oval ears; small, medium to deep kernels; tough pericarp; good to very good overall rating; good yield. HMX 7387 Mid- to main season maturity; bushy plant; very long, slender, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears; very good to excellent ear uniformity; minimal to poor husk extension; very good tip fill; straight rows; tough pericarp; very good overall ear rating and excellent yield. C-205 An observation entry; mid- to main season maturity; thin stand; cylindrical, round ears with very good husk extension and tip fill; small, shallow to medium depth kernels in straight rows; very good yield for the plant population; very good overall ear rating; worth looking at in replicated trial. 175

GH 6462 Mid- to main season maturity; cylindrical, round ears with very good husk extension and tip fill; straight rows; very good overall ear rating; good yield; ear uniformity hurts this one a bit. 5807 Mid- to main season maturity; excellent plant uniformity; cylindrical, round ears with decent husk extension and very good tip fill; a few slightly curved ears; small kernels in straight rows; good to very good overall rating and very good yield. Tamarack Mid- to main season maturity; long, slightly tapered ears with good husk extension; straight rows; tough pericarp; good yield (although lower plant population probably hurt yield); very good overall rating; cut kernel market; some tassle smut. Captain Main season maturity; long, cylindrical, round ears with good husk extension and very good tip fill; small kernels; pericarp a bit softer than others; very good overall ear rating and very good yield. C194 Main season maturity; tall, bushy plant; very long, slightly tapered to tapered ear with minimal to poor husk extension; a few ears slightly curved; ears did not fill but uniformly so; straight rows; very good overall ear rating; very good to excellent yield and recovery; cut kernel market; some tassle smut. HMX 7388 Main season maturity; tall plants with ears high on the stalk; long, round, cylindrical ears with very good tip fill; straight rows; very good overall ear rating; very good yield. Cultivar Descriptions Provided by the Seed Source (Su type) C162 General Mills: early season (1,575 heat units) yellow su; Rp1-d gene for rust resistance. UY3435 Crites Moscow. C151 General Mills: yellow su; mid- to early season maturity (1,630 heat units); Rp1d rust resistance. GH 2042 Rogers: 75 days to maturity (1,553 heat units); 7-foot plant height, 24-inch ear height, 1.9-inch ear diameter, 8.5-inch ear length, 16-20 rows, 12-mm kernel depth; Rp1i gene for rust resistance, tolerance to MDMV, poast herbicide tolerance. C174 General Mills: yellow su; early to midseason maturity (1,720 heat units); Rp1d rust resistance. EX 5414 (EX 087 3 5414) Seminis: early maturity (74 days); MDM resistance; as early or earlier than GH 2042. 176

Prelude Crites Moscow: an extremely high yielding, medium early processing hybrid; its exceptional quality is unique for its maturity; suitable as an early and midseason variety; has performed well across the United States in the early to mid- planting slots; excellent replacement for Jubilee; 2-3 days earlier than Jubilee, 3-4 days later than GH 1861 or Boston; very sweet with an excellent flavor, eats like an se type; field holding ability, and hence harvest window, is excellent; cob size is moderate but very consistent; high recovery and good factory throughput; twin cobbing is common with high synchronicity; this drives good yield potential; moderated to good stalk strength with reasonable tolerance to stalk rots; can be grown right throughout the season, although is only slightly stronger in the stalk than Jubilee; has shown greater tolerance to boil smut than Jubilee in Washington and Oregon; tolerant to the chemicals Accent and Callisto; moderate multigenic tolerance to rust, moderately susceptible to NLB, MDMV, SW, SLB, and Grey Leaf Spot; worth trialing anywhere that Jubilee is grown, where you want Jubilee-type quality, or you need it in an earlier variety; where you want good establishment across a wide range of conditions with improved Smut tolerance and stalk strength, do not plant into high disease pressure times or areas of severe storm activity (commercial 2004). GH 4927 Rogers: 75 days to maturity; stout plant; Rp1i gene for rust resistance; Poast herbicide tolerance; similar to 2042 but with better plant. GH 2171 Rogers: 74 days to maturity; Rp1g gene for rust resistance, some NCLB and Stewart s wilt tolerance; Poast herbicide tolerance; similar to Cahill. HMX 2390 Harris Moran: 78 days to maturity; 84-inch plant height, 30-inch ear height, 8.3-inch ear length, 1.8-inch ear diameter, 18-20 rows; yellow su; high yielding; improved disease resistance (fusarium), intermediate resistance to common rust, susceptible to both MDMV and NCLB, intermediate resistance to Stewart s wilt and common smut; medium kernel style developed for processor market. GH 6377 Rogers: 82-83 days to maturity; very high quality petite kernel; 8.3-inch ear length, 20 rows; PSgenes d/g, ET (IR), MDMV (HR), expect Pst (IR) in a Poast-tolerant hybrid. C2-35 Crookham Co. Rocker (GH6631) Rogers: su type; 85 days to maturity (1,793) heat units; 8.5-foot plant height, 38-inch ear height, 8.25-inch ear length, 1.85-inch ear diameter, 18-20 rows, 11-mm average kernel depth; Rp1-d & g genes for rust resistance, tolerant to maize dwarf mosaic virus; Poast herbicide tolerance. Cultivar Descriptions Provided by the Seed Source (Su type) Bonus Rogers: 83 days to maturity (1,750 heat units); main season processor; normal su type; 7.5-foot plant height, 36-inch ear height, 8.0-inch ear length, 1.8-inch diameter, 18-22 row count, 11-mm kernel depth; produces ears with exceptional uniformity of size, shape, and style, which 177

promotes efficient processing; petite kernel and golden yellow color give it a gourmet appearance; excellent husk length minimizes potential for bird damage; sturdy clean plant that harvests easily; resistant to common rust (RP1d gene), tolerant to MDMV, Stewart s wilt, and NCLB. EX 5821 (EX 087 5 5821) Seminis: 82 days to maturity; new race of Rust resistance; Legacy type. HMX 7387 Harris Moran: full-season maturity at 86 days; 16-18 row count, 22-cm ear length. C205 Crookham Co. GH 6462 Rogers: 83 days to maturity; double rust genes d, g, some NCLB, SCLB, MDMV, and Stewart s tolerance; great percentage of recovery, and good finished quality and color. EX 08735807 Seminis: main season hybrid (82 days to maturity); su1 yellow processor hybrid with petite kernel style; good rowing on 8-inch ears; attractive processed color; intermediate resistance to MDMV, Stewart s wilt, and NLB, carries the Rp1-D gene, and has shown good polygenic levels of rust resistance. Tamarack Crookham: 84 days to maturity (1,428 heat units); yellow su type; 8.7-inch ear length, 2.0-inch ear diameter, 30-inch ear height, 89-inch plant height, 20-22 rows; IR for Stewart s Wilt, Rp1g gene for rust resistance, HR to MDMV. Captain Crites Moscow. C194 General Mills: yellow su type; full-season maturity (1,900 heat units); Rp1d,-g & I genes for rust resistance. HMX 7388 Harris Moran: full-season maturity at 86 days; 16-18 row count, 22-cm ear length. 178

Table 9. Maturity of supersweet gene type for planting date June 16. Cultivar Days To Silk Heat Units to Silk (base 50) Days to Harvest Heat Units to Harvest (base 50) % Moisture at Harvest Seed Source Maturity C177 56 1,079 85 1,558 75.4 1760 Protégé 60 1,140 90 1,617 80.0 77 ACX7132 58 1,116 90 1,614 74.9 na 7-272 60 1,136 90 1,617 76.5 na GSS 1477 61 1,167 92 1,650 76.7 79 Magnum II 61 1,162 93 1,653 76.6 81 HB2642 61 1,160 93 1,656 75.8 na HMX 7389S 62 1,181 94 1,666 75.6 83 Overland 63 1,200 94 1,669 77.8 84 HY1089 61 1,156 94 1,664 74.4 na ACX5008 61 1,164 95 1,670 77.7 na GSS7051 64 1,219 95 1,673 75.4 84 Fortitude 61 1,161 95 1,671 75.5 80 Cshyp6-223 62 1,178 96 1,675 76.4 na C179 62 1,173 96 1,679 78.8 1890 Galaxy 64 1,209 97 1,684 75.6 na HY1481 63 1,186 97 1,680 75.5 na HW2545 64 1,209 97 1,682 76.6 na GSS6550 64 1,204 98 1,689 77.3 84 6-225 62 1,167 99 1,693 76.0 na 7-265 61 1,161 99 1,695 73.8 na 7-276 63 1,194 99 1,695 75.5 na ACX 5156 63 1,194 99 1,695 74.0 na 6-224 62 1,177 100 1,696 76.0 na na=not available. All data and ratings are an average of four replications. Days to Silk: The number of days from planting until plots had 50% of the plants showing silks. Heat Units to Silk (base 50): Growing degree day units base 50 F. The accumulation of degree-day units from planting until silk. Days to Harvest: The number of days from planting until harvest. Heat Units to Harvest (base 50): Growing degree day units base 50 F. The accumulation of degree-day units from planting until harvest. % Moisture at Harvest: Percent moisture of the harvest sample. A slurry of cut kernels was dried to determine the percent moisture. Seed Source Maturity: Listed in either heat units or days to harvest. Information provided by the seed company. 179

Table 10. Ear and kernel ratings for supersweet planting date June 16. Cultivar Ear Unif. Rating Ear Shape Rating Oval/ Round Rating Kernel Rowing Rating Kernel Size Rating Kernel Depth (mm) Kernel Depth Rating Flavor Rating Pericarp Rating Market Use Rating C177 G-VG SL T R ST-SL I M-L 12 SH OK-G OK-T CUT Protégé G-VG CY-SL T R ST-SL I M 12 M OK OK B ACX7132 G-VG SL T-T R ST-SL I M 11 SH-M OK-G OK CUT 7-272 VG SL T-T R-SL O ST-SL I M 12 SH-M OK-G T CUT GSS 1477 G-VG CY R ST-SL I M 12 M OK-G OK-T B Magnum II VG CY R ST-SL I M 13 M OK-G OK B HB2642 VG CY-SL T R ST M 12 M G S-OK B HMX 7389S VG-E CY R ST M 13 M-D G T B Overland VG CY-SL T R ST-SL I S-M 13 M-D G OK B HY1089 VG-E CY R ST S 12 M OK-G OK-T B ACX5008 VG VCY R ST M-L 13 M ok OK B GSS7051 VG CY R-SL O ST M 12 SH-M G-SW T B Fortitude VG CY R ST M 13 M OK-G OK-T B Cshyp6-223 VG CY R ST M 14 M-D G OK B C179 VG CY-SL T R ST-SL I M 14 M-D OK OK CUT Galaxy VG-E CY R ST S-M 13 M-D G OK-T B HY1481 G-VG CY R-SL O ST-SL I S 13 M OK-G OK-T B HW2545 G-VG CY-SL T R ST S-M 12 M G S B GSS6550 VG-E CY R ST M 13 M G OK-T B 6-225 G CY R ST M-L 14 M G S CUT 7-265 VG T R ST-SL I M 13 M G T CUT 7-276 G-VG SL T-T R ST-SL I M 13 M-D G OK CUT ACX 5156 G-VG SL T R-SL O ST-SL I M 13 M-D OK-G OK-T B 6-224 G-VG CY SL O ST M 14 M G S CUT All data and ratings are an average of four replications. Ear Unif. Rating: Ex=excellent (entire sample was the same length, diameter and uniform tip fill), VG=very good, G=good, F=fair, P=poor. Ear Shape Rating: CY=cylindrical, Sl T=slightly tapered, T=tapered. Oval/Round Rating: R=round, Sl O=slightly oval, O=oval. Kernel Rowing Rating: The straightness of the rows of kernels. St=straight, SL I=slightly irregular, IRR=quite irregular. Kernel Size Rating: S=small, M=medium, L=large. Kernel Depth (mm): The measurement of how deep the kernel was in millimeters (determined from breaking five ears in two and measuring the kernel depth. Kernel Depth Rating: S=shallow, M=moderate, D=deep. Flavor Rating: Bl=Blah, OK=acceptable, Good=better than acceptable, SW=sweet. Pericarp Rating: S=soft, OK=acceptable, T=tough. Market Use Rating: Cut=cut kernel, Cob=cobbette, Both=could be used for either. 180

Table 11. Ear and yield data for supersweet gene type. Cultivar Husk Ext. (in.) Ear Length (in.) Ear Dia. (in.) Kernel Row Range Unfilled Tip (in.) Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs) Sample Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs Sample Husked Ear Weight (lbs) Sample Kernel Weight per Ear (lbs) Plants per Acre (1,000) Ears Per Plant % Moisture Tons Per Acre % Recovery C177 0.3 7.8 2.1 12 20 0.1 0.87 0.86 0.67 0.39 19.8 0.99 75.4 8.6 46 3.7 Protégé 0.1 8.1 2.0 16-22 0.7 0.88 0.90 0.65 0.39 17.8 0.95 80.0 7.4 43 3.75 ACX7132 0.2 9.1 2.1 12 20 0.6 0.97 0.95 0.74 0.54 17.9 0.96 74.9 8.3 57 3.6 C7-272 0.5 8.1 2.0 14-18 0.1 0.83 0.89 0.64 0.39 8.1 1.71 76.5 5.6 44 4 GSS 1477 0.6 8.2 2.1 14-22 1.3 0.86 0.89 0.68 0.39 19.2 0.94 76.7 7.8 44 3 Magnum II 0.4 8.4 2.1 14-20 0.7 0.97 0.98 0.70 0.44 18.5 0.92 76.6 8.3 45 3.8 HB2642 1.3 8.4 2.1 14-20 0.7 0.95 0.93 0.76 0.45 18.0 0.98 75.8 8.3 51 4 HMX 7389S 1.2 7.4 2.1 16-22 0.1 0.96 0.97 0.70 0.39 18.9 0.97 75.6 8.8 40 4.1 Overland -0.4 8.3 2.1 16-22 0.7 0.96 0.97 0.73 0.54 17.4 0.93 77.8 7.8 56 4 HY1089 1.7 7.9 2.1 16-20 0.6 0.92 0.92 0.64 0.39 18.4 0.97 74.4 8.3 42 4.1 ACX5008 0.7 8.2 2.1 16-20 0.1 0.89 0.91 0.73 0.42 17.8 0.90 77.7 7.1 46 4.1 GSS7051 0.6 8.3 2.0 14-20 0.6 0.92 0.93 0.68 0.39 14.9 0.91 75.4 6.3 42 3.9 Fortitude 2.0 8.3 2.2 14-22 2.6 1.05 1.07 0.76 0.45 9.8 1.29 75.5 6.4 42 4 Csh6-223 0.2 8.0 2.2 14-18 0.2 0.98 1.00 0.74 0.44 8.8 1.53 76.4 6.3 44 4.25 C179-0.6 8.8 2.4 16-24 0.9 1.10 1.12 0.92 0.61 17.8 0.88 78.8 8.5 54 3.8 Galaxy 0.3 7.9 2.1 16-22 0.4 0.91 0.91 0.71 0.43 18.7 0.94 75.6 8.0 47 4.1 HY1481-0.2 8.1 2.1 16-22 0.6 0.92 0.92 0.72 0.41 19.1 0.86 75.5 7.5 44 3.4 HW2545 1.0 7.9 2.1 16-24 0.7 0.98 0.97 0.68 0.38 14.7 0.94 76.6 6.7 39 3.7 GSS6550 0.1 7.7 2.0 14-20 0.6 0.79 0.80 0.61 0.38 17.6 1.07 77.3 7.4 47 4.25 C6-225 1.0 8.3 2.2 12 18 0.7 1.02 1.09 0.84 0.59 8.1 1.43 76.0 5.9 54 3.5 C7-265 0.1 9.0 2.2 14-20 0.5 0.99 1.05 0.84 0.58 9.8 1.67 73.8 8.1 55 3.75 C7-276 0.3 8.7 2.2 16-22 0.6 1.02 1.06 0.81 0.53 7.4 1.56 75.5 5.9 50 3.6 ACX 5156 1.3 6.8 2.1 16-20 0.1 0.79 0.74 0.54 0.39 15.2 1.02 74.0 6.1 53 3.5 C6-224 0.7 9.2 2.2 16-22 0.7 1.11 1.14 0.87 0.54 7.8 1.28 76.0 5.5 47 2.75 Notes on next page Overall Ear Rating Continued on next page 181

Table 11 (continued) Husk Ext. (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the distance from the tip of the cob to where the husk opens. A negative measurement indicates exposed kernels. Exposed kernels can make the ear more susceptible to insect or bird feeding. Ear Length (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the husked ear butt to tip. Ear Dia. (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the diameter of the middle of the ear. Kernel Row Range: The range of the number of rows counted on the ear sample. Unfilled Tip (in.): The measurement (in inches) of the tip of the ear that had not formed kernels. Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of an unhusked ear. Determined by the total yield weight divided by total number of ears harvested. Comparing weight per unhusked ear from total harvest to the sample unhusked weight per ear indicates how valid the sampling technique is. Sample Weight per Unhusked Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of an unhusked ear based on the sample 15 ears brought in from the field. Sample Husked Ear Weight (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of a husked ear based on the sample. Sample Kernel Weight per Ear (lbs): The weight (in pounds) of the kernels cut from the ear. Plants per Acre (1,000): Plant population per acre of the harvested plot (multiply number in the column by 1,000). Harvest plot was two rows by 20 ft per replication. Ears per Plant: The number of ears harvested divided by the number of plants in the harvest area. % Moisture: Percent moisture of the harvest sample. A slurry of cut kernels was dried to determine the percent moisture. Tons per Acre: The extrapolated yield of the plot listed as tons per acre. Harvest plot was two rows by 20 ft per replication. % Recovery: Sample kernel weight divided by sample unhusked ear weight. Overall Ear Rating: 5=exceptional, 4=very good, 3=acceptable, 2=unacceptable, 1=very poor. This evaluation was made by considering ear uniformity, ear size, tip fill, and kernel rowing. 182

Table 12. Plant characteristics for supersweet gene type. Cultivar Plant Uniformity Tillers Ear Position Smut Galls Above the Ear (# plants) Common Rust Rating Stewart s Wilt Rating NCLB Rating Plant Height (in.) Ear Height (in) C177 G-VG S-L 30 0 MOD MOD M 83 21 Protégé VG N-S 30-60 0 N N N 76 21 ACX7132 G-VG S 30 1 M M MOD 82 22 C7-272 G-VG L 30 0 MOD N N 76 18 GSS 1477 VG N-S 30 0 M N N 83 23 Magnum II VG N-S 30 0 M N N 92 26 HB2642 G-VG S 30-60 0 M-MOD M M 89 23 HMX 7389S VG N-S 30 0 N N N 90 30 Overland VG N-S 60-90 0 N N N 81 28 HY1089 G-VG F-L 30 0 M N N 88 23 ACX5008 G-VG S 30 3 M M M 71 16 GSS7051 G-VG S-L 60 0 N N N 84 27 Fortitude VG S-L 30 0 M-MOD N N 77 21 Cshyp6-223 G-VG F-L 30 0 M M N 80 26 C179 VG F-L 30 0 N M M 91 26 Galaxy G-VG N-S 30 0 M M N 82 24 HY1481 VG S 30-60 0 M N N 88 26 HW2545 G-VG S-L 30 0 M N N 84 21 GSS6550 VG S-L 30-60 0 N N N 84 26 C6-225 G-VG L 30-60 0 N N N 78 21 C7-265 VG L 30-60 0 N N N 84 28 C7-276 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 81 25 ACX 5156 G-VG S 30 0 M N N 76 22 6-224 G L 30 0 MOD N N 80 24 Plant Uniformity: Ex=excellent, VG=very good, G=good. Tillers: N-S=none to small, F-L=few large ones, S-L=some large tillers, M-L=many large tillers. Ear Position: (This may influence mechanical harvest) 30=30 degree from stalk, 45=45 degree from stalk. Common Rust Rating: N= no symptoms seen, M=only a few rust pustules noted, MOD=moderate level of rust infection, SEV=severe amount of rust infection (30% or higher of leaf surface had rust pustules. Stewart s Wilt Rating: M=minor lesions, MOD=moderate level of infection (ears would probably be affected), SEV=severe (some plants were stunted). Northern Corn Leaf Blight Rating: N=none, M=minor, Mod.=moderate. Plant Height (in.): The measurement of the plant in inches from the base of the stalk to the top of the tassel. Ten plants were measured from each plot. Ear Height (in): The measurement from the base of the stalk to the node at the base of the primary ear. Ten plants were measured from each plot. 183

Additional Comments Supersweet Type C177 Early season maturity; slightly tapered ears with minimal to poor husk extension; very good to excellent tip fill; ears quite one-sided; medium to large, shallow kernels; very good yield; probably best for cut kernel market; moderate levels of common rust and Stewart s wilt infection. Protégé Early to midseason maturity; cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with minimal to poor husk extension; ears uniformly not filled; small cob; difficult to use moisture as an indicator of maturity. ACX 7132 Early to midseason maturity; long, slightly tapered to tapered ears with minimal to poor husk extension; very good yield and excellent recovery; best market would be cut kernel; moderate level of NCLB infection; ear uniformity could be better. C7-272 Observation entry; early to midseason maturity; thin stand; slightly tapered to tapered, round to slightly oval ears with very good to excellent tip fill; shallow to medium kernel depth; tough pericarp; very good overall ear rating; some tassle smut, moderate level of common rust infection; might be worth looking at again in replicated study. GSS 1477 Early to midseason maturity; some broken plants after hard winds; round, cylindrical ears with uniformly poor fill; decent yield; ears very one-sided to slightly curved. Magnum II Mid- to main season maturity; tall plants; ears quite one-sided; long; cylindrical, round ears with minimal husk extension; ears were uniformly not filled; very good yield and good recovery. HB 2642 Mid- to main season maturity; bicolor; many broken plants after high winds; long, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with very good husk extension; ears were not filled; straight rows; pericarp a bit softer than most others; very good overall ear rating, yield, and recovery; moderate level of common rust infection; more of a fresh market variety than a processor. HMX 7389S Mid- to main season maturity; tall plant; some broken plants after high winds, very one-sided to slightly curved ears; short, very uniform ears with very good husk extension and tip fill; straight rows; tough pericarp; very good overall ear rating; very good to excellent yield; recovery was on the low side although the kernels were quite deep. Overland Mid- to main season maturity; our supersweet standard; ear angle 60-90 degrees from the plant; long, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with exposed tips; ears uniformly not filled; small, medium to deep kernels; good yield and excellent recovery; very good overall ear rating. 184

HY1089 Mid- to main season maturity; very good to excellent ear uniformity; cylindrical ears with good husk extension; small, pointed type kernels in straight rows; very good yield and overall ear ratings. ACX 5008 Mid- to main season maturity; short plant; ear height may be a concern in a dry year; very cylindrical ears with decent husk extension; very good to excellent tip fill; medium to large kernels in straight rows; decent yield and very good recovery; very good overall ear rating; a few plants with common smut galls above the ear. GSS7051 Mid- to main season maturity; less than optimum plant stand; tall plants; many broken plants after high winds; long, cylindrical ears with decent husk extension; not filled but uniformly so; straight rows; good flavor; tough pericarp; very good overall ear rating. Fortitude Mid- to main season maturity; thin stand; long, cylindrical, large diameter ears; long husk extension and uniform; poor tip fill; straight rows; very good overall ear rating (positives outweighed the poor fill); small cob; moderate level of common rust infection (disease susceptibility may keep it from becoming commercially acceptable). C6-223 Main season maturity; thin stand; cylindrical, large diameter ears with minimal to poor husk extension; very good tip fill; medium to deep kernels in straight rows; very good overall ear rating; probably worth looking at again in replicated study with better seed. C179 Main season maturity; tall plant; a number of broken plants after high winds; a few ears broke while husking; external baby ears attached to the main ear; very long, large diameter, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with exposed tips; ears one-sided to slightly curved; ears uniformly not filled; medium to deep kernels; very good yield and recovery. Galaxy Main season maturity; cylindrical, very uniform ears with minimal husk extension; small, medium to deep kernels in straight rows; very good overall ear rating; very good yield and recovery; very good potential. HY 1481 Main season maturity; a number of broken plants after high winds; cylindrical, round to slightly oval ears with exposed tips; small kernels; decent yield. HW 2545 Main season maturity; white kernels; less than optimum plant stand; very uniform, cylindrical to slightly tapered ears with good husk extension; small kernels in straight rows; soft pericarp; decent yield and very good recovery; very good overall ear rating. 185

GSS 6550 Main season maturity; bushy plant; some broken plants after high winds; very good to excellent ear uniformity; cylindrical, round ears with minimal to poor husk extension; straight rows; decent yield and very good recovery; very good overall ear rating. C6-225 Observation entry; main season maturity; thin stand; cylindrical, large diameter, round ears with good husk extension; ears not filled and not as uniform as they should be; straight rows; medium to large kernels; soft pericarp; excellent recovery. C7-265 Observation entry; main season maturity; thin stand; long, tapered, large diameter ears with minimal to poor husk extension; tough pericarp; very good yield (considering the low plant stand) and recovery; a few ears infected with common smut; possibly worth looking at again in replicated study. C7-276 Observation entry; main season maturity; thin stand; long, tapered, large diameter ears with minimal husk extension; medium to deep kernels; very good recovery. ACX 5156 Observation entry; main season maturity; less than optimum plant stand; short, slightly tapered, round to slightly oval ears with good husk extension; very good to excellent tip fill; good cut corn recovery; a special niche market type of ear. C6-224 Observation entry; main season maturity; thin stand; long, large diameter, cylindrical, slightly oval ears with decent husk extension; ears were not filled; straight rows; soft pericarp; unacceptable overall ear rating (three flat tipped ears in the sample); moderate level of common rust infection. Descriptions Provided by the Seed Source (Supersweets) C177 General Mills: early season maturity (1,760 heat units); yellow supersweet; Rp1-d gene for rust resistance. Protégé (GSS 7164) Rogers: 77 days to maturity; similar to GSS 9299 with newer I gene for rust resistance and better ear uniformity. ACX 7132 Abbott & Cobb. C7-272 Crookham Co. GSS 1477 Rogers: new; 79 days to maturity; 8.5-inch ear; Rp1d gene for rust, some overall tolerances for new race, HR for NCLB, SCLB, and IR on Stewart s Wilt and MDMV; good recovery and quality. 186

Magnum II Rogers: 81 days maturity; 8.5-inch ear length, 16-18 rows, 1.9-inch diameter; strong plant; IR to common rust, HR to NCLB, IR to SCLB; excellent husk cover; good seedling vigor; good field holding capacity; straight rowing. HB 2642 Crites Moscow: bicolor. HMX 7389 Harris Moran: 83 days to maturity; 16-18 row count; multiple gene rust resistance, IR for NCLB; 21-cm ear length. Overland (GSS 3287) Rogers: 84 days to maturity (1,775 heat units); 7-foot plant height, 36-inch ear height, 8.5-inch ear length, 1.85-inch ear diameter, 18-20 rows, 12-mm kernel depth; Rp1i gene for rust resistance, resistance to NCLB, tolerance to MDMV and SW. HY1089 Crites Moscow. ACX 5008 Abbott & Cobb. GSS7051 Rogers: SSJ cob quality in a late season great multi-disease package; 84 days to maturity; rust genes di, NCLB/Et (HR), Stewart swilt or Pst very good, but too new to say which IR (oldmr) or (HR) yet. Fortitude (CSH3-99) Crookham: 80 days to maturity. Cshyp6-223 Crookham. C179 General Mills: full-season maturity (1,890 heat units); yellow supersweet; Rp1d, g & I genes for rust resistance. Galaxy Crites Moscow. HY 1481 Crites Moscow. HW 2545 Crites Moscow: white. GSS 6550 Rogers: 84 days to maturity; first Poast-tolerant supersweet; Rp1I gene for rust resistance; lush green plant; IR to NCLB, high resistance to MDMV; 16-18 rows, 1.8-inch diameter. 187

C6-225 Crookham Co. C7-265 Crookham Co. C7-276 Crookham Co. ACX 5156 Crookham Co. C6-224 Crookham Co. Table 13. Weather summary. Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units May 2008 1 50 32 41 0 0 0 2 57 36 46.5 0.05 0.05 0 0 3 61 50 55.5 0.03 0.08 5.5 6 4 67 50 58.5 0.45 0.53 8.5 14 5 56 36 46 0 0.53 0 14 6 67 41 54 0 0.53 4 18 7 65 42 53.5 0 0.53 3.5 22 7 74 46 60 0.12 0.65 10 32 9 55 38 46.5 0 0.65 0 32 10 59 42 50.5 0.01 0.66 0.5 32 11 63 38 50.5 0 0.66 0.5 33 12 65 46 55.5 0 0.66 5.5 38 13 61 45 53 0 0.66 3 41 14 68 41 54.5 0 0.66 4.5 46 15 75 48 61.5 0.17 0.83 11.5 57 16 63 45 54 0 0.83 4 61 17 55 41 48 0.01 0.84 0 61 18 67 42 54.5 0.13 0.97 4.5 66 19 64 40 52 0.15 1.12 2 68 20 49 36 42.5 0.01 1.13 0 68 21 61 42 51.5 0 1.13 1.5 69 22 54 41 47.5 0.07 1.2 0 69 Continued on next page 188

Table 13 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units May 2008 (continued) 23 56 42 49 0 1.2 0 69 24 61 47 54 0.03 1.23 4 73 25 65 48 56.5 0 1.23 6.5 80 26 75 49 62 0 1.23 12 92 27 83 59 71 0 1.23 21 113 28 64 38 51 0 1.23 1 114 29 59 41 50 0 1.23 0 114 30 72 46 59 0 1.23 9 123 31 72 53 62.5 0.13 1.36 12.5 135 June 2008 1 77 55 66 0.38 1.74 16 151 2 63 52 57.5 0.02 1.76 7.5 159 3 76 56 66 0 1.76 16 175 4 72 58 65 0.04 1.8 15 190 5 73 60 66.5 0 1.8 16.5 206 6 82 64 73 0.01 1.81 23 229 7 94 73 83.5 0 1.81 33.5 263 8 89 68 78.5 0 1.81 28.5 291 9 87 71 79 0.11 1.92 29 320 10 93 66 79.5 0 1.92 29.5 350 11 89 58 73.5 0.3 2.22 23.5 373 12 80 55 67.5 0 2.22 17.5 391 13 76 56 66 0 2.22 16 407 14 88 63 75.5 0.05 2.27 25.5 432 15 74 62 68 0.04 2.31 18 450 16 83 59 71 0.35 2.66 21 471 17 79 55 67 0.06 2.72 17 488 18 65 50 57.5 0.11 2.83 7.5 496 19 66 49 57.5 0.3 3.13 7.5 503 20 66 55 60.5 0.12 3.25 10.5 514 21 72 53 62.5 0.01 3.26 12.5 526 22 80 58 69 0.22 3.48 19 545 Continued on next page 189

Table 13 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units June 2008 (continued) 23 77 58 67.5 0.38 3.86 17.5 563 24 76 57 66.5 0 3.86 16.5 579 25 73 55 64 0 3.86 14 593 26 81 62 71.5 0 3.86 21.5 615 27 80 65 72.5 0 3.86 22.5 637 28 82 64 73 0.06 3.92 23 660 29 83 68 75.5 0.02 3.94 25.5 686 30 81 60 70.5 0.87 4.81 20.5 706 July 2008 1 78 60 69 0.41 5.22 19 725 2 76 52 64 0 5.22 14 739 3 82 57 69.5 0 5.22 19.5 759 4 73 52 62.5 0.21 5.43 12.5 771 5 74 51 62.5 0.02 5.45 12.5 784 6 78 54 66 0 5.45 16 800 7 84 64 74 0 5.45 24 824 8 87 66 76.5 0 5.45 26.5 850 9 90 69 79.5 0 5.45 29.5 880 10 81 60 70.5 0.01 5.46 20.5 900 11 77 58 67.5 0.01 5.47 17.5 918 12 72 59 65.5 0.13 5.6 15.5 933 13 89 64 76.5 0.01 5.61 26.5 960 14 77 58 67.5 0.95 6.56 17.5 977 15 79 54 66.5 0 6.56 16.5 994 16 80 59 69.5 0 6.56 19.5 1,013 17 86 63 74.5 0.2 6.76 24.5 1,038 18 84 66 75 0.07 6.83 25 1,063 19 87 72 79.5 0 6.83 29.5 1,092 20 87 69 78 0.69 7.52 28 1,120 21 85 67 76 0.53 8.05 26 1,146 22 79 62 70.5 0.14 8.19 20.5 1,167 23 78 63 70.5 0.9 9.09 20.5 1,187 Continued on next page 190

Table 13 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units July 2008 (continued) 24 77 63 70 0.06 9.15 20 1,207 25 68 58 63 0.51 9.66 13 1,220 26 81 63 72 0 9.66 22 1,242 27 82 64 73 0.09 9.75 23 1,265 28 78 64 71 0 9.75 21 1,286 29 79 63 71 0 9.75 21 1,307 30 79 59 69 0.05 9.8 19 1,326 31 81 63 72 0 9.8 22 1,348 August 2008 1 82 64 73 0 9.8 23 1,371 2 80 64 72 0.11 9.91 22 1,393 3 75 62 68.5 0.12 10.03 18.5 1,412 4 72 63 67.5 0 10.03 17.5 1,429 5 79 56 67.5 0 10.03 17.5 1,447 6 82 62 72 0.43 10.46 22 1,469 7 80 63 71.5 0 10.46 21.5 1,490 8 76 59 67.5 0 10.46 17.5 1,508 9 69 57 63 1.27 11.73 13 1,521 10 75 58 66.5 0.4 12.13 16.5 1,537 11 74 54 64 0.24 12.37 14 1,551 12 70 56 63 0.13 12.5 13 1,564 13 73 55 64 0.07 12.57 14 1,578 14 75 55 65 0.11 12.68 15 1,593 15 75 57 66 0 12.68 16 1,609 16 75 56 65.5 0 12.68 15.5 1,625 17 77 62 69.5 0 12.68 19.5 1,644 18 79 60 69.5 0 12.68 19.5 1,664 19 83 58 70.5 0.16 12.84 20.5 1,684 20 65 49 57 0 12.84 7 1,691 21 70 50 60 0 12.84 10 1,701 22 79 53 66 0 12.84 16 1,717 23 84 62 73 0 12.84 23 1,740 Continued on next page 191

Table 13 (continued) Day Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Mean Temp. Precip. Acc Precip. Degree Days Base 50 Acc. DD Units August 2008 (continued) 24 82 62 72 0 12.84 22 1,762 25 85 59 72 0.08 12.92 22 1,784 26 68 51 59.5 0 12.92 9.5 1,794 27 71 47 59 0 12.92 9 1,803 28 76 50 63 0 12.92 13 1,816 29 70 58 64 0.7 13.62 14 1,830 30 74 60 67 0.34 13.96 17 1,847 31 77 58 67.5 0 13.96 17.5 1,864 September 2008 1 77 52 64.5 0 13.96 14.5 1,879 2 78 53 65.5 0 13.96 15.5 1,894 3 81 56 68.5 0 13.96 18.5 1,913 4 82 56 69 0 13.96 19 1,932 5 83 64 73.5 0 13.96 23.5 1,955 6 89 63 76 0 13.96 26 1,981 7 67 57 62 0.2 14.16 12 1,993 8 71 56 63.5 0.03 14.19 13.5 2,007 9 75 57 66 0.25 14.44 16 2,023 10 66 49 57.5 0.11 14.55 7.5 2,030 11 65 45 55 0 14.55 5 2,035 12 71 47 59 0 14.55 9 2,044 13 69 61 65 0.93 15.48 15 2,059 14 75 67 71 0.21 15.69 21 2,080 15 85 62 73.5 0 15.69 23.5 2,104 16 65 47 56 0 15.69 6 2,110 17 66 45 55.5 0 15.69 5.5 2,115 18 74 46 60 0 15.69 10 2,125 19 64 39 51.5 0 15.69 1.5 2,127 20 67 41 54 0.02 15.71 4 2,131 21 73 51 62 0 15.71 12 2,143 22 60 41 50.5 0.11 15.82 0.5 2,143 23 64 41 52.5 0 15.82 2.5 2,146 24 69 43 56 0 15.82 6 2,152 192

Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation 2009 Mark Koenig, Extension Educator, Ohio State University Extension, Sandusky Co. Matt Hofelich, Station Manager and Jordan Miller, Research Assistant OARDC/OSU North Central Agricultural Research Station Sweet corn is one of the most commonly grown fresh market crops in northwest Ohio. Having two general genotypes and a wide array of different varieties within each genotype, it becomes difficult to choose what varieties to plant. To add to this confusion there is also the combination of the two genotypes referred to as triple sweets su. The objectives of the Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation were (1) to test and evaluate sh 2, se, and su sweet corn varieties under northern Ohio growing conditions for plant and ear characteristics and yield, and (2) to provide taste test results from the general public for several varieties. Each variety was judged using only plot numbers and only at the end of the evaluation were variety names substituted for plot numbers. Plant evaluations were performed at regular intervals during the growing seasons and at harvest. Fifteen se and or su sweet corn varieties and 33 varieties of sh 2 sweet corn were evaluated (Tables 1, 2). Plots were established in a randomized complete block design with four replications per entry. Each rep was planted in four rows, harvesting only the middle two rows. Data collected on each entry included the following: Seedling vigor early and midseason Suckering Silk and harvest dates Snap rating (ease of ear removal from stalk) Ear height Final stand per 20 ft/row (two 10-ft/row harvest data rows) Marketable dozen per acre Flag appearance Husk cover Tip fill Rows of kernels/ear Ear color, length, and diameter Brix value at harvest, 5 days storage, and 10 days storage (Tables 8, 13) All values reported are based on the average of all four replications per entry, unless otherwise noted. Plots were established on May 11, 2009, in rows spaced 30 inches apart and at a seeding rate of three seeds per foot of row. All cultural practices and field operations are listed in Table 3. Seedling vigor (emergence), midseason vigor, and pre-tassel vigor ratings were taken along with silk date and harvest date (Tables 4, 9). Disease was not a problem in either of the plots. No evaluation was taken. At harvest, ease of harvesting ear (snap rating), ear height, stand per 10 ft./row, marketable dozens per acre (Tables 5, 10) were determined. At harvest, five ears per rep were evaluated for flags, husk cover, tip fill, number of kernel rows/ear, ear color, length, and diameter (Tables 6, 11). 193

As part of this continuing project, several different varieties were distributed to a group of volunteer individuals for the purpose of rating varieties on appearance and taste. Individuals were given two different varieties and asked to judge each variety in two general areas. The first area was Appearance, defined as (1) husk color, (2) size of ear, and (3) kernel color. The second area was Taste, which included (1) tenderness, (2) sweetness, and (3) flavor. The evaluation form also asked about overall comments about each variety. Participants were encouraged to let each family member judge the corn individually. Varieties were only identified to participants as numbers. The goal of the consumer taste results was to get the public s opinion on some of the sweet corn varieties tested in our trial this year. Most participants thought the test was interesting and very enjoyable. Sweet corn varieties selected for public opinion were selected by harvest ratings done at the OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. These ratings included appearance of rowing (how straight the rows of kernels were on the ears, tenderness, and sweetness (raw taste test) (Tables 7, 12). Volunteer participants were asked to taste cooked sweet corn for evaluation. Some general observations of the taste test panel were that everyone has a different idea of how sweet corn should taste, some participants prefer immature corn while others prefer fully mature or over-mature ears, and people prefer longer ears. All participants volunteered for future taste test panels. Table 1. Varieties and seed suppliers for se and su entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Cultivar Bi-color Vitality (67 day) Montauk (80 day) HMX 6358 BES (66 day) Sumptious (80 day) Synergy (76 day) Monomoy (76 day) Supplier Seminis Stokes / Mesa Maize Harris Moran Stokes Stokes Mesa Maize Cultivar Ovation (75 day) EXP 41006 (70 day) EXP 40979 (74 day) EXP 40980 (71 day) Kristine (80 day) Trinity (70 day) Mystique (75 day) Yellow GH 0851 Bt (80 day) Supplier Mesa Maize Mesa Maize Mesa Maize Mesa Maize Crookham Crookham Crookham Stokes 194

Table 2. Varieties and seed suppliers for sh 2 entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Cultivar Supplier Bi-color Fantastic (75 day) Stokes / Seedway Obsession (81 day) Seminis Triumph (75 day) Seedway BSS 0982 (79 day) Rogers / Syngenta Mirai 350 BC Centest (78 day) XTH 2171 (71 day) Stokes & IFSI XTH 2281 (81 day) Stokes & IFSI Brand 274A (74 day) IFSI Awesome (75 day) Stokes / Seedway XTH 2573 (73 day) Stokes & IFSI Bueno (76 day) Crookham CSABF4-157 Crookham (70 day) CSABF7-263 Crookham (70 day) Brand 277A (77 day) IFSI XTH 2673 (73 day) IFSI XTH 2170 (70 day) IFSI XTH 2272 (72 day) IFSI XTH 2474 (74 day) IFSI Cultivar Supplier Brand 275A (75 day) IFSI Brand 278A (78 day) IFSI Sweet Surprise Rispen (72 day) Legion (79 day) Rogers / Syngenta HMX 8343 Harris Moran EX 08767143 Seminis White XTH 3673 (74 day) IFIS XTH 3473 (73 day) IFIS HMX 6360 WS Harris Moran (74 day) Devotion (82 day) Seminis Iceberg (74 day) Harris Moran ABCO MS 951 W Abbott-Cobb (76 day) Yellow XTH 1575 Seedway HMX 7368D Harris Moran (77 day) Garrison (81 day) Rogers / Syngenta Passion (81 day) Seminis Ravelin (72 day) Rogers / Syngenta *IFSI=Illinois Foundation Seed, Inc. Table 3. Log of operations for 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Date Description of Operation se and su trial 4/22/2009 Weighed, packaged and randomized seed for trial 4/27/2009 Fertilized with 7#/A of 15% Boron, 200#/A 46-0-0, 150#/A 10-52-0 and 250#/A 0-0-60 (107-78-155 total units) 5/11/2009 Stale seeded SE Trial seeding 58 seed / 35 feet of row 5/11/2009 Staked plots 195

Table 3 (continued) Date Description of Operation 5/12/2009 Applied Dual Magnum @ 1 pt/a and Touchdown Total @ 1 pt/a 6/5/2009 cultivated trial 6/5/2009 Sidedressed plot with 300 lbs / acre of 28-0-0 (84 units) 6/10/2009 Applied Laddok @ 1.66 pts/a and Crop Oil @ 2pts/A 6/25/2009 Assisted Mark with stand counts 7/1/2009 Applied Mustang Max @ 2.5 oz/a 7/8/2009 Irrigated trial with.9 inches of H 2 O, set up and breakdown of irrigation 7/8/2009 Mark Koenig evaluated plots for tassel and silking 7/9/2009 Staked and put up electric fencing around trial 7/10/2009 Applied Warrior @ 2 oz/a 7/17/2009 Applied Asana XL @ 2 oz/a 7/21/2009 Irrigated trial with.9 inches of H2O, set up and breakdown of irrigation 7/27/2009 Harvested & evaluated 3 varieties (31,42,45) 7/27/2009 Applied 2 oz / acre Warrior 7/30/2009 Pulled 6 varieties and graded 7/30/2009 Harvested & evaluated 6 varieties (34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 44) 8/2/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 31, 42, 45 8/3/2009 Pulled 2 varieties and graded 8/3/2009 Harvested & evaluated 2 varieties (38,43) 8/3/2009 Applied 5 oz / acre od Spintor 8/4/2009 Pulled 3 varieties & evaluated 8/4/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 44 8/4/2009 Harvested & evaluated 2 varieties (35,41) 8/6/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 31, 42, 45 8/8/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 38, 43 8/9/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 44 8/9/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 35, 41 8/10/2009 Graded and evaluated 1 remaining variety 8/10/2009 Harvested & evaluated 2 varieties (32,33) 8/13/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 38, 43 8/14/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 35, 41 8/15/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 32, 33 8/20/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 32, 33 196

Table 3 (continued) Date Description of Operation sh 2 trial 4/22/2009 Weighed, packaged, and randomized seed for trial 4/27/2009 Worked ground with JD 7210 and Landoll 4/27/2009 Fertilized with 7#/A of 15% Boron, 200#/A 46-0-0, 150#/A 10-52-0 and 250#/A 0-0-60 and incorporated with JD 7210 and Landoll (107-78-155 total units) 5/11/2009 Stale seeded sh 2 Plot 5/12/2009 Staked plots 5/12/2009 Applied Dual Magnum @ 1 pt/ A, and Touchdown Total @ 1 pt/a 6/5/2009 Cultivated with L3410 Kubota and 2 row 6/8/2009 Sidedressed plot with 300 lbs / acre of 28-0-0 (84 units) 6/10/2009 Applied Laddok S-12 @ 1.66 pts/a and Crop Oil @ 2 pts/a 6/25/2009 Assisted Mark with stand counts 7/1/2009 Applied Mustang Max @ 2.5 oz/a 7/6/2009 Irrigated trial with.9 inches of H2O, & setup / breakdown of irrigation equipment 7/8/2009 Staked and put up electric fencing around trial 7/10/2009 Applied Warrior @ 2 oz/a 7/16/2009 Applied Asana XL @ 6 oz/a 7/20/2009 Irrigated trial with.9 inches of H2O, & setup / breakdown of irrigation equipment 7/27/2009 Applied 2 oz/a of Warrior 7/31/2009 Pulled 5 varieties & graded 7/31/2009 Harvested and evaluated varieties 5, 9, 10, 14, 15, 8/3/2009 Pulled 5 varieties & graded 8/3/2009 Applied 5 oz/a Spintor 8/3/2009 Harvested and evaluated varieties 2, 3, 6, 7, 25 8/4/2009 Harvested and evaluated varieties 12, 17, 18, 24 8/5/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 5, 9, 10, 14, 15, 8/6/2009 Pulled 6 varieties 8/6/2009 Graded 6 SH 2 varieties 8/6/2009 Harvested and evaluated varieties 4, 11, 19, 23, 26, 27 8/7/2009 Pulled 6 varieties 8/7/2009 Graded 6 sh 2 varieties 8/7/2009 Harvested and evaluated varieties 1, 8, 13, 16, 22, 28 8/8/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 2, 3, 6, 7, 25 197

Table 3 (continued) Date Description of Operation 8/9/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 12, 17, 18, 24 8/10/2009 Pulled out 7 remaining varieties 8/10/2009 Graded 4 SH 2 varieties 8/10/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 5, 9, 10, 14, 15, 8/10/2009 Harvested and evaluated varieties 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 8/11/2009 Graded out 4 remaining sh 2 varieties 8/11/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 4, 11, 19, 23, 26, 27 8/12/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 1, 8, 13, 16, 22, 28 8/13/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 2, 3, 6, 7, 25 8/14/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 12, 17, 18, 24 8/15/2009 5-day brix test on varieties 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 8/16/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 4, 11, 19, 23, 26, 27 8/17/2009 10-day brix test on varieties 1, 8, 13, 16, 22, 28 8/20/2009 10 day brix test on varieties 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 198

Table 4. Plant evaluation for se and su entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Seeding Emergence 5/29 Mid-Season Vigor 6/25 Tassel Date Suckers (1-3) Silk Date Harvest Date Bi-color Varieties HMX 6358 BES 2.5 3.0 7/2 3.0 7/10 7/27 Sumptious 2.5 3.0 7/13 0.5 7/13 8/10 Synergy 3.5 3.5 7/10 2.5 7/13 7/30 Montauk 2.5 2.75 7/13 2.0 7/20 8/4 Monomoy 2.5 3.0 7/6 2.0 7/13 7/30 Ovation 2.5 3.0 7/8 1.5 7/15 7/30 EXP 41006 3.0 3.375 7/6 2.5 7/13 8/3 EXP 40979 3.0 3.0 7/1 0.5 7/13 7/30 EXP 40980 3.0 3.5 7/2 0.5 7/10 7/30 Kristine 2.0 2.0 7/13 2.0 7/20 8/4 Trinity 2.5 3.75 7/2 1.5 7/10 7/27 Mystique 2.5 2.5 7/6 1.0 7/13 8/3 Vitality 3.0 3.5 7/2 3.0 7/10 7/27 Yellow Varieties GH 0851 BT 3.5 4 7/13 2.5 7/20 8/10 AVERAGE 2.75 3.134 1.78 Rating Scale Seeding Emergence: 1=poor (weak), 3=average, 5=outstanding. Mid-Season Vigor: 1=poor (weak), 3=average5=outstanding. Tassel Date=50% or more of the plants tasseling in all 4 reps. Silk Date=50% or more of plants silking in all 4 reps. Suckers: 0=no suckers, 1=few, 2=moderate, 3=severe. 199

Table 5. Harvest data for se and su entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Snap (1-5) Ear Height (inches) Stand Per/Acre Harvested Dozen/Acre Marketable Dozen/Acre Bi-color Varieties HMX 6358 BES 3.25 11.25 18,043 1,829 1,702 Sumptious 3.25 15.75 18,913 1,865 1,811 Synergy 2.00 16.00 20,434 2,336 2,173 Montauk 3.25 16.25 20,869 2,065 2,047 Monomoy 3.25 15.00 19,782 2,916 2,536 Ovation 3.00 18.00 16,739 1,757 1,612 EXP 41006 3.00 16.75 24,562 2,318 2,246 EXP 40979 3.50 20.00 19,130 2,409 2,300 EXP 40980 3.00 19.00 17,826 2,300 2,028 Kristine 3.50 14.00 21,521 1,739 1,702 Trinity 2.87 11.50 18,695 1,920 1,793 Mystique 3.00 16.50 20,869 2,083 1,974 Vitality 3.00 13.25 19,565 2,572 2,355 Yellow Varieties GH 0851 BT 3.50 20.25 21,304 2,137 2,119 AVERAGES 3.10 15.96 19,875 2160 2028 Snap rating: 1=difficult to pull, 3=average, 5=very easy to pull. 200

Table 6. Ear evaluation for se and su entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Husk Cover Flags Overall Husk Tip Fill Rows (avg.) Length (inches) Diameter (inches) Bi-color Varieties HMX 6358 BES 3 4 4 5 14 8.3 1.75 Sumptious 3 5 4 3 18 8.8 1.85 Synergy 2 4 4 4 18 8.5 1.80 Montauk 4 4 5 5 20 8.5 2.05 Monomoy 3 3 3 3 16 7.75 1.65 Ovation 4 4 5 3 14 8.05 1.85 EXP 41006 4 5 4 5 14 8.0 1.75 EXP 40979 2 5 4 3.5 18 8.2 1.85 EXP 40980 3 4 4 4 16 7.7 1.90 Kristine 4 3 5 4 16 8.05 1.90 Trinity 4 3 4 5 14 7.7 1.80 Mystique 3 5 4 4 16 8.9 2.05 Vitality 3 4 4 4.5 14 7.95 1.85 Yellow Varieties GH 0851 BT 3 2 3 5 18 9.0 1.90 AVERAGE 16 8.24 1.72 Husk Cover: 1=no cover, 3=adequate tip cover, 5=abundant tip cover. Flags: 1=no flags, 3=somewhat attractive, 5=long & attractive. Overall Husk: 1=dull unattractive, 3=average appearance, 5=very attractive. Tip Fill: 1=more than 2 inch gap, 3=1-inch gap, 5=complete to the end. 201

Table 7. Taste and appeal for se and su entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Rowing Color Tenderness (raw) Sweetness (raw) Brix Taste Test (Public) Bi-color Varieties HMX 6358 BES 4 4 3 5 16 X Sumptious 4 5 4 5 13 X Synergy 4 4 3 4 14.5 X Montauk 4 4 3 4 17 Monomoy 4 4 5 4 17 X Ovation 2 3 4 4 15.5 X EXP 41006 3 3 4 3.5 17.5 EXP 40979 3 3 4 3 14.5 X EXP 40980 3 4 2.5 5 17 X Kristine 4 3 4 5 15 X Trinity 3 4 3 5 16 X Mystique 3 4 3.5 4 19 X Vitality 3 4 4 4 15 X Yellow Varieties GH 0851 BT 4 4 4 4 18 X AVERAGE 3.8 3.6 4.2 16.1 Rowing (straightness): 1=no uniformity, 3=mostly straight, 5=straight & uniform. Color: 1=dull, 3=good contrast, 5=bright, very good contrast. Tenderness (raw): 1=tough, 3=somewhat tender, 5=very tender. Sweetness (raw): 1=bland, 3=somewhat sweet, 5=very sweet. 202

Table 8. Brix value at harvest and after 5 and 10 days of cold storage for se and su entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Harvest Brix 5-Day Brix 10-Day Brix Bi-color Varieties HMX 6358 BES 16 19 16 Sumptious 16.5 15.5 11.5 Synergy 14.5 9 9 Montauk 17 15 13 Monomoy 17 12.5 13.5 Ovation 15.5 17 13 EXP 41006 17.5 20.5 15.5 EXP 40979 14.5 11.5 9 EXP 40980 17 12.5 11.5 Kristine 15 14.5 9 Trinity 15.5 19 18 Mystique 19 14.5 18.5 Vitality 15 15.5 16.5 Yellow Varieties GH 0851 BT 14 14.5 13.5 AVERAGE 16.1 15.0 13.4 Table 9. Plant evaluation for sh 2 entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Seeding Emergence 5/27 Mid-Season Vigor 6/25 Tassel Date Suckers (1-3) Silk Date Harvest Date Bi-color Varieties Mirai 350 BC 2 1.75 7/15 1 7/22 8/7 Fantastic 2 2.25 7/8 2 7/15 8/3 XTH 2171 2 3 7/10 2 7/15 8/3 XTH 2281 3 3.375 7/8 2 7/15 8/6 Brand 274A 2 3 7/2 1 7/10 7/31 Awesome 3 2.75 7/8 2 7/15 8/3 XTH 2573 2 2 7/8 2 7/15 8/3 Bueno 3 2.5 7/15 2 7/22 8/7 CSABF4-157 1 1.75 7/2 2 7/10 7/31 CSABF7-263 3 3.125 7/2 2 7/10 7/31 203

Table 9 (continued) Variety Seeding Emergence 5/27 Mid-Season Vigor 6/25 Tassel Date Suckers (1-3) Silk Date Harvest Date Triumph 2 2.75 7/8 1 7/15 8/6 Brand 277A 1 1.25 7/8 3 7/15 8/4 XTH 2673 1 1.5 7/15 2 7/22 8/7 XTH 2170 4 3.375 7/10 2 7/15 7/31 XTH 2272 1 1.5 7/10 2 7/15 7/31 XTH 2474 2 2.75 7/15 1 7/22 8/7 Brand 275A 3 2.75 7/15 3 7/20 8/4 Brand 278A 3 2.5 7/15 1 7/20 8/4 Sweet Surprise 3 2.75 7/10 2 7/20 8/6 Legion 3 2.75 7/15 2 7/22 8/10 BSS 0982 1 1.75 7/15 3 7/22 8/10 HMX 8343 3 2.75 7/10 2 7/15 8/7 EX 08767143 3 2.5 7/15 3 7/20 8/10 Obsession 4 3.625 7/15 3 7/20 8/10 White Varieties XTH 3673 1 2.25 7/10 2 7/15 8/6 XTH 3473 3 2 7/10 2 7/15 8/4 HMX 6360 3 2.25 7/8 3 7/15 8/3 Iceberg 2 2 7/10 2 7/15 8/6 Devotion 4 3.5 7/15 2 7/20 8/10 Yellow Varieties XTH 1575 2 2.25 7/10 2 7/15 8/6 HMX 7368D 3 2.25 7/15 3 7/20 8/7 Garrison 3 2.875 7/15 2 7/20 8/10 Passion 4 3.25 7/15 3 7/20 8/10 Ravelin 3 3.75 7/6 2 7/13 7/30 AVERAGE 2.5 2.5 2.1 Rating Scale Seeding Emergence: 1=poor (weak), 3=average, 5=outstanding. Mid-season Vigor: 1=poor (weak), 3=average, 5=outstanding. Tassel Date=50% or more of the plants tasseling in all 4 reps. Suckers: 0=no suckers, 1=few, 2=moderate, 3=severe. Silk Date=50% or more of plants silking in all 4 reps. 204

Table 10. Harvest data for sh 2 entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Snap (1-5) Ear Height Stand Per/Acre Harvested Dozen/ Acre Marketable Dozen/Acre Bi-color Varieties Mirai 350 BC 3.13 17.00 16,739 2,173 2,137 Fantastic 2.87 15.00 16,956 2,173 1,920 XTH 2171 3.75 14.00 22,391 2,445 2,282 XTH 2281 3.12 15.75 18,043 2,445 2,101 Brand 274A 3.5 11.50 16,086 2,010 1,920 Awesome 3.62 14.50 19,782 2,427 2,355 XTH 2573 3.25 13.75 18,913 2,192 2,137 Bueno 3.00 16.25 18,043 2,083 2,065 CSABF4-157 3.00 11.75 15,254 1,648 1,612 CSABF7-263 2.50 18.00 15,652 2,119 1,956 Triumph 3.12 17.25 16,521 2,318 2,137 Brand 277A 3.00 14.25 18,676 2,210 2,192 XTH 2673 2.87 14.50 15,217 2,336 2,318 XTH 2170 3.50 11.50 18,478 2,101 2047 XTH 2272 2.00 11.00 15,869 2,047 1,920 XTH 2474 3.50 15.50 19,782 2,409 2,300 Brand 275A 3.00 17.00 18,478 2,228 2,228 Brand 278A 3.00 17.25 18,676 1,811 1,811 Sweet Surprise 2.87 16.25 18,260 2,355 2,318 Legion 3.00 21.0 23,478 2,717 2,681 BSS 0982 3.12 18.75 22,173 2,246 1,974 HMX 8343 2.87 20.75 19,782 2,210 2,028 EX 08767143 3.25 20.5 22,826 2,445 2,355 Obsession 3.62 22.0 21,956 2,663 2,608 White Varieties XTH 3673 3.5 15.0 18,695 2,173 2,101 XTH 3473 3.25 13.5 18.676 2,047 2,028 HMX 6360 2.75 15.75 21,304 2,047 1,956 Iceberg 3.37 16.75 18,043 2,445 2,355 Devotion 3.12 26.25 24,130 2,028 2,010 205

Table 10 (continued) Variety Snap (1-5) Ear Height Stand Per/Acre Harvested Dozen/ Acre Marketable Dozen/Acre Yellow Varieties XTH 1575 3.5 15.5 19,347 2,355 2,246 HMX 7368D 3.5 21.25 19,130 2,210 2,119 Garrison 3.25 21 21,304 2,500 2,409 Passion 3.5 23.25 23,913 2,445 2,300 Ravelin 3.00 18.00 18,695 2,246 2,010 AVERAGE 3.2 16.8 19,155 2,244 2,145 Snap: 1=difficult to pull, 3=average, 5=very easy to pull. Table 11. Ear evaluation for sh 2 entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Husk Cover Flags Overall Husk Tip Fill Rows (avg.) Length (inches) Diameter (inches) Bi-color Varieties Mirai 350 BC 4 4 4 5 16 8.05 1.9 Fantastic 2 4 5 5 18 8.4 2 XTH 2171 3 3 5 5 16 8.6 2 XTH 2281 2 4 4 5 16 8.4 1.95 Brand 274A 3 5 4 5 18 9.3 1.9 Awesome 5 5 5 5 16 8 2.05 XTH 2573 2 5 5 4 14 8.65 1.95 Bueno 4 2 3 5 16 7.9 2 CSABF4-157 2 5 4 5 14 8.3 1.7 CSABF7-263 4 3 4 3 16 8.2 1.9 Triumph 3 5 5 5 18 8.4 2 Brand 277A 2 4 3 5 18 7.75 1.9 XTH 2673 2 3 3 5 16 7.8 1.9 XTH 2170 3 5 5 5 16 8.8 1.9 XTH 2272 1 5 5 5 18 8.2 1.95 XTH 2474 3 3 4 4 16 8.65 2.1 Brand 275A 4 5 5 5 18 8.1 1.9 Brand 278A 3 5 5 5 16 8.3 1.85 Sweet Surprise 3 5 5 5 18 8 1.86 Legion 3 5 4 5 18 8 1.8 BSS 0982 2 5 5 5 18 8.2 2.2 206

Table 11 (continued) Variety Husk Cover Flags Overall Husk Tip Fill Rows (avg.) Length (inches) Diameter (inches) HMX 8343 2 3 4 5 16 8.4 1.85 EX 08767143 3 3 3 4 16 8 1.8 Obsession 3 3 4 5 18 8.15 1.95 White Varieties XTH 3673 3 4 5 4 16 7.9 2 XTH 3473 4 4 4 5 16 7.6 1.85 HMX 6360 1 3 4 4 18 7.95 1.95 Iceberg 2 4 5 4 16 8.1 2 Devotion 2 3 3 5 20 8.3 2 Yellow Varieties XTH 1575 2 5 4 5 16 8.15 1.8 HMX 7368D 3 4 3 5 16 7.5 1.9 Garrison 3 5 4 5 18 8.4 1.95 Passion 2 3 4 5 18 8.3 2 Ravelin 3 5 4 5 16 7.85 1.75 AVERAGE 17 8.4 1.99 Husk Cover: 1=no cover, 3=adequate tip cover, 5=abundant tip cover. Flags: 1=no flags, 3=somewhat attractive, 5=long & attractive. Overall Husk: 1=dull unattractive, 3=average appearance, 5=very attractive. Tip Fill: 1=more than 2 inch gap, 3=1-inch gap, 5=complete to the end. Table 12. Taste and appeal for sh 2 entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Rowing Color Tenderness Sweetness Brix Taste Test (Public) Bi-color Varieties Mirai 350 BC 4 3 3 3 15.5 Fantastic 4 4 4 4 11.5 XTH 2171 4 4 3 3 14 XTH 2281 4 5 3 3 12.5 Brand 274A 3 4 4 5 12.5 X Awesome 4 4 5 4 14 X XTH 2573 4 5 5 5 11.5 X Bueno 4 5 4 5 10.5 X CSABF4-157 5 4 3 5 14.5 X CSABF7-263 3 4 3 5 13 X 207

Table 12 (continued) Variety Rowing Color Tenderness Sweetness Brix Taste Test (Public) Triumph 4 5 4 5 15.5 X Brand 277A 2 4 5 5 9.5 X XTH 2673 4 5 5 5 15 X XTH 2170 4 4 5 5 13 X XTH 2272 4 5 3 3 9 XTH 2474 4 4 5 5 12 X Brand 275A 4 5 4 4 10.5 Brand 278A 4 4 3 3 11 Sweet Surprise 4 4 3 4 12.5 X Legion 4 4 4 4 9.5 BSS 0982 4 5 4 5 12.5 X HMX 8343 4 4 5 5 13 X EX 08767143 4 3 5 5 14 X Obsession 3 5 4 5 13.5 X White Varieties XTH 3673 4 4 4 5 13 X XTH 3473 5 4 5 5 10.5 X HMX 6360 4 4 5 5 13.5 X Iceberg 4 4 4 5 14.5 X Devotion 3 4 4 5 14 X Yellow Varieties XTH 1575 4 4 4 5 12.5 HMX 7368D 4 5 4 4 13 Garrison 4 4 4 4 10.5 Passion 3 2 5 5 16.5 X Ravelin 5 4 2 2 12.5 AVERAGE 4.2 4.4 12.7 Rating Scale Rowing (straightness): 1=no uniformity, 3=mostly straight, 5=straight & uniform. Color: 1=dull, 3=good contrast, 5=Bright, very good contrast. Tenderness: 1=tough, 3=somewhat tender, 5=very tender. Sweetness: 1=bland, 3=somewhat sweet, 5=very sweet. 208

Table 13. Brix value at harvest and after 5 and 10 days of cold storage for sh 2 entries in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. Variety Harvest Brix 5-Day Brix 10-Day Brix Mirai 350 BC 15.5 13 10 Fantastic 11.5 13 12.5 XTH 2171 14 11 8 XTH 2281 12.5 9.5 9 Brand 274A 12.5 12.5 8 Awesome 14 13.5 12 XTH 2573 11.5 12.5 11.5 Bueno 10.5 9 11 CSABF4-157 14.5 12.5 9.5 CSABF7-263 13 13.5 8.5 Triumph 15.5 10 7.5 Brand 277A 9.5 12.5 10.5 XTH 2673 15 12.5 10.5 XTH 2170 13 12 12 XTH 2272 9 11 8 XTH 2474 12 12.5 12 Brand 275A 10.5 12 6 Brand 278A 11 9.5 7 Sweet Surprise 12.5 13 8 Legion 9.5 11.5 13 BSS 0982 12.5 13.5 13.5 HMX 8343 13 11 11.5 EX 08767143 14 12.5 10.5 Obsession 13.5 13 11.5 White Varieties XTH 3673 13 10 9.5 XTH 3473 10.5 11.5 9.5 HMX 6360 13.5 12.5 11.5 Iceberg 14.5 11.5 11 Devotion 14 12 13.5 209

Table 13 (continued) Variety Harvest Brix 5-Day Brix 10-Day Brix Yellow Varieties XTH 1575 12.5 11.5 8.5 HMX 7368D 13 12 9 Garrison 10.5 12 10 Passion 13 13.5 13 Ravelin 12.5 12 10.5 AVERAGE 12.7 11.9 10.2 210

Table 14. Public evaluation of sweet corn varieties in the 2009 North Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station*. Husk Color Size of Ear Kernel Color Tenderness Sweetness Flavor Variety P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E Number of ratings in each category Bicolor se/syn HMX 6358 BES 0 2 6 3 0 2 5 4 0 2 5 4 0 2 5 4 0 1 6 4 1 0 6 4 Sumptious 0 3 5 6 0 2 8 4 0 1 9 4 0 2 7 5 0 1 9 4 0 2 7 5 Synergy 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 Monomoy 0 1 8 0 3 1 4 1 2 1 6 0 0 0 6 3 0 1 6 2 0 1 6 2 Ovation 0 0 5 3 0 2 2 4 0 1 6 1 0 2 4 2 0 4 2 2 0 3 4 1 EXP 40979 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 EXP 40980 0 6 4 1 1 4 5 1 0 3 4 4 1 3 6 1 1 3 4 3 2 4 4 1 Kristine 0 0 6 2 0 1 4 4 0 0 4 4 0 0 4 4 0 1 5 2 0 1 4 3 Trinity 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 Mystique 0 6 4 1 0 3 5 4 1 3 6 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 Vitality 1 5 12 2 1 3 11 5 1 1 10 8 1 2 12 5 2 5 7 6 2 5 5 8 Yellow se/syn GH 0851 BT 1 1 6 1 1 2 6 0 0 2 5 1 0 2 5 1 0 3 3 2 0 3 3 2 Bicolor sh 2 Brand 274A 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 3 Awesome 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 CSABF4-157 0 1 1 4 0 1 3 2 0 1 3 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 CSABF4-263 0 2 2 4 0 2 2 4 0 2 4 2 1 4 1 2 2 3 1 2 1 4 1 2 Triumph 0 1 2 3 0 0 2 4 0 0 4 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 4 Brand 277A 0 1 8 7 1 3 6 6 0 2 7 7 1 2 4 9 1 2 9 4 0 4 7 5 211

Table 14 (continued) Variety Husk Color Size of Ear Kernel Color Tenderness Sweetness Flavor P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E Number of ratings in each category XTH 2673 0 0 3 6 0 1 2 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 XTH 2170 0 2 6 9 0 2 8 7 0 2 8 7 0 2 11 4 0 3 9 5 0 2 10 5 XTH 2474 0 1 6 4 1 1 4 5 1 3 2 5 0 3 6 2 0 3 6 2 0 3 6 2 Sweet Surprise 0 2 1 4 0 2 0 5 0 0 2 5 0 0 4 3 0 2 1 4 0 2 2 3 EX 08767143 0 0 6 4 0 0 7 6 0 0 5 8 0 1 5 7 0 2 3 9 0 2 3 7 Obsession 0 8 9 3 2 5 12 1 1 7 10 2 1 2 13 14 2 7 7 4 2 4 10 4 XTH 2573 0 3 8 4 1 4 7 3 1 4 5 5 0 3 7 5 0 3 7 5 0 2 7 6 Bueno 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 BSS 0982 0 1 4 3 0 1 8 1 0 1 3 6 0 1 5 4 0 0 8 2 0 0 6 4 HMX 8343 0 0 11 2 2 2 5 4 0 1 8 4 0 1 8 3 0 2 6 4 1 1 7 3 Yellow sh 2 Passion 0 1 3 5 0 1 3 5 1 0 2 6 1 1 3 4 1 1 2 5 1 1 2 5 White sh 2 Devotion 1 1 6 1 1 2 6 0 0 2 5 1 0 2 5 1 0 3 3 2 0 3 3 2 HMX 6360 0 4 13 4 0 2 14 4 1 4 7 8 0 5 4 11 2 3 4 11 2 4 5 8 Iceberg 0 2 4 1 0 3 4 0 0 2 3 2 0 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 0 3 2 2 XTH 3673 0 2 2 2 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 2 2 2 0 0 5 1 0 1 3 2 XTH 3473 0 4 9 2 0 4 8 3 0 4 6 5 0 0 9 6 0 1 7 7 0 2 8 5 P=poor, A=acceptable, V=very good, E=excellent. 212

Sugar-enhanced Sweet Corn Evaluations for West Virginia, 2009 Lewis W. Jett, State Extension Vegetable Specialist West Virginia University, 2102 Agriculture Sciences Building, Morgantown, WV 26506 Introduction Sweet corn is a very popular summer vegetable in West Virginia. With high yield potential and strong demand, it is a perfect crop for early and late markets. Sugar-enhanced cultivars can be planted earlier than supersweet cultivars and possess excellent yield and quality attributes. One of the disadvantages of planting late sweet corn is severe infestation by corn earworm. The objective of this evaluation was to examine the yield, quality attributes, and corn earworm infestation of 11 sugar-enhanced sweet corn cultivars. Materials and Methods The evaluation was conducted on a commercial vegetable farm located in Lewis County, WV (central WV). The 11 cultivars were direct-seeded in 35-foot-long plots with 2.5 feet between rows resulting in a final plant population of approximately 27,000 plants/acre. Seeding was performed on June 20, 2009. Each cultivar was replicated three times in a randomized complete block design. A late seeding date resulted in high corn earworm pressure. Approximately 75 lbs/acre of actual N, and 150 lbs of P 2 O 5, and K 2 O, respectively were broadcast and disked-in prior to seeding. An additional 40 lbs/acre of actual N was sidedressed four weeks after seeding. Weeds were controlled with atrazine (Atrazine 4L) and s-metolachlor (Dual Magnum). Insecticides (Asana, Mustang Max) were applied beginning at first silking and continued at fourday intervals for about two weeks to control corn earworm. The Attribute insect-protected cultivar (BC0805) was not sprayed for corn earworm. Harvest commenced on September 8 and continued for three weeks. Marketable ears per plot were counted and husked ears weighed. Additional attributes such as tip fill and ear length were noted and measured. Infestation of each ear by corn earworm was recorded.. Results Charisma had excellent tip fill (data not shown) and produced the highest marketable yield of all cultivars evaluated (Table 1). Cameo produced a high marketable yield but a relatively loose husk, especially at the tip, which may have resulted in more corn earworm infestation. Revelation is an early maturing cultivar (66 days) with small ear size and stalk height. As a result of the ear being close to the ground, it was susceptible to wildlife damage and yields were very low. Delectable produced an excellent ear and had good tip fill. Montauk is also a very attractive ear with good tip fill. Sparkler was easy to harvest and had a thick husk with excellent tip fill and marketable yield. The insect-protected cultivar BC0805 produced an acceptable ear with good tip fill. Despite not being sprayed with insecticides for corn earworm control, this cultivar had negligible corn earworm infestation. 213

Table 1. Marketable yield, ear weight, and corn earworm infestation of evaluated sugarenhanced sweet corn cultivars. Cultivar Seed Source Marketable Yield (dozen/acre) Ear Weight (husked ounces) Corn Earworm Infestation (%) BC0805* SW 1,867 8.8 4 Cameo SW 1,922 9.2 34 Charisma SW 2,157 8.7 16 Delectable SW 1,632 8.7 17 Montauk SW 1,866 8.0 22 Reflection HR 560 8.0 32 Renaissance HR 484 8.0 17 Revelation HR 332 6.0 15 Sparkler SW 1,894 9.1 11 Synergy SW 1,258 8.0 22 Temptation SW 1,065 8.0 17 Mean 981 8.2 18 Standard error 128 0.2 2.3 *Attribute insect-protected cultivar. 214

Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region Jim Jasinski, Ohio State University Extension, IPM Program, Urbana, OH 43078 The Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group (WG) conducted a regional observation and evaluation trial of 10 heirloom tomato varieties. Summary results from nine of the 16 sites (Figure 1) are reported here. Individual site data are published in additional reports in the Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. WG members designed a protocol to observe the inherent pest resilience and horticultural qualities of 10 heirloom tomato varieties at each location. The varieties were chosen based on input from the WG members and from a member of the Solanaceae Coordinated Agricultural Project. Insect damage, disease pressure, percent germination, yield, etc., were measured weekly for each variety at each site. One of the overall goals of this project was to look for regional trends among the varieties and to make this information available to growers for use in variety selection and market planning. Given the multiple site locations, it should be helpful to growers to see the performance of each variety over a wide geographic and meteorological range. While many references exist that describe the physical characteristics of heirloom tomatoes, our intent was to augment those resources with field evaluation data on pest tolerance and yield characteristics. Figure 1. Locations of the nine heirloom tomato variety evaluation sites in 2009: Barker, NY; Rock Springs, PA; Piketon, OH; Columbus, OH; South Charleston, OH; Macomb County, MI; West Lafayette, IN; Dixon Springs, IL; and Waseca, MN. 215

In addition to the pest management and horticultural information collected, some sites hosted consumer acceptance (taste) surveys using the heirloom tomato fruit produced at that site using a standard evaluation protocol. The results offer growers an insight into both the physical attributes of the fruit as well as taste preferences from the consumer perspective. Materials and Methods At each of the nine locations, the same 10 heirloom tomato varieties Amish Paste, Brandywine (Sudduth/Quisenberry), Burbank, Cherokee Purple, Jaune Flamme, Opalka, Oxheart (Livingston s), Peron, Rutgers, and Tainan were evaluated. All sites were to follow the same general protocol outlined here, but there was some variation, which is noted in each individual site report. Seeds were sown in greenhouses near each field site in April, and then transplanted into black plastic mulch in May. Percent germination of each variety was calculated for most locations. Each plot consisted of eight to 10 transplants per variety in a single row with a plant spacing of 3 to 4 feet. Fertilization at each site usually included a preplant application followed by at least one post transplant feeding. Plants were typically suckered and staked, using various support media, with string to support the growing plants. The sites with trickle irrigation applied 1 inch of water per week. Insects such as aphids, hornworms, stink bugs, and tomato fruitworms, including their associated damage, were scouted for weekly. Diseases such as early blight, Septoria leaf spot, and bacterial infections were also scouted for on a weekly basis at all locations. Fruit were harvested between the breaker stage and mature red. The number of marketable, culls, and green fruit were recorded, along with the weight of marketable fruit. One or two representative plants per variety were harvested once or twice per week through first frost, then harvests were halted. In addition to the yield data, sensory evaluation of the fruit was performed at a few locations with growers and consumers to gauge overall taste appeal. Results and Discussion All heirloom varieties used in the evaluation trial were indeterminate types except for Rutgers and Burbank, which are determinate. The growth characteristics of all varieties were medium to very large plants, with Tainan being the only exception, which is described as short and lowgrowing (Table 1). Although germination varied widely among the varieties, clearly Amish Paste had extremely poor germination across all sites. Tainan produced the most marketable fruits per plant, but the grape tomatoes were also the smallest fruit produced in the trial. Jaune Flamme produced the second most fruit which were also the second smallest by weight in the trial. In terms of total marketable fruit, Peron, Juane Flamme, and Oxheart all produced more than 16 lbs per plant. Tainan, Rutgers, and Brandywine produced the fewest pounds of marketable fruit per plant. Green fruit were not recorded at many sites, but Jaune Flamme and Tainan appear to have the most per plant. Although Tainan has the most number of culled fruit per plant, if average fruit weight is taken into account, then Cherokee Purple and Oxheart have the most unsellable fruit per plant. Disease pressure overall was rated as light to moderate at most sites for early blight and Septoria leaf spot, with some sites reporting similar levels of bacterial infections. Insect pressure was likewise light at most sites, with hornworms and aphids being reported most often. Five sites( Macomb County, MI; Waseca, MN; Barker, NY, Dixon Springs, IL; and South Charleston, OH, collected some data on taste evaluation. In terms of overall taste satisfaction, Tainan, Peron, and Brandywine had the highest ratings, though none of them was rated above a six on the nine-point taste scale. 216

Additional reports on this project will be published at the Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Web site http://glvwg.ag.ohio-state.edu. Table 1. The heirloom tomato variety evaluation study conducted at nine sites within the North Central region by the Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group in 2009. Plant habit Amish Paste Medium height, upright Brandywine Vigorous, bushy potato foliage Burbank Medium height, upright Cherokee Purple Very tall, busy Jaune Flamme Medium height; semibush type Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Tall, upright Medium height, dense foliage Medium height Medium height, sparse foliage Short, with sparse foliage % Germination 21.0 79.0 86.7 89.5 65.7 69.3 69.5 80.3 62.8 76.5 (n=6 sites) Total marketable fruit no./ 31.7 12.4 39.0 18.5 139.9 34.3 38.1 37.4 49.0 535.5 plant (n=7) Total mkt wt. / plant 15.0 11.6 14.3 13.1 16.7 13.6 16.1 17.6 12.2 10.8 (lbs) (n=7) Avg. marketable fruit wt. (oz) 6.7 14.4 5.3 9.9 2.2 5.4 6.7 6.8 3.4 0.3 (n=7) total green no./ plant 20.0 6.0 24.3 10.9 66.0 32.6 19.5 33.3 35.7 35.6 (n=2) Total cull fruit no./ 9.8 5.2 13.6 10.3 18.2 10.5 14.7 6.6 15.6 23.3 plant (n=7) Overall satisfaction 1=no, 4.4 5.4 5.2 5.1 4.9 3.9 5.0 5.6 5.3 5.9 9=great (n=3) Seed Source TGS TGS GI DF DF TGS DF GI DF DF GI=Gary Ibsen, TomatoFest, PO Box 628, Little River, CA 95456 (no telephone number) info@tomatofest.com, www.tomatofest.com. DF=David Francis, Tomato Genetics and Breeding Program, OARDC-Wooster, Wooster, OH 44691 (330) 263-3893, www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/tomato. TGS=Tomato Growers Supply, PO Box 2237, Fort Meyers, FL 33902; www.tomatogrowers.com. 217

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Illinois Bronwyn Aly & Elizabeth Wahle Dixon Springs Agricultural Center, Simpson, IL Site: Dixon Springs Agricultural Center, Simpson, IL Seeded in greenhouse: March 25 Transplanted: May 15 into black plastic mulch Row spacing: 5.5 feet Plant spacing: 2 feet Plant support: Individually staked with T-posts Fertility: Preplant 70 lbs /acre N, P 2 O 5, and K 2 O incorporated, another 30 lbs/acre N applied through drip irrigation during the growing season Site notes: Generally cool and wet for duration of season. Six applications of fungicides and insecticides were applied to keep early blight, bacteria, and insect pests under control. Cracking was a problem for all varieties throughout the season. Fruit were harvested June 22 through September 10. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 218

Plant habit Germination (%) First ripe fruit Total marketable fruit no./ plant Total marketable fruit wt. / plant (lbs) Avg. marketable fruit wt. (oz) Total green fruit no. / plant Total cull fruit no./ plant Amish Paste Large, upright, vigorous Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Large, upright Medium, vigorous Medium to large Jaune Flamme Medium, vigorous Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright Medium Small, bushy, vigorous 23 93 90 93 77 67 77 80 57 57 Upright, somewhat leggy, vigorous July 14 June 25 June 22 June 25 June 22 June 25 June 25 July 1 July 1 June 22 16.8 2.7 19.1 8.8 62.7 27.2 11.1 13.6 11.8 824.1 6.1 2.2 5.5 5.2 9.3 9.5 5.0 6.1 2.4 13.4 6.7 13.3 7.0 11.1 2.4 5.8 10.8 8.4 3.3 0.3 - - - - - - - - - - 24.8 9.2 27.1 11.2 20.3 16.1 16.3 17.5 31.4 27.7 Continued on next page 219

Disease pressure notes Insect pressure notes Consumer notes Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme None None None None None Bacterial symptoms on fruit 9/1/2009 Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan None Bacterial symptoms on fruit 9/1/2009 Puffy fruit, possible virus problem? None None None None None None None None None None Flavor did not stand out None Excellent flavor, good acidity Wellliked variety, good flavor. Good acidity, tough skin, good flavor. Repeat requests for this variety, excellent flavor, meaty, easy to remove seeds (for those with dietary issues). Rough shoulder, minimal cracking Not quite as flavorful as Burbank. Watery, bland None Sweet 220

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Indiana Ben Alkire, Purdue University Site: Meigs Horticulture Research Farm, Lafayette IN Seeded in greenhouse: April 13 Transplanted: May 22 into black plastic mulch Row spacing: 7 feet Plant spacing: 3 feet Plant support: metal stakes and Florida weave Fertility: Preplant 50 lbs/acre N, P 2 O 5, and K 2 O incorporated Site Notes: Generally cool with adequate rain for duration of season. The hottest period this summer was relatively early, in mid- to late June. August was wet and cool. September was very dry. The heaviest yields were in the last three weeks of September and October 1. Water was applied as needed through drip irrigation. Six applications of fungicides were applied (weekly) August 3 to September 14. Early season Septoria was present, followed by early blight infestations, and then Xanthomonas and Psuedomonas (spot and speck). Late blight was never present. No insecticides were applied. Mature fruits were at fully breaking stage to soft mature. Transplants were exposed to 2,4-D, dicamba drift. The varieties most affected were Amish Paste, Brandywine, Opalka, Oxheart, and Rutgers. This slowed overall plant development throughout June. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 221

Plant habit Amish Paste Slow, weak spindly growth, becoming more robust in late summer Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Robust plants, classic potatoleaf. Average growth Some individuals seem determinate, others indeterminate Average growth Jaune Flamme Average growth Precocious Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Average growth Late. Above average vigor compared to most others Nice tidy architecture w thick stems, suckering at soil-stem base. Vigorous. Average growth Early season leaf-rolling Germination 27 77 77 93 73 88 63 87 67 90 (%) First ripe fruit Aug. 15 Aug. 15 July 24 Aug. 15 July 16 July 31 Aug. 15th Aug. 7 July 31 July 16 Total 15 14 57 16 109 10 46 48 28 657 marketable fruit no./ plant Total 5.69 11.77 18.47 4.78 13.83 3.05 16.51 17.67 6.33 11.75 marketable fruit wt. / plant (lbs) Avg. 6.0 13.5 5.2 4.8 2.0 4.9 5.7 5.9 3.6 0.3 marketable fruit wt. (oz) Total ripe fruit 6.25 15.68 21.4 7.25 18.02 4.17 18.31 19.49 8.58 12.26 wt. (marketable plus unmarketable) /plant (lbs.) Percent 91 75 84 66 77 73 75 91 74 96 marketable of total weight Total cull fruit no. / plant 2 4 7 4 33 3 5 5 10 29 Disease notes as of 9-11 Spot, Speck 5% Spot, Speck 5% Spot, Speck 15% Spot, Speck 10% Spot, Speck 20% Speck on fruits? Spot, Speck 5% Spot, Speck 5% Spot, Speck 1% Spot, Speck 5% Untamed extremely vigorous, sprawling and vining Precocious EB 5% Spot, Speck 10% Continued on next page 222

Insect pressure notes Fruit notes Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme None 3 hornworms 1 hornworm 1 hornworm Prone to more radial cracks than concentric cracks. Blemishes and sunscald on shoulders. Not a pretty tomato though firm, meaty and thick skinned. Ugly tomatoes but some of the best ones are absolutely beautiful. Deep radial cracks especially on larger fruits cause spoilage, rotting around pedicel scar. Thin-skinned and fragile. Radial cracks a problem in early season. Some uneven ripening with green shoulders. Highyielding late with highquality fruit. Larger fruits that set were mostly unmarketable. Problems similar to those of Brandywine fruits, e.g. thin-skinned, big and misshaped. Early fruiting. Fruits sometimes with small blemishes spots (sucking insect?) perhaps spec/spot later on? Most culls with single radial crack only. Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Some BER on earlyseason fruits, improving in late summer. Some with green shoulders Beautiful fruits. 1 Jap. beetle Thin skinned. Heavy fruiting late. Not an early variety. Great looking fruits. Best of the round-fruited bunch, yielding lots of highquality marketable fruits. 4 hornworm Firm fruits. Early problems w/ radial cracks, blotchy ripening. Fruits slightly irregular crosssection ribbed or zippered. Problems of uneven ripening. Fruits not weight, size homogeneous; ranging from 6-15 grams, depending on branched cyme location picked. Few culls, mostly with single radial crack. 223

Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme Opalka 224

Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 225

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Michigan Hannah Stevens, Michigan State University Extension Site: Miller s Big Red Orchard, Macomb County Michigan Seeded in greenhouse: March 28 Transplanted: June 3 into black plastic mulch Row spacing: 12 feet Plant spacing: 1.5 feet Plant support: Wood stakes and poly twine (Stake and weave) Fertility: Planted on plowed down winter rye. 2 tons/a beet lime broadcast with 100 lbs./a of 12-12-12 as a starter fertilizer. Site Notes: The season was cool with an average high temperature of 77 F and an average low of 55 F. Temperatures above 90 F occurred on only two occasions: June 24 and 25. A low temperature of 36.8 F occurred on June 5. The amount of rain received was 15.63 inches, and the maximum interval without measurable rainfall was 11 days. The plots received drip irrigation as needed. Weekly applications of chlorothalonil and copper were applied with an airblast sprayer to control fungal disease and limit bacterial disease spread. Foliage was severely blighted towards the end of the season. One application of carbaryl was applied about August 19 to control a hornworm outbreak. All plants were pruned in mid-june by removing all suckers up to the last one beneath the first flower cluster. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 226

Plant habit (notes made on July 16) Amish Paste Slender, few flowers Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Vigorous indeterminate growth Variable habit; some with vigorous growth Fairly vigorous, First fruit in cluster growth very low on plant Jaune Flamme Very nice habit with few small clusters Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Very late Vigorous Self pruning lower leaves Slender and tall. Significant leaf roll in mid-july Germination 30 83 87 100 67 50 63 83 80 67 (%) First ripe fruit 8/18 8/18 8/14 8/11 8/11 8/11 8/18 8/11 8/18 8/11 Days from 76 76 72 69 69 69 76 69 76 69 planting to first ripe fruit Peak yield 9/15 9/15 9/15 9/9 9/15 9/23 9/15 9/15 9/29 9/9 Days from 104 104 104 98 104 112 104 104 118 98 planting to peak yield Total 30.8 8.4 32.5 12.4 143.4 16.9 31.5 16.7 27.3 440.2 marketable fruit no./ plant Total mkt wt. / 13.3 8.5 10.0 9.4 11.6 7.3 11.6 8.8 6.8 9.9 plant (lbs) Avg. marketable 6.9 16.3 4.9 12.2 1.3 7.0 5.9 8.4 4.0 0.4 fruit wt. (oz) Total cull fruit 6.0 2.6 16.4 5.9 8.6 20.3 8.6 2.7 16.8 5.9 no. / plant Percent unmarketable fruit 13 21 20 26 14 47 16 10 32 1 Very tall and floriferous top growth in Mid July Continued on next page 227

Infectious Disease pressure notes Physiological disease notes Insect pressure notes Amish Paste Septoria appeared on 7/1. heavy pressure. Bacterial canker and speck (spread from Opalka) Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Cucumber Mosaic virus on three plants. Minimal pressure from Septoria began 7/1 Deep radial cracking Septoria appeared on 7/1. Bacterial disease appeared 8/18 Culls due to small fruit Septoria appeared on 7/1. Heavy pressure Radial cracks, skin splits, poor shape Jaune Flamme Minimal pressure from Septoria began 7/1 Severe skin splitting Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Severe bacterial speck. Minimal pressure from Septoria began 7/1 Moderate pressure from Septoria began 7/1 Small size in late season fruit Tobacco hornworm appeared on August 19 and was controlled with one application of carbaryl Septoria appeared on 7/1 Cracks, size, skin splits Severe bacterial canker. Minimal pressure from Septoria began 7/1 Hollow Minimal pressure from Septoria began 7/1 Very consistent. Turned bitter at end of season 228

Sensory evaluation Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 1= no 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.5 5.1 4.1 4.0 3.3 4.4 5.3 satisfaction 9=great satisfaction Color/shape 2.8 2.9 2.6 2.9 3.4 3.2 3.1 3.6 2.8 3.5 1=not appealing 5=very appealing Taste 1=poor 5=Excellent 2.8 3.1 2.8 2.9 3.3 3.1 2.5 3.0 2.9 3.5 Additional Non-Heirloom Hybrids 1 Goliath Fabulous RFT New Girl Sunsation 1= no satisfaction 7.8 7.1 5.3 5.3 4.9 9=great satisfaction Color/shape 3.9 4.1 3.6 3.6 3.8 1=not appealing 5=very appealing Taste 1=poor 5=Excellent 4.0 4.1 3.3 3.8 2.6 1 Comments: From 9 to 20 tasters participated in the sensory evaluation. The five hybrids included as a type of control rated higher than nine out of the ten heirlooms in overall satisfaction as well as color/shape. Since overall satisfaction takes color and shape into account, these attributes may be correlated. 229

Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme Opalka 230

Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 231

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Minnesota Vince Fritz, University of Minnesota Site: University of Minnesota Southern Research and Outreach Center, Waseca, MN. 44º4 N. Lat, 93º30 W. Lon Row spacing: 6 feet Transplanted to field: June 3, on raised beds with photodegradable black plastic mulch Plant spacing: 3 feet Plant support: plants attached to 1 row of 6-foot tall 6-inch remesh with tomato clips and twine Soil type: Webster clay loam Fertility: 80 pounds N / A, urea Irrigation: Trickle irrigation as needed for approximately 1 inch of water per week Harvest: Fruits were harvested twice weekly at pink or red stage through October 1 (120 days after transplant). First frost=oct. 9. Weather notes: Temperatures were cooler than average throughout the year, with low rainfall in June and September and frequent morning dew in early September. Pesticides: Pesticides were applied through September 4 to control fungal and bacterial diseases. A rotation including chlorothalonil, azoxystrobin, copper hydroxide, and acibenzolar-s-methyl was used. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 232

Plant habit Vigorous, 6-7 feet. Very poor germination. First ripe fruit (Days after transplant, date) Total marketable fruit no./ plant Total marketable fruit wt. / plant (lbs) Avg. marketable fruit wt. (oz) Percent cull fruit Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple 86 days, Aug. 28 Tall, 5-6 feet, large leaves. 84 days, Aug. 26 Tall, 5.5-6.5 feet. 79 days, Aug. 21 Very short (3.5-4.5 feet). 84 days, Aug. 26 Jaune Flamme Tall, 5-6 feet. Consistent yield throughout season. 65 days, Aug. 7 Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Tall, 5.5-6.5 feet 100 days, Sept. 11 Tall, but variable (4-6 feet). Vigorous branches. 82 days, Aug. 24 Tall, 5.5-6.5 feet 79 days, Aug. 21 Very tall, 6-7 feet 91 days, Sept. 2 47 23 58 28 175 36 74 55 70 836 25.9 21.8 23.4 21.0 28.1 16.8 31.3 29.6 19.6 16.8 8.7 15.1 6.4 12.1 2.6 7.5 6.8 8.7 4.5 0.32 13 24 8 23 9 7 10 4 7 1 Short (4-5 feet), with thin, sparse branches. Very florific, consistent yield throughout season. 65 days, Aug. 7 Continued on next page 233

Disease pressure notes Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Bacterial speck late in season (<10%). Insect none pressure notes Consumer Color was notes rated 4.25/5. Texture was rated pulpy by 50% of tasters, taste was rated neutral to slightly sweet. Late blight (<10%) and bacterial speck (<15%) late in season. Some tasters didn t like shape and would not taste this fruit. For those who would taste it, shape was rated less than appealing (1.75/5) on average, color rated 3/5. Taste ranged from very sweet to slightly tart. Early blight (<10%) throughout season Color was rated 4.25/5. Texture was rated juicy by 50% of tasters, taste was rated neutral. Most diseaseresistant of all varieties tested. No problems. Some tasters didn t like shape and color and would not taste. Shape rated less than appealing (2/5) on average, color rated 2.8/5. Taste was rated slightly to very sweet, texture was firm (50%) or juicy (50%). Jaune Flamme Bacterial speck (<20%) late in season, some on fruits too. Slight early blight (<5%). Skins split relatively easily and were somewhat tough to chew. Color was rated 2.9/5. Texture was rated juicy by 75% of tasters. Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Early blight early in season (<25%), controlled by fungicides. Bacterial speck late in season (<15%). Color was rated 3.3/5. Taste was rated neutral. Some tasters liked this fruit very much and some did not. Bacterial speck late in season (<30%). Color and shape were highly rated (4/5). Texture was rated juicy by 75% of tasters. Late blight (<15%) late in season. Color (4.25/5) and shape (4/5) were highly rated. Texture was rated firm (50% of tasters) and juicy (50% of tasters). Early blight early in season (<10%), bacterial speck late in season (<5%). Color and shape were highly rated (4.25/5). Texture was rated firm by 75% of tasters. Early blight throughout season (<10%). Color was rated 3.9/5. Texture was rated firm by 100% of tasters. Continued on next page 234

Percent of tasters who would buy Overall tasting score (out of 9) Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 50 100 100 100 63 50 25 75 100 57 5 6 5.5 5.3 4.9 5 5.8 6.8 6 5 235

236

237

238

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary New York Judson Reid, Cornell University Extension Site: Pyskaty Farms, Niagara County, Barker, New York Seeded in greenhouse: Mid-April Transplanted: June 5 Row spacing: 5 feet Plant spacing: 18 inches Harvested: September 2 Plant support: Wooden stakes with two strings high, did not continue with staking Fertility: Watered in with calcium nitrate (6 oz in 5 gal of water). Side dressed with 15-15-15 at end of June Site Notes: Generally cool with substantial rain for duration of season (June=4.94 inches, July=4.53 inches, August=4.22 inches, September=1.68 inches). Fungicides were applied every seven or eight days for a majority of growing season because of severe early and late blight infestation. An early infestation of aphids required an insecticide spray during the last week of June (Sevin and Malathion). Fifty fruit per variety were harvested. There was only one Amish Paste plant, and only 10 fruit harvested for this variety. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 239

Plant habit Total wt/50 fruit (lbs.) Average wt/fruit (lbs.) Number with cracks/splits out of 50 Number rotten out of 50 Total Number Marketable Fruit out of 50 Maturity Comments Amish Paste (only one plant of this variety) Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Vines tall, falling over, kinked Jaune Flamme Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Very dense canopy, dark green leaves Possible nutrient deficiency Thin stems, fine leaves 22.75* 39.8 12.5 28.65 7.7 13.55 25.05 21.75 12.9 1.45.455.796.25.573.154.271.501.435.258.029 1 13 7 23 4 2 22 2 4 1 3 11 0 7 2 1 14 2 4 0 30* 26 43 20 44 47 14** 46 42 49 Later than Peron Fruit Set Low Moderatefair Flavor Comments Fruit Description Late Later than Brandywine Early Smalllate maturing Good Excellent Moderatelow Watery Pasty Wonderful, good tomato flavor Blocky, Small, Looks good! Cat-facing, BER Small Large, Cracking includes severe catfacing Catfacing/ zippers, Blotchy ripening Not typical shape, Catfacing, Yellow shoulders Heavy Sprawling, Dark leaves Good potential Some yellow shoulders Continued on next page 240

Disease pressure Insect pressure: number of aphid colonies/ leaflet, 6/23/09 Amish Paste Early blight Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme None Early blight Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Early blight None Early blight <1 1 1 <1 1 1 1 <1 >1 <1 *Indicates value multiplied by 5. **Includes fruit with yellow shoulders. 241

Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme Opalka 242

Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 243

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Columbus, Ohio Elaine Grassbaugh, Ohio State University Location: Waterman Ag and Natural Resources Laboratory, Columbus, OH Seeded in greenhouse: April 9 (36-cell trays) Transplanted: May 22 into black plastic mulch and raised beds Row spacing: 8 feet Plant spacing: 3 feet Plant Support: Metal stakes and baling twine Fertility: pre plant 50 lbs N, P 2 O 5, and K 2 O (20-20-20) incorporated; 8 oz per plant starter fertilizer (1 tablespoon 10-52-8 in 1 gallon water) at transplant. Site Notes: Generally cool with adequate rain for most of the season. The hottest part of the season was late summer. Overhead irrigation (1 inch) was applied three times during the growing season. No fungicide or insecticide applications were applied. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 244

Plant habit Amish Paste Medium, upright Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Vigorous, bushy potato foliage Medium, upright Very tall, busy Jaune Flamme Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Medium height; semibush type Tall, upright Medium height, dense foliage Medium height Medium height, sparse foliage Germination 12 62 79 75 58 62 66 83 62 70 (%) First flower June 22 June 22 June 22 June 6 June 22 June 22 June 22 June 22 June 29 June 15 First ripe fruit Aug. 11 July 31 Aug. 5 July 31 July 24 July 31 July 31 July 31 Aug. 31 July 24 Total 39 15 41 14 139 32 34 33 53 456 marketable fruit no. / plant Total 14.5 12.4 12.0 13.0 16.6 13.2 15.25 16.6 10.6 7.4 marketable fruit wt. / plant (lbs) Avg. 5.9 13.3 4.6 14.9 1.9 6.6 7.2 8.0 3.2 0.26 marketable fruit wt. (oz) Total cull fruit no. / plant 3 6 10 7 16 0 3 2 3 11 Disease pressure notes Insect pressure notes Light septoria 7/31 Light whitefly 7/31 Light septoria 7/31 Light whitefly 7/31 None None None None Light septoria 7/31 Light hornworm pressure 7/17 Light whitefly 7/17 Light whitefly 7/17 None Light hornworm and whitefly Short, with sparse foliage Light septoria 8/5 None None None None Light whitefly 7/31 Continued on next page 245

Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Jaune Flamme Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan General Comments Plants grew slow at first; dense fruit A lot of cracking, catfacing Wonderful flavor but too many cracked fruits Beautiful orange color and great flavor but too much cracking even transporting a few feet; not recommended for commercial production; short shelf life Good dense, meaty texture and good flavor; good choice for home canning or processing; very few seeds Good texture and flavor Very nice fruit with good shape and flavor Very odd shape and almost every fruit had blotchy ripening and white pithy centers Good grape tomato flavor. Fruit falls off plant too easily 246

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary Piketon, Ohio Brad Bergefurd and Thom Harker, OSU South Centers at Piketon Site: OSU South Centers, Piketon, OH Seeded in greenhouse: Float trays Transplanted: July 1 into black plastic mulch Row spacing: 6 feet Plant spacing: 3 feet Plant support: Fiberglass stakes Fertility: Preplant 100 lbs N, P 2 O 5, and K 2 O incorporated Site Notes: Irrigated once per week through drip irrigation during the growing season. Fungicide and insecticide were applied every 7-10 days. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 247

Plant habit Amish Paste Large, upright, vigorous Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Not planted Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Jaune Flamme Not planted Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous First ripe fruit 9/23 9/23 9/23 9/23 9/23 9/23 9/23 9/23 Total 21.60 39.22 24.22 35.44 21.33 38.22 56.22 485.67 marketable fruit no. / plant Total 10.34 12.54 15.38 13.84 9.18 18.99 16.17 13.98 marketable fruit wt. / plant (lbs) Avg. 7.7 5.1 10.2 6.2 6.9 7.9 4.6 0.46 marketable fruit wt. (oz) Total green 20.00 28.56 16.78 34.11 19 33.56 51.44 61.11 fruit no. / plant Total cull fruit no. / plant 19.80 18.78 23.33 19.22 37 5.33 13.33 49.22 248

2009 Great Lakes Vegetable Working Group Heirloom Tomato Project Summary S. Charleston, Ohio Jim Jasinski, Bob Precheur, Ohio State University Extension Site: Western Ag Research Station, South Charleston, OH Seeded in greenhouse: April 28 Transplanted: May 18 into black plastic mulch with drip Row spacing: 6 feet Plant spacing: 3 feet Plant support: Metal stakes and string (FL weave) Fertility: Preplant 50 lbs/a N, P 2 O 5, and K 2 O incorporated, three applications of diluted liquid 10-15-10 during seedling stage. Site Notes: Dual and Sencor were applied between the plastic for weed control. This site was dry through late spring and early summer, then received above average rainfall. Used drip irrigation only in early part of season. After that, precipitation was adequate. Plants were generally healthy and fairly robust until late blight set in mid-august. No insecticides were applied to control moderate to heavy Tobacco hornworm pressure. No fungicides were applied either and the plot suffered devastating losses from late blight in mid-august. All fruit were harvested immediately, leading to a large proportion of green fruit. Four harvests had been performed up to that point. For additional information about this project, see Evaluation of Ten Heirloom Tomato Varieties at Nine Sites Throughout the Great Lakes Region in the 2009 Midwest Vegetable Trial Report. 249

Plant habit Amish Paste Large, upright, vigorous Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Jaune Flamme Medium, upright, vigorous Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Large, upright, vigorous Germination 11 89 100 89 72 89 78 72 61 100 (%) First flower 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-12 First ripe fruit 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-24 7-15 Total 15 6 17 12.5 117 7.5 17.5 23.5 15.5 260 marketable fruit no./ plant Total 10.5 6.2 7.6 8.5 18.3 2.8 8.7 9.9 3.9 4.4 marketable fruit wt. / plant (lbs) Avg. 11.2 16.5 7.2 10.9 2.5 5.9 7.9 6.7 4.0 0.3 marketable fruit wt. (oz) Total green 21 16.5 22.5 7.5 87.5 51 31.5 18 76.5 507 fruit / plant Total cull fruit no./ plant 3 1.5 0 6 11.5 4 3 1.5 2.5 10 Disease pressure notes 5% early blight, < 5% lower chlorotic leaves 15% early blight, 20% bacterial infection 10% Septoria & 10% bacterial infection 25% Septoria by 8/11 20% Septoria by 8/11; some checking on fruit 50% infected by early blight as of 8/11 5-10 % early blight and up to 40% Septoria by 8/11 5-10% early blight, 10% Septoria by 8/11 5% early blight by 8/11 Medium, prostrate, open 5% early blight by 8/11 Continued on next page 250

Insect pressure notes Consumer notes overall satisfaction, 9 point scale, (1=no, 9=great) % of tasters who would buy this fruit Amish Paste 3 hornworms + feeding injury + aphids; favored by hornworms Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple 1.5 hornworms / plant + feeding + aphids 1.5 hornworms per plant + feeding injury + aphids; favored by hornworms 0.5 hornworms + feeding injury + aphids Jaune Flamme 0.5 hornworms per plant + feeding injury + aphids Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 1.5 hornworms + feeding injury Hornworm feeding injury, no worm 0.5 hornworms + feeding injury 0.5 hornworms + feeding injury 4.2 6.3 6.0 5.6 4.8 2.5 5.2 6.8 5.5 7.5 50% 100% 66% 50% 33.3 % 0% 75% 100% 50% 100% 1.5 hornworms + feeding injury + aphids; favored by hornworms 251

Amish Paste Brandywine Burbank Cherokee Purple 252

Jaune Flamme Opalka Oxheart Peron Rutgers Tainan 253