2015 Research Progress Report Potato Breeding and Selection Submitted by David G. Holm, Caroline Gray, and Katrina Zavislan San Luis Valley Research Center to the Colorado Potato Administrative Committee (Area II) Research Committee and the Colorado Potato Administrative Committee (Area III)
Mission Statement The mission of the Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program is to develop cultivars that will help assure that the Colorado potato industry remains productive, competitive, and sustainable and that provide the consumer with improved nutrition and quality. ii
Table of Contents Mission Statement................................................................... ii Table of Contents.................................................................... iii Preface............................................................................. v Acknowledgments................................................................... vi Introduction........................................................................ 1 Potato Breeding..................................................................... 2 Germplasm Accession and Introgression............................................ 2 Carotenoid Enhancement........................................................ 2 Crossing..................................................................... 3 Seedling Selection and Clonal Development.............................................. 3 Collaborative Studies................................................................. 5 Graduate Students................................................................... 5 Potato Breeding Program Advisory Committee........................................... 6 Colorado State University Potato Program Website....................................... 6 San Luis Valley Research Center Facebook Page......................................... 6 Tables 1. Generalized potato breeding and selection scheme used at the San Luis Valley Research Center............................................................. 7 2A-B. Preliminary Trial............................................................. 8 3A-B. San Luis Valley Chipping Study................................................ 10 4A-E. Intermediate Yield Trial...................................................... 13 5A-E. Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial.............................................. 18 6A-E. Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial............................................. 23 7A-E. Advanced Yield Trial........................................................ 28 8A-E. Southwest Regional Russet Trial............................................... 33 9A-E. Southwest Regional Red Trial.................................................. 38 10A-E. Southwest Regional Specialty Trial............................................. 43 11A-E. Southwest Regional Chip Trial................................................. 48 12A-E. Western Regional Main Trial.................................................. 53 13A-E. Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial....................................... 58 14A-E. Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial................................... 63 iii
15A-E. Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial................................... 68 16. Summary comparison of advanced selections and named cultivars for yield, grade, maturity, specific gravity, and grade defects...................................... 73 17A-17AB. Detailed data summaries for advanced selections and named cultivars: Russets AC00395-2RU......................................................... 79 CO05068-1RU......................................................... 80 CO05175-1RU......................................................... 81 AC05039-2RU......................................................... 82 Canela Russet.......................................................... 83 Centennial Russet...................................................... 84 Fortress Russet......................................................... 85 Rio Grande Russet...................................................... 86 Russet Norkotah........................................................ 87 Specialties CO04056-3P/PW....................................................... 88 CO04067-8R/Y........................................................ 89 CO04099-3W/Y........................................................ 90 AC05175-3P/Y........................................................ 91 CO05037-2R/Y........................................................ 92 CO05037-3W/Y........................................................ 93 CO05028-4P/PY....................................................... 94 CO05028-11P/RWP..................................................... 95 CO05035-1PW/Y....................................................... 96 AC99330-1P/Y (Midnight Moon).......................................... 97 Mountain Rose......................................................... 98 Purple Majesty......................................................... 99 Yukon Gold.......................................................... 100 Chippers AC01151-5W......................................................... 101 CO02024-9W......................................................... 102 CO02033-1W......................................................... 103 CO02321-4W......................................................... 104 AC03433-1W......................................................... 105 CO03243-3W......................................................... 106 AC00206-2W......................................................... 107 AC03452-2W......................................................... 108 AC05153-1W......................................................... 109 Atlantic............................................................. 110 Chipeta.............................................................. 111 Figures 1. Photographs of advanced selections............................................ 75 Appendices 1. Cultural management information for the Potato Breeding and Selection Program s trials at the San Luis Valley Research Center - 2015................................... 113 2. General procedures used for postharvest evaluations.............................. 114 Notes............................................................................ 115 iv
Preface We are pleased to provide this copy of the 2015 Potato Breeding and Selection Research Progress Report. This report includes research funded by the Colorado potato industry (Area II and Area III), Colorado State University (Agricultural Experiment Station and the Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture), the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), the US Potato Board, and PVP royalties. These funds collectively continue to allow us to strengthen our overall collaborative research efforts with colleagues at CSU and other universities and agencies. All of these efforts are aimed at developing improved potato cultivars for Colorado. Ongoing support by the Colorado potato industry is key to maintaining funds received from NIFA and other sources. NIFA and PVP funding have allowed us to significantly expand our breeding efforts over the years to include resistance to the following: PVY, late blight (foliar and tuber), nematodes, pink rot, storage rots [dry rot (Fusarium and early blight) and bacterial soft rot], corky ringspot, and powdery scab, as well as other special initiatives including graduate student support. The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program relies on the invaluable cooperation of several growers, shippers, and research personnel to assess the production, adaptability, marketability, and other characteristics of advanced selections. Collaborators and areas of collaboration are: Andrew J. Houser - Disease Screening and Evaluation Samuel Y. C. Essah - Cultivar Specific Production Management Sastry S. Jayanty - Cultivar Specific Postharvest Management and Physiology Adam Heuberger - Nutritional Characteristics and Health Attributes Kent P. Sather and Andrew J. Houser - Potato Certification Service Colorado Potato Growers Southwest Regional Potato Breeding and Cultivar Development Cooperators (Colorado, Texas, and California). The overall objective of this research group is to develop and evaluate improved potato cultivars to meet the production, marketing, and producer/consumer needs of the Southwest U.S. Other cooperating research/extension programs - several cooperators throughout the United States and Canada provide breeding material and opportunities to screen our germplasm under various growing conditions and disease pressures. Best wishes for the 2016 production season! Sincerely, Dave Holm, Caroline Gray, and Trina Zavislan v
Acknowledgments We would like to express appreciation to the following individuals, groups, and organizations for their efforts on behalf of the Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program in 2015. Financial and In-kind Support from the following is gratefully acknowledged: Colorado Potato Industry - Area II and III Colorado State University - Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station & the Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture USDA - National Institute of Food and Agriculture - Potato Research Award Number 2012-34141-20309 United States Potato Board - National Chip Processing Trial (NCPT) and National Fry Processing Trial (NFPT) Stone s Farm Supply - in-kind support Colorado Potato Administration Committee, Area II - Research Committee (Members and At-large Members) and Area III Technical Support/Graduate Students* Mitzi Cisneros Helen Duran Wendy Waldrop Taylor Bond Kegan Leckler Zach Leckler Lexi Shawcroft Leandro Sala Derek Sala Raven Bough* Sarah Shawcroft Greg Hess* Numerous other temporary support personnel assisted the project, particularly during seed cutting, planting, and harvest. Research Collaborators - Colorado State University Samuel Essah Sastry Jayanty Adam Heuberger Andrew Houser Jorge Vivanco Staff - San Luis Valley Research Center Michelle Leckler Tim Poe Ron Price Stan Price Tyler Thompson Sharon Yust Potato Certification Service Kent Sather Rick Haslar (retired) Andrew Houser Carolyn Keller Steve Keller Teresa Almeida Greg Hess Southwest Regional Potato Breeding and Cultivar Development Cooperators (Colorado, Texas, and California). The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program relies on the cooperation of several growers, shippers, processors, and research personnel to assess the production, adaptability, marketability, and other characteristics of advanced selections from our program. We sincerely appreciate their support and the valuable feedback they provide. We thank the many cooperating breeding and selection programs throughout the United States and Canada who have provided breeding material and opportunities to screen our germplasm under various growing conditions and disease pressures not usually available in Colorado. vi
2015 Research Progress Report Potato Breeding and Selection Submitted by David G. Holm, Caroline Gray, and Katrina Zavislan San Luis Valley Research Center Introduction The major objectives of the Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program are: (1) to develop new potato cultivars with increased yield, improved quality, improved nutritional and health characteristics, resistance to diseases and pests, and tolerance to environmental stresses; (2) to collaborate with growers, shippers, processors, and research/extension personnel to assess the production, adaptability, marketability, and other characteristics of advanced selections from the Colorado program; (3) to provide a basic seed source of selections to growers for seed increase and commercial testing; (4) to evaluate promising selections for possible interstate and international export. The primary emphasis is placed on the development of russet cultivars. The balance of the breeding effort is devoted to developing red, specialty, and chipping cultivars. This broad approach recognizes the diverse markets accessed by potato growers throughout Colorado. Besides the major objectives, specific breeding emphasis is being placed on identifying germplasm and developing cultivars that have: (1) early vine maturity and early tuber bulking; (2) immunity to PVY; resistance to (3) late blight (foliar and tuber); (4) storage rots [dry rot (Fusarium and early blight) and bacterial soft rot]; (5) pink rot; (6) nematodes; (7) powdery scab; (8) corky ringspot, and (9) improved nutritional quality, health attributes, and other "consumer" characteristics such as improved red skin color retention and shelf life. Continued emphasis has been placed on breeding/selecting for "low input" cultivars, primarily for reduced nitrogen and fungicide input, and for improved postharvest and processing qualities such as lengthened dormancy. Cultivars with these characteristics will help assure that the potato industry in Colorado remains productive and competitive. Cultivar development is a five-step process. The first step is the generation of segregating populations followed by evaluation of visual agronomic traits. This involves identifying parents with desired characteristics for crossing to produce true (botanical) potato seed (TPS). TPS is planted to produce seedling tubers for field planting. Second, superior progeny are identified and these selections undergo additional evaluation for economically important characteristics. Third, a profile of cultivar specific management criteria - production and postharvest - are developed. A grower, shipper, processor, and/or marketer may fine tune for his/her operation. Fourth, a basic seed source of the selections is developed 1
to facilitate further seed increase and commercial testing of advanced selections. Finally, market development takes place to determine consumer acceptance and recognition in the intended market. Each of these integrated steps is critical in the development and commercialization of new cultivars and provides the base for a successful cultivar release. The process of cultivar development takes 14 or more years. Years 1 and 2 are the potato breeding phase of the development process. Parents are selected and crossed to produce true potato seed. Seedling tubers are then produced from the true seed in year 2. Year 3 and later years represent the selection phase of the development process. Each year represents another cycle of field selection. As each cycle is completed, fewer and fewer clones remain and the amount of seed per selection is increased. Clones remaining after eight cycles of field selection are released to growers for evaluations prior to official release as a named cultivar. Table 1 presents a detailed description of the steps involved in developing new potato cultivars. The long-term process of cultivar development fosters collaborations among growers, shippers, processors, researchers, and extension personnel. The network must provide for a grower evaluation process to assist in the development of management guidelines, detect unforeseen problems, and determine the predictability of performance of each new cultivar. Because the timeline for cultivar development is lengthy, improved methods to speed up the breeding and selection process are continually evaluated. Technologies such as marker assisted selection provide opportunities, in concert with existing and new collaborators, to facilitate accelerated and focused breeding for high priority characteristics. A priority of the potato cultivar development process is to provide a solid foundation for the development and commercialization of new potato cultivars prior to the formal naming and release process. As such, potato cultivar development is a long-term process and is difficult to shorten significantly. Potato Breeding Germplasm Accession and Introgression. Germplasm with late blight resistance, virus resistance (PVX, PVY, and PLRV), nematode resistance, and other characteristics of importance is continually being acquired from various sources. Primary sources are the USDA-ARS in Aberdeen, Idaho; Prosser, Washington; Madison, Wisconsin; and Oregon State University. Other sources are Asia, Europe, and South America. All of these materials are incorporated into our germplasm in the breeding program. Carotenoid Enhancement. Carotenoids are phytonutrients produced in the tuber flesh of potatoes that contain various health benefits such as reduction of cardiovascular diseases, some cancers, and macular degeneration. We initiated an effort to enhance the carotenoid content of our yellow fleshed selections in 2007 by hybridizing two high carotenoid selections obtained from Dr. Chuck Brown, USDA-ARS, Prosser Washington. The first product to come from this work was selection CO07131-1W/Y (PA4X137-12 x 4X91E22). This selection (shown to the right) produces small tubers with very dark yellow flesh. It is currently being used as a parent. A small planting by a grower is planned for 2016. 2
In 2009 we initiated another effort to enhance the tuber cartenoid content. Dr. Kathy Haynes, USDA- ARS, Beltsville, Maryland, developed a diploid hybrid population of Solanum phureja x Solanum stenotomum adapted to long-day growing conditions. This was accomplished by recurrent selection. TPS of several families was initially planted in 2009 in the greenhouse. Resulting seedling tubers were planted in the field in 2010 with initial field selection for dark yellow flesh occurring in the fall. Currently 10 selections remain and we have started to utilize a subset of them as parents. Seedlings tubers of five crosses were produced in 2015 and will be planted in the field in 2016. TPS of two more crosses are currently being grown in the greenhouse. These seedling tubers will be planting in the field in 2017. We also acquired 4 diploid Solanum phureja cultivars from The James Hutton Institute (formerly the Scottish Crop Research Institute) via MyInefield Research Services in 2012. The cultivars and release year are Mayan Gold (2001), Inca Dawn (2003), Mayan Queen (2008), and Mayan Twilight (2008). We have produced seedling tubers from Inca Dawn and Mayan Gold crosses. They were planted as single hills in 2014 and 2015. Fifty-eight selections remain (51 Inca Dawn crosses and 7 Mayan Gold crosses). While some of the progeny had more of a wild appearance (shown on the right), others had good tuber type. TPS of seven more crosses of this type are growing in the greenhouse now and resulting tubers will be planted in the field in 2017. The United States Potato Genebank (NRSP-6) has also been working with Colombian sources of Solanum phureja. These materials are commonly referred to papa criolla. We received TPS of three criolla families from NRSP-6. Seedling tubers are currently being produced for field planting in 2017. Crossing. The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program intercrossed 93 parental clones in 2015 in two separate crossing blocks. The emphasis of the first crossing block was russet and red cultivar development and general disease resistance, primarily PVY resistance. The second crossing block emphasized russet and yellow flesh cultivar development, and resistance to PVY and nematodes. Seed from 549 combinations was obtained. A subset of these crosses will be planted in the greenhouse in 2016 to produce seedling tubers. Approximately 35,579 first-size seedling tubers representing 168 families were produced from 2014 greenhouse crosses for initial field selection in 2016. These seedlings represented crosses segregating primarily for russets, yellows, reds, specialty types, and resistance to late blight, PVY, corky ringspot, and nematodes. Second through fourth size seedling tubers will be distributed to Idaho (USDA-ARS), Maine, Oregon, Texas, and Alberta, Canada (Agriculture Canada). Seedling Selection and Clonal Development Colorado grew 86,349 first-year seedlings representing 456 families in 2015, with 742 selected for subsequent planting, evaluation, and increase in future years. A portion of these seedlings were obtained from the USDA-ARS (Aberdeen, Idaho), Agriculture Canada, Texas A&M University, North Dakota State University, and the University of Maine. Another 865 clones were in 12-hill, preliminary, and intermediate stages of selection. At harvest, 242 were saved for further increase and evaluation in 2016. Sixty-two advanced selections were saved and will be increased in 2016 pending further evaluation. Another 271 selections and cultivars were maintained for germplasm development, breeding, and other experimental purposes including seed increase/maintenance. 3
Field trials conducted in 2015 included: Preliminary Trial, Intermediate Yield Trial, Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial, Advanced Yield Trial, Southwestern Regional Russet Trial, Southwestern Regional Red Trial, Southwestern Regional Specialty Trial, Western Regional Russet/Processing Trial, Western Regional Red Trial, Western Regional Specialty Trial, San Luis Valley Chipping Trial, and Western Regional Chipping Trial. All trials are grown under "low input" conditions, primarily for reduced nitrogen and fungicide. Tables 2-15 present the data for the various trials. Appendix 1 summarizes the cultural information for the trials planted at the San Luis Valley Research Center in 2015. A total of 170 samples are in the process of being evaluated for two or more of the following postharvest characteristics: blackspot susceptibility, storage weight loss, dormancy, enzymatic browning, specific gravity, french fry color, french fry texture, and chip color. Appendix 2 lists the procedures used for the postharvest evaluations for the trials. Advanced selections evaluated in the Southwest Regional Trials, Western Regional Trials, or by potato growers in 2015, included 9 russets (AC00395-2RU, AC05039-2RU, CO03276-5RU, CO05068-1RU, CO05110-6RU, CO05175-1RU, CO06057-3RU, CO07015-4RU, and CO07049-1RU), 1 red (CO07102-1R), 11 chippers (AC00206-2W, AC01151-5W, AC03433-1W, AC03452-2W, AC05153-1W, CO02024-9W, CO02033-1W, CO02321-4W, CO03243-3W, CO07070-10W, and CO07070-13W), and 10 specialties (AC05175-3P/Y, CO04021-2R/Y, CO04056-3P/PW, CO04067-8R/Y, CO04099-3W/Y, CO05035-1PW/Y, CO05037-2R/Y, CO05037-3W/Y, CO07131-1W/Y, and CO07370-1W/Y). The Plant Variety Protection Office recently completed reviewing the applications and will be issuing certificates of plant variety protection for AC99330-1P/Y, Red Luna (CO97233-3R/Y), and Fortress Russet (AC99375-1RU). A Plant Variety Protection application is in preparation for CO97222-1R/R, a red-skinned, red-fleshed selection. Several selections are available for exclusive release. Data summaries for all clones are available on request. Anyone interested in further information about how exclusive releases are developed may contact David Holm for further information. Included are russets - AC96052-1RU, CO97087-2RU, CO98067-7RU, CO99053-4RU, and CO03276-5RU; reds - CO98012-5R, CO99076-6R, CO99256-2R, CO00277-2R, and CO00291-5R; chippers - CO95051-7W, CO00188-4W, CO00197-3W, and CO00270-7W; and specialties (including yellows) - AC97521-1R/Y, ATC00293-1W/Y, CO97215-2P/P, CO97222-1R/R, CO97226-2R/R, CO97227-2P/PW, CO97232-1R/Y, CO97232-2R/Y, CO99045-1W/Y, CO00405-1RF, CO00412-5W/Y, CO00415-1RF, VC0967-2R/Y, VC1002-3W/Y, and VC1009-1W/Y. The Plant Variety Protection Office recently completed reviewing the applications and will be issuing certificates of plant variety protection for AC99330-1P/Y, Red Luna (CO97233-3R/Y), and Fortress Russet (AC99375-1RU). A Plant Variety Protection application is in preparation for CO97222-1R/R (Crimson King), a red-skinned, red-fleshed selection. Table 14 summarizes the performance of advanced selections that are available for growers to evaluate in 2016. Detailed data summaries for each of the advanced selections are presented in Tables 17A-17AG. Figure 1 includes photographs of these selections. Data summaries for additional selections that are available for exclusive release are available upon request. 4
Collaborative Studies The following collaborative studies were conducted in 2015: Several advanced selections were evaluated for disease symptom expression screening trials in Colorado. These trials were conducted in cooperation with Andrew Houser and Kent Sather. Diseases included were bacterial ring rot (21 selections), PVY (17 selections), and powdery scab (18 selections) in Colorado. Additionally we provided six selections to Sastry Jayanty for powdery scab evaluations. Several advanced selections were distributed to state/usda-ars collaborators in Idaho, Michigan, Oregon, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin for additional disease evaluations. These selections were screened for one or more of the following diseases: late blight, early blight, scab (common and powdery), PVY, Verticillim wilt, and zebra chip. Twelve advanced selections were evaluated in cultural management trials in collaboration with Samuel Essah. Several selections were evaluated for various postharvest characteristics in collaboration with Sastry Jayanty. Three selections were entered in the National Fry Processing Trials conducted in Washington, Idaho, North Dakota, Maine, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota (screening for common scab and PVY). A focus of these trials is to identify selections with low acrylamide potential and that have suitable QSR attributes. Five selections were entered in the National Chip Processing Trials. These trials were planted in up to 11 locations in northern and southern production areas of the US. Trials were conducted in California, Florida, North Carolina, Oregon, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Texas, North Dakota, and Wisconsin (plus a scab trial). Four selections were entered in the USPB/Snack Food Association Trials. These trials were planted in up to 11 locations in northern and sourthern production areas of the US. Trials were conducted in California, Florida, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. Several selections were provided to Adam Heuberger. His research program focuses on using metabolomics to evaluate nutrition and health traits in advanced selections in our breeding program. Graduate Students Sara Kammlade, MS student. Thesis Title: Potato Tuber Yield, Quality, Mineral Nutrient Concentration, Soil Health and Soil Food Web in Conventional and Organic Potato Systems. Coadvised by David Holm and Samuel Essah. Sara completed her thesis in 2015. Raven Bough, MS student. Thesis Title: Screening Potato Germplasm for Flavor Utilizing HS- SPME/GC-MS and Sensory Panel Analyses. Co-advised by David Holm and Sastry Jayanty. Raven s thesis completion date will be in 2016. 5
The development of potato cultivars with improved flavor in the San Luis Valley has the potential to expand the region s fresh potato market by focusing on consumer appeal. Through analysis of existing cultivars, the objective of this project is to establish a flavor rating methodology for potato selections based on correlation of HS-SPME/GC-MS quantification of major flavor compounds and sensory panel tests. Flavor ratings will guide germplasm screening in the breeding process, which will enable the development of new cultivars with improved flavor. Greg Hess. Greg is coadvised by Sastry Jayanty, Adam Heuberger, and David Holm. His thesis is focused on screening select progeny for genetic markers associated with PVY resistance. Multiple PVY resistant lines of Solanum tuberosum will be crossed to develop segregating populations. Up to 300 progeny of a selected cross will be molecularly screened using primers targeting the Ryadg (andigena) and Rysto (stoloniferum) genes. Potato Breeding Program Advisory Committee The Potato Breeding Advisory Committee had its inaugural meeting on November 12, 2015 with 11 in attendance. Several topics were discussed including current and future goals for breeding (market classes) and trait improvement, increasing grower involvement, feedback forms for production and storage of advanced selections, tours of the breeding program and related programs, and venues for reporting. Colorado State University Potato Program Website The overall address for the website is http://potatoes.colostate.edu. To go to the potato breeding program section of the website the address is http://potatoes.colostate.edu/potato-breeding/. Since the website was launched in 2014 it has been a valuable resource to refer people with inquiries to for detailed information. We invite you to browse our website. Please let us know if you have any suggestions or recommendations for improving our website or if you would like us to include additional information. San Luis Valley Research Center Facebook Page A Facebook page for the San Luis Valley Research Center (www.facebook.com/slvrc.potatoes/) was started this past summer. The focus of this page is to inform the public about various activities at the SLV Research Center including the potato breeding program. We encourage you to Like our page to receive posts. 6
Table 1. Generalized potato breeding and selection scheme used at the SLV Research Center. Year Comments 1 Select parents for crossing and true seed production in the greenhouse. 2 Produce seedling tubers from true seed in the greenhouse. 3 70,000-80,000 seedling tubers planted in the field as single hills. Several thousand tubers are obtained from other breeding programs. Initial selection of this material takes place at harvest. First cycle of field selection. 4 Twelve-hills of each single-hill selection are planted. Second cycle of field selection. 5 Preliminary Selections Tier 1 (PT1). Third cycle of field selection (48 plant tuber-unit seed increase). Initial evaluations for chipping qualities (chip color after various storage regimes and specific gravity) are conducted this year and subsequently. 6 Preliminary Selections Tier 2 (PT2). Fourth cycle of field selection (96 plant tuber-unit seed increase). Initial evaluations to characterize selections for blackspot bruise potential, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning. Initial evaluations for french fry potential (french fry color and specific gravity) are conducted this year and subsequently. Evaluations for chipping qualities are continued. 7 Intermediate Selections. Fifth cycle of field selection. Initial data collected on yield, grade, and growth characteristics. Plant a 144 plant tuber-unit seed increase and a 2 rep x 25 plants intermediate yield trial (IYT). 8-14+ Advanced Selections: Includes selections that have advanced from the IYT. Additional selections are included that have graduated from the Southwest Regional and Western Regional Trials. The advanced yield trials for reds, specialty types, and chippers are planted with entries in the Western Regional Red, Specialty and Chip Trials. Selections are in the 6th-12th+ cycles of field selection. All advanced yield trials (AYT) have 4 reps x 25 plants. Sixth and seventh cycle field selections respectively have a 400/1,200 plant tuber-unit seed increase. All 8th year selections have up to a 1/3 acre tuber-unit seed increase planted. All 9 th year and older selections generally have up to a ½ acre or more of seed increase depending on grower demand. Selections in the sixth cycle of selection are indexed for viruses and cleanup/micropropagation is initiated. Testing for ring rot and PLRV reaction is also initiated at this stage and continues as needed. Selections in the 7th cycle of field selection are entered into cultural management trials and postharvest disease reaction (dry rot and soft rot) evaluations. 10 All 8 th year selections are entered in the Southwest Regional Trials (4 locations - CO, TX, two in CA). Cultural management trials and postharvest disease reaction evaluations continue as needed. 11-13 All 9 th -11 th year selections are entered in the Western Regional Trials (4 trials): main (russets and long whites), reds, specialties, and chippers. The Western Coordinating Committee (WERA027) directs these trials at 10+ locations in the Western United States each year. Cultural management trials and postharvest disease reaction evaluations continue as needed. 11+ Grower/industry evaluations. The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Project relies on the cooperation of several growers, shippers, and processors to evaluate advanced selections for adaptability and marketability. 14+ Release as a named cultivar.
Table 2A. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Preliminary Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Weight Dormancy Enzymatic Clone Bud End Stem End Average Loss 2 (Days) 3 Browning 4 AC08152-3W/Y 3.9 3.6 3.8 2.4 82 4.2 AC10376-1W/Y 4.7 4.7 4.7 2.2 145 3.2 CO10003-3W/Y 5.0 3.9 4.5 3.3 47 4.2 CO10010-5RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 2.4 96 3.8 CO10015-8W/Y 4.8 4.6 4.7 1.7 124 4.8 CO10015-18W/Y 4.9 4.9 4.9 1.6 124 4.0 CO10018-6W/Y 5.0 4.8 4.9 3.9 47 5.0 CO10018-11W/Y 4.4 4.5 4.5 2.4 103 5.0 CO10064-1W/Y 4.8 4.6 4.7 1.7 124 4.8 CO10087-4RU 5.0 4.7 4.9 3.2 110 4.2 CO10090-9RU 5.0 4.4 4.7 1.9 110 3.8 CO10091-1RU 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.1 103 5.0 CO10097-2W/Y 4.3 4.4 4.4 1.6 96 5.0 CO10098-2W/Y 5.0 4.2 4.6 2.0 89 5.0 CO10098-4W/Y 3.5 2.6 3.1 1.9 82 4.8 CO10098-5W/Y 4.9 3.9 4.4 2.3 103 3.8 NDC102908-2R/R -- -- -- 6.3 89 -- Canela Russet 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.3 144 4.6 Centennial Russet 4.9 4.9 4.9 3.0 94 4.6 Rio Grande Russet 5.0 4.8 4.9 2.7 82 3.4 Russet Burbank 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.7 150 3.6 Russet Norkotah-S3 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.2 98 2.6 Russet Nugget 5.0 4.5 4.8 2.1 98 4.2 Sangre-S10 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 101 4.8 Shepody 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.1 101 4.8 Yukon Gold 5.0 4.9 5.0 1.8 110 4.6 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 8
Table 2B. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Preliminary Trial clones - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F AC08152-3W/Y 1.078 3 3 3 3 AC10376-1W/Y 1.074 3 4 3 4 CO10003-3W/Y 1.088 3 4 3 3 CO10010-5RU 1.094 1 3 4 4 CO10015-8W/Y 1.074 2 2 2 2 CO10015-18W/Y 1.062 1 2 2 1 CO10018-6W/Y 1.078 1 2 3 2 CO10018-11W/Y 1.078 1 2 3 3 CO10064-1W/Y 1.084 0 0 4 3 CO10087-4RU 1.088 3 1 4 4 CO10090-9RU 1.088 0 2 3 4 CO10091-1RU 1.083 1 1 2 4 CO10097-2W/Y 1.080 1 0 3 2 CO10098-2W/Y 1.084 1 1 3 3 CO10098-4W/Y 1.092 1 0 2 3 CO10098-5W/Y 1.097 1 1 3 3 NDC102908-2R/R 1.070 - - 1 2 Canela Russet 1.091 2 3 2 3 Centennial Russet 1.079 3 3 3 2 Rio Grande Russet 1.083 2 3 3 3 Russet Burbank 1.074 2 2 3 3 Russet Norkotah-S3 1.075 2 3 4 2 Russet Nugget 1.094 1 1 4 4 Sangre-S10 1.069 4 4 2 2 Shepody 1.081 2 3 3 3 Yukon Gold 1.086 2 4 4 3 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 9
Table 3A. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for San Luis Valley Chipping study entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Dormancy Loss 2 (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 AC00206-2W 3.7 2.8 3.3 2.7 96 3.6 AC01144-1W 4.8 4.6 4.7 1.4 108 4.2 AC01151-5W 4.4 1.3 2.9 4.4 81 1.4 AC03433-1W 4.9 4.4 4.7 2.4 83 4.4 AC03452-2W 5.0 4.7 4.9 2.8 52 4.8 AC05153-1W 3.9 2.1 3.0 5.4 80 2.4 AC08094-2W 5.0 4.9 5.0 2.1 154 3.6 AC10239-7W 5.0 4.6 4.8 3.5 103 5.0 AFC5534-1W 4.9 4.5 4.7 1.6 117 4.0 AFC5551-4W 4.7 4.0 4.4 1.6 138 5.0 AFC5563-5W 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.0 68 4.4 CO00188-4W 4.8 3.5 4.2 3.4 95 4.4 CO02024-9W 4.4 3.2 3.8 3.7 89 3.4 CO02033-1W 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.6 102 2.6 CO02321-4W 5.0 4.0 4.5 2.9 87 4.6 CO03243-3W 4.2 3.9 4.1 2.6 90 3.0 CO07070-10W 3.7 2.0 2.9 2.5 112 4.8 CO07070-13W 4.9 3.6 4.3 3.4 77 4.2 CO10030-3W 4.9 3.9 4.4 2.7 103 3.6 CO10032-4W 4.4 2.4 3.4 2.0 117 1.6 CO10032-8W 4.9 3.1 4.0 2.5 103 2.6 CO10060-23W 4.9 2.9 3.9 1.9 89 4.6 CO10071-1W 4.9 4.6 4.7 3.0 89 4.4 CO10073-7W 5.0 4.1 4.6 2.4 89 4.4 CO10076-4W 3.7 3.8 3.8 2.4 96 5.0 TC09403-4W 5.0 4.3 4.7 1.9 89 5.0 Atlantic 3.3 3.7 3.5 2.7 101 5.0 Chipeta 4.7 3.4 4.1 2.0 98 3.2 Snowden 3.6 2.8 3.2 2.4 115 4.0 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 10
Table 3B. Chip color 1 after various storage regimes, and specific gravity of San Luis Valley Chipping study entries - 2015. Specific 5 wks 5 wks/40f 5 wks 5 wks/50f Clone Gravity 40F +3 wks/60f 50F +3 wks/60f AC00206-2W 1.089 2.0 2.5 2.5 1.0 AC01144-1W 1.075 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 AC01151-5W 1.092 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 AC03433-1W 1.087 2.5 2.5 1.5 2.0 AC03452-2W 1.075 4.0 3.5 1.5 1.0 AC05153-1W 1.092 4.5 4.0 2.5 2.5 AC08094-2W 1.077 4.5 4.5 2.5 3.0 AC10239-7W 1.089 4.5 4.0 1.0 1.0 AC11463-2W 1.080 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.5 AFC5534-1W 1.069 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 AFC5551-4W 1.085 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 AFC5563-5W 1.082 4.5 4.0 2.0 3.0 AFC5687-2W 1.077 4.5 4.0 1.5 1.0 CO00188-4W 1.087 3.0 3.5 1.5 1.5 CO02024-9W 1.087 4.5 2.5 3.0 1.5 CO02033-1W 1.104 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.0 CO02321-4W 1.094 4.0 2.5 2.0 2.5 CO03243-3W 1.087 4.0 2.5 1.0 2.5 CO07070-10W 1.100 4.0 3.5 2.0 2.5 CO07070-13W 1.094 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.5 CO10030-3W 1.083 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5 CO10032-4W 1.092 4.5 4.0 3.0 2.5 CO10032-8W 1.090 2.5 1.5 2.0 1.5 CO10060-23W 1.090 2.5 3.5 2.0 3.0 CO10061-4W 1.083 4.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 CO10071-1W 1.091 5.0 4.5 3.0 3.0 CO10073-7W 1.088 4.0 2.5 2.5 1.0 CO10075-3W 1.082 4.0 3.5 2.5 2.0 CO10076-4W 1.081 4.0 3.0 1.0 1.5 CO11023-2W 1.085 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.5 CO11023-6W 1.080 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 CO11023-9W 1.081 2.5 1.5 2.0 2.5 CO11037-1W 1.084 3.0 3.5 1.0 1.5 CO11037-5W 1.086 3.5 3.5 2.0 2.5 CO11037-13W 1.082 5.0 4.5 3.5 3.0 Table 3B continued on next page 1 Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0 are acceptable. 11
Table 3B (cont d). Chip color 1 after various storage regimes, and specific gravity of San Luis Valley Chipping study entries - 2015. Specific 5 wks 5 wks/40f 5 wks 5 wks/50f Clone Gravity 40F +3 wks/60f 50F +3 wks/60f CO11037-18W 1.084 4.0 3.5 2.0 2.5 CO11044-1W 1.083 4.5 4.0 2.0 3.0 CO11045-2W 1.090 4.5 4.0 3.0 2.5 CO11048-3W 1.076 5.0 4.0 1.0 1.5 CO11048-6W 1.091 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 CO11048-8W 1.082 3.0 2.5 1.5 2.5 CO11074-1W 1.079 3.0 2.0 1.5 3.0 CO11087-1W 1.086 3.5 4.0 1.5 2.0 CO11087-2W 1.088 2.0 3.0 1.5 1.0 CV97065-1 1.084 3.5 3.5 1.5 2.5 TC09403-4W 1.075 4.0 4.0 2.5 2.5 Atlantic 1.096 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.5 Chipeta 1.091 5.0 4.5 3.0 3.0 Snowden 1.098 4.5 3.5 2.0 1.0 1 Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0 are acceptable. 12
Table 4A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO09036-2RU 366 241 66 202 39 119 1.95/1.12 CO09076-3RU 462 373 80 226 147 61 1.94/1.15 CO09139-7RU 347 228 66 212 16 113 1.86/1.16 CO09205-2RU 342 272 79 232 39 57 1.78/1.16 CO09278-2RU 311 154 49 140 14 154 1.74/1.22 CO09337-1RU 295 249 84 197 52 46 1.64/1.24 Canela Russet 292 264 90 200 63 28 1.74/1.19 Russet Norkotah 285 220 77 149 72 48 1.92/1.19 Mean 338 250 74 195 55 78 1.83/1.18 LSD 2 (0.05) 94 104 11 53 93 34 0.08/0.05 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 13
Table 4B. Grade defects for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO09036-2RU 1.7 MS, GR* 0.0 CO09076-3RU 6.7 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 CO09139-7RU 1.7 GR* 0.0 CO09205-2RU 3.9 GC*, GR 0.0 CO09278-2RU 1.1 MS*, GC, GR 0.0 CO09337-1RU 0.0 0.0 Canela Russet 0.4 GR 0.0 Russet Norkotah 6.0 MS*, GR 1.4 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 14
Table 4C. Growth characteristics of Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO09036-2RU 96 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.5 3.0 3.0 CO09076-3RU 100 4.0 3.5 3.0 4.5 3.0 3.0 CO09139-7RU 96 4.0 3.0 4.2 4.0 3.0 2.5 CO09205-2RU 100 3.0 3.0 3.7 2.5 2.0 1.5 CO09278-2RU 100 3.0 2.0 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 CO09337-1RU 94 2.0 2.5 2.9 2.5 2.0 1.5 Canela Russet 94 1.5 2.5 2.6 3.5 3.0 3.0 Russet Norkotah 96 3.0 3.0 3.1 2.0 2.0 1.0 Mean 97 3.0 2.8 3.5 3.4 3.0 2.3 LSD 6 (0.05) 8 0.6 0.9 1.6 1.4 NS 1.1 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 15
Table 4D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO09036-2RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 2.5 84 4.8 CO09076-3RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 4.8 77 4.0 CO09139-7RU 4.7 4.6 4.7 2.8 77 3.2 CO09205-2RU 5.0 4.2 4.6 1.7 56 4.6 CO09278-2RU 4.9 3.8 4.4 6.7 77 4.0 CO09337-1RU 4.9 4.4 4.7 1.7 63 3.2 Canela Russet 4.9 3.9 4.4 3.1 140 4.4 Russet Norkotah 5.0 3.3 4.2 2.7 91 2.4 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 16
Table 4E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO09036-2RU 1.089 1 2 5 5 CO09076-3RU 1.085 1 3 3 3 CO09139-7RU 1.102 1 3 5 5 CO09205-2RU 1.075 1 1 3 4 CO09278-2RU 1.093 3 3 3 3 CO09337-1RU 1.074 2 3 3 3 Canela Russet 1.097 2 3 5 5 Russet Norkotah 1.085 2 3 4 4 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 17
Table 5A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO08037-2P/P 349 185 50 167 18 165 1.31/1.12 CO08049-1R/RW 410 256 63 250 6 152 1.09/1.13 CO09079-5PW/Y 313 84 25 78 6 229 1.32/1.12 CO09124-1W/Y 401 142 36 142 0 259 1.18/1.21 CO09127-3W/Y 356 131 37 131 0 225 1.05/1.25 CO09128-3W/Y 221 26 12 26 0 195 1.34/1.21 CO09128-5W/Y 350 54 15 54 0 296 0.99/1.21 CO09218-4W/Y 371 172 46 168 0 193 1.17/1.30 Purple Majesty 444 164 37 143 21 278 1.47/1.20 Yukon Gold 398 351 88 201 150 27 1.33/1.18 Mean 362 157 41 136 21 202 1.23/1.20 LSD 2 (0.05) 87 88 19 86 55 89 0.08/0.06 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 18
Table 5B. Grade defects for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO08037-2P/P 0.0 0.0 CO08049-1R/RW 0.4 MS* 0.0 CO09079-5PW/Y 0.0 0.0 CO09124-1W/Y 0.0 0.0 CO09127-3W/Y 0.0 0.0 CO09128-3W/Y 0.5 MS* 0.0 CO09128-5W/Y 0.0 0.0 CO09218-4W/Y 1.3 GR* 0.0 Purple Majesty 0.4 MS* 0.0 Yukon Gold 5.1 GC, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 19
Table 5C. Growth characteristics of Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO08037-2P/P 92 1.5 2.5 4.3 3.5 4.0 3.0 CO08049-1R/RW 98 3.5 3.0 4.9 4.0 3.0 2.5 CO09079-5PW/Y 96 2.5 3.5 3.3 2.5 2.5 1.5 CO09124-1W/Y 96 3.5 3.5 6.3 3.0 2.5 3.0 CO09127-3W/Y 96 4.0 3.5 5.2 2.0 2.5 1.5 CO09128-3W/Y 96 2.5 2.5 4.6 2.0 2.0 1.5 CO09128-5W/Y 98 4.5 3.5 6.5 3.0 2.5 1.5 CO09218-4W/Y 100 1.5 2.0 3.9 3.5 2.5 3.5 Purple Majesty 98 5.0 3.5 4.5 3.5 2.5 1.0 Yukon Gold 94 4.5 3.5 2.2 4.5 3.0 1.0 Mean 96 3.3 3.1 4.6 3.2 2.7 2.0 LSD 6 (0.05) 8 1.1 1.5 2.2 1.1 0.8 1.1 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference. 20
Table 5D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO08037-2P/P -- -- -- 3.8 84 -- CO08049-1R/RW -- -- -- 5.6 91 -- CO09079-5PW/Y 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.6 112 4.8 CO09124-1W/Y 4.7 2.8 3.8 3.5 49 2.0 CO09127-3W/Y 4.1 3.9 4.0 5.1 49 5.0 CO09128-3W/Y 5.0 4.9 5.0 3.0 70 4.4 CO09128-5W/Y 3.8 3.1 3.5 3.8 35 3.6 CO09218-4W/Y 4.6 3.5 4.1 3.3 84 4.4 Purple Majesty -- -- -- 3.6 49 -- Yukon Gold 4.6 4.5 4.6 1.5 91 4.4 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 21
Table 5E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO08037-2P/P 1.081 - - 4 2 CO08049-1R/RW 1.076 - - 3 3 CO09079-5PW/Y 1.070 3 4 2 2 CO09124-1W/Y 1.087 2 3 3 3 CO09127-3W/Y 1.075 1 3 2 3 CO09128-3W/Y 1.069 3 3 2 2 CO09128-5W/Y 1.085 1 1 4 3 CO09218-4W/Y 1.070 3 3 2 3 Purple Majesty 1.085 - - 3 4 Yukon Gold 1.090 1 3 4 5 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 22
Table 6A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015. Total Tuber Length Tuber Shape 1 Clone (Cwt/A) <2" <2-4" >4-6" >6" L:W/W:T CO08029-1RF/R 268 8 143 96 12 2.95/1.04 CO08051-3RF/R 235 18 179 34 0 2.62/1.04 CO08062-3PF/P 278 8 150 71 25 3.07/0.99 Banana 200 2 72 77 20 3.71/1.01 Mean 245 9 136 70 14 3.11/1.02 LSD 2 (0.05) NS 14 NS NS NS 0.22/0.07 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.10=round; 1.11-1.70=oval; 1.71-2.20=oblong, 2.21-2.50=long; >2.50=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 23
Table 6B. Grade defects for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO08029-1RF/R 3.5 MS, GR* 0.0 CO08051-3RF/R 0.8 MS* 0.0 CO08062-3PF/P 8.0 MS* 0.0 Banana 13.8 MS, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 24
Table 6C. Growth characteristics of Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2014. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO08029-1RF/R 95 2.8 2.5 4.2 3.8 3.0 3.0 CO08051-3RF/R 100 1.0 3.0 3.6 4.0 3.0 2.5 CO08062-3PF/P 96 2.5 2.0 4.5 3.0 2.0 3.0 Banana 94 2.5 3.0 4.9 4.0 3.0 2.5 Mean 96 2.2 2.6 4.3 3.0 2.8 2.8 LSD 6 (0.05) NS NS NS NS 0.6 NS NS 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 25
Table 6D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO08029-1RF/R -- -- -- 2.9 91 -- CO08051-3RF/R -- -- -- 2.3 126 -- CO08062-3PF/P -- -- -- 2.9 56 -- Banana 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.8 77 4.4 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing fresh lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 26
Table 6E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 9 wks 45F Harvest 9 wks 45F CO08029-1RF/R 1.083 - - 3 3 CO08051-3RF/R 1.070 - - 3 3 CO08062-3PF/P 1.072 - - 3 3 Banana 1.080 1 2 5 5 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 27
Table 7A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO03202-1RU 434 362 83 265 98 61 2.08/1.21 CO08065-2RU 343 271 79 236 35 61 1.79/1.11 CO08155-2RU/Y 306 228 74 200 28 72 1.96/1.20 CO08231-1RU 411 316 77 260 57 89 1.62/1.20 Canela Russet 347 320 92 219 101 22 1.79/1.25 Russet Norkotah 340 295 87 194 101 31 1.98/1.22 Mean 363 299 82 229 70 56 1.87/1.20 LSD 2 (0.05) 34 45 6 48 51 17 0.12/0.06 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 28
Table 7B. Grade defects for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO03202-1RU 2.4 MS, GR* 0.0 CO08065-2RU 3.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.3 CO08155-2RU/Y 1.7 MS*, GR* 0.0 CO08231-1RU 1.5 MS*, GC, GR 0.0 Canela Russet 1.2 MS, GR* 0.0 Russet Norkotah 4.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 29
Table 7C. Growth characteristics of Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO03202-1RU 98 3.5 2.8 3.0 4.3 3.0 3.3 CO08065-2RU 99 4.3 4.0 3.1 3.5 3.0 3.3 CO08155-2RU/Y 82 3.8 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 CO08231-1RU 96 3.3 3.0 3.2 5.0 3.0 3.0 Canela Russet 95 1.8 2.8 2.2 3.8 3.0 3.3 Russet Norkotah 97 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.0 2.8 1.3 Mean 95 3.3 3.0 2.8 3.6 3.0 2.8 LSD 6 (0.05) 6 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.5 NS 0.6 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 30
Table 7D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Dormancy Loss 2 (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO03202-1RU 5.0 4.2 4.6 3.2 91 5.0 CO08065-2RU 4.4 3.8 4.1 4.7 84 4.4 CO08155-2RU/Y 5.0 4.1 4.6 2.6 56 4.6 CO08231-1RU 4.8 4.1 4.5 3.7 70 4.6 Canela Russet 5.0 3.8 4.4 3.1 133 4.8 Russet Norkotah 4.8 4.2 4.5 2.9 91 3.2 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 31
Table 7E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO03202-1RU 1.090 2 3 3 5 CO08065-2RU 1.099 0 0 5 3 CO08155-2RU/Y 1.091 1 1 4 4 CO08231-1RU 1.088 2 3 3 3 Canela Russet 1.096 2 3 4 4 Russet Norkotah 1.081 1 3 3 5 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 32
Table 8A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO07015-4RU 316 273 86 203 70 32 1.69/1.19 CO07049-1RU 337 272 81 196 76 60 1.80/1.28 Canela Russet 278 248 89 183 65 25 1.72/1.19 Russet Norkotah 293 226 76 144 83 39 1.92/1.18 Mean 306 255 83 182 74 39 1.78/1.22 LSD 2 (0.05) 46 NS 11 35 NS 16 0.10/0.06 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 33
Table 8B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO07015-4RU 3.6 MS, GC, GR* 0.5 CO07049-1RU 1.5 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 Canela Russet 1.9 MS*, GR* 0.0 Russet Norkotah 9.6 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 34
Table 8C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO07015-4RU 97 3.0 3.0 3.1 2.5 3.0 1.3 CO07049-1RU 94 2.0 3.0 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.3 Canela Russet 95 1.0 3.3 1.8 3.5 4.0 3.3 Russet Norkotah 93 2.5 2.8 2.9 2.3 2.8 1.0 Mean 95 2.1 3.0 2.6 2.8 3.2 1.9 LSD6 (0.05) NS 0.5 NS 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 35
Table 8D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO07015-4RU 5.0 4.1 4.6 2.6 56 3.6 CO07049-1RU 5.0 4.8 4.9 3.4 84 4.0 Canela Russet 5.0 3.9 4.5 3.1 140 5.0 Russet Norkotah 5.0 4.0 4.5 2.9 91 4.2 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 36
Table 8E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO07015-4RU 1.083 1 3 3 3 CO07049-1RU 1.082 1 2 4 3 Canela Russet 1.095 1 3 5 4 Russet Norkotah 1.079 1 2 2 3 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 37
Table 9A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO07102-1R 274 173 63 170 3 99 1.15/1.16 Chieftain 466 402 87 256 147 46 1.29/1.25 Red LaSoda 393 321 82 262 59 49 1.13/1.23 Sangre-S10 471 417 89 292 124 44 1.19/1.19 Mean 401 328 80 245 83 60 1.19/1.21 LSD 2 (0.05) 72 53 7 54 47 34 0.07/0.05 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 38
Table 9B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO07102-1R 0.7 MS, GR* 0.3 Chieftain 3.7 MS, SG, GR* 1.3 Red LaSoda 5.8 MS, SG, GC* 2.9 Sangre-S10 2.2 GC*, GR 0.6 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 39
Table 9C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO07102-1R 92 3.8 3.3 4.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 Chieftain 98 4.3 3.3 3.2 3.8 3.3 2.8 Red LaSoda 95 4.3 3.3 2.9 3.0 3.0 1.5 Sangre-S10 97 3.3 3.3 4.0 5.0 3.5 3.3 Mean 96 3.9 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.2 2.1 LSD6 (0.05) NS 1.0 NS 1.3 0.8 NS 0.6 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 40
Table 9D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO07102-1R 4.8 2.7 3.8 7.5 56 1.4 Chieftain 4.6 3.7 4.2 3.0 105 3.6 Red LaSoda 4.5 4.2 4.4 3.3 77 1.6 Sangre-S10 3.7 3.7 3.7 1.9 84 2.6 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 41
Table 9E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO07102-1R 1.083 1 3 4 3 Chieftain 1.079 2 2 3 3 Red LaSoda 1.079 3 3 3 4 Sangre-S10 1.083 4 4 3 4 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 42
Table 10A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO07131-1W/Y 134 1 1 1 0 133 1.10/1.07 CO07370-1W/Y 334 221 66 197 24 105 1.10/1.15 Yukon Gold 388 348 90 197 152 36 1.27/1.22 Mean 285 190 52 132 59 91 1.16/1.15 LSD 2 (0.05) 68 62 5 45 34 24 0.08/0.05 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 43
Table 10B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO07131-1W/Y 0.0 0.0 CO07370-1W/Y 2.3 MS*, GR* 0.0 Yukon Gold 0.9 MS*, GC*, GR* 0.6 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 44
Table 10C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO07131-1W/Y 96 1.3 2.3 4.4 1.8 2.3 1.0 CO07370-1W/Y 93 3.8 2.8 3.4 5.0 3.5 4.8 Yukon Gold 90 4.8 3.5 2.6 3.3 2.8 2.0 Mean 93 3.3 2.8 3.5 3.4 2.8 2.6 LSD6 (0.05) NS 1.0 1.0 NS NS 0.9 0.5 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 45
Table 10D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO07131-1W/Y 5.0 4.6 4.8 8.8 21 3.4 CO07370-1W/Y 4.3 3.3 3.8 5.4 70 1.6 Yukon Gold 5.0 4.0 4.5 1.9 84 4.6 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 46
Table 10E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO07131-1W/Y 1.063 1 3 1 1 CO07370-1W/Y 1.080 1 1 3 3 Yukon Gold 1.089 1 3 4 3 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 47
Table 11A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T CO07070-10W 367 293 79 224 68 65 1.15/1.22 CO07070-13W 299 177 58 144 33 116 1.00/1.15 Atlantic 400 325 81 196 130 61 1.12/1.25 Chipeta 355 249 70 173 76 86 1.27/1.24 Mean 355 261 72 184 77 82 1.14/1.22 LSD 2 (0.05) 80 104 14 37 84 33 0.09/0.06 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 48
Table 11B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 CO07070-10W 2.8 GC, GR* 0.9 CO07070-13W 2.0 MS, GC*, GR 2.1 Atlantic 3.4 MS, GC*, GR* 1.8 Chipeta 5.5 MS, GC*, GR 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 49
Table 11C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 CO07070-10W 94 4.5 3.3 3.7 4.0 3.0 3.0 CO07070-13W 87 3.5 3.3 3.7 2.5 2.5 1.5 Atlantic 92 4.8 4.0 3.1 4.0 3.0 3.0 Chipeta 96 5.0 3.8 3.2 4.3 3.0 3.0 Mean 92 4.4 3.6 3.4 3.7 2.9 2.6 LSD6 (0.05) NS 0.5 0.7 NS 0.9 0.5 0.5 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant. 50
Table 11D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 CO07070-10W 3.9 2.1 3.0 3.2 84 3.6 CO07070-13W 4.7 2.6 3.7 6.2 49 3.4 Atlantic 3.7 1.7 2.7 4.2 77 4.4 Chipeta 4.4 3.3 3.9 2.8 91 4.4 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 51
Table 11E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F CO07070-10W 1.107 3.5 3.0 4.5 3.0 CO07070-13W 1.096 3.5 2.5 3.0 2.5 Atlantic 1.109 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.0 Chipeta 1.095 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.0 1 Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0 are acceptable. 52
Table 12A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T A03141-6 523 464 89 254 210 29 1.68/1.19 A03921-2 430 351 81 251 101 58 1.79/1.25 A06021-1T 383 344 90 274 70 33 1.74/1.17 A06914-3CR 441 345 79 318 27 72 1.62/1.18 AC05039-2RU 271 243 89 169 74 19 1.80/1.16 AO01114-4 327 267 82 219 48 27 1.71/1.15 AO03123-2 420 323 77 287 36 86 1.81/1.11 AOR06070-1KF 479 386 81 273 113 69 1.82/1.16 CO05068-1RU 430 357 83 270 87 42 1.75/1.20 CO05110-6RU 353 310 88 246 64 32 1.74/1.20 CO05175-1RU 451 370 82 216 153 46 2.05/1.12 COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 157 114 73 107 7 42 1.30/1.28 OR05039-4 403 363 90 251 112 25 2.02/1.15 POR06V12-3 382 298 78 228 70 67 1.91/1.11 TX08352-5Ru 49 26 36 22 4 22 1.76/1.17 Canela Russet 329 295 89 200 94 29 1.76/1.20 Ranger Russet 434 363 84 204 158 37 1.81/1.21 Russet Burbank 440 289 65 245 43 118 1.81/1.23 Russet Norkotah 334 282 83 184 98 39 1.91/1.18 Shepody 375 247 66 183 64 66 1.92/1.31 Mean 371 302 79 220 82 48 1.79/1.19 LSD 2 (0.05) 57 60 12 42 44 20 0.20/0.05 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 53
Table 12B. Grade defects for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 A03141-6 5.8 MS*, GC, GR* 0.4 A03921-2 5.0 MS, GR* 0.0 A06021-1T 1.5 GR* 0.0 A06914-3CR 5.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 AC05039-2RU 3.8 MS*, GR* 0.0 AO01114-4 10.0 GC*, GR 0.0 AO03123-2 2.4 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 AOR06070-1KF 4.8 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 CO05068-1RU 7.2 MS, GR* 0.6 CO05110-6RU 3.3 MS*, GR* 0.0 CO05175-1RU 7.8 MS*, GC, GR 6.0 COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 0.2 GR* 0.0 OR05039-4 3.7 MS*, GR 0.0 POR06V12-3 4.3 MS*, SG, GR 0.0 TX08352-5Ru 1.3 GR* 0.0 Canela Russet 1.8 GR* 0.0 Ranger Russet 7.7 MS, SG, GC, GR* 0.0 Russet Burbank 7.8 MS, SG*, GR 1.8 Russet Norkotah 3.9 MS*, SG, GR 0.0 Shepody 16.2 MS, SG*, GC, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 54
Table 12C. Growth characteristics of Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 A03141-6 100 4.5 3.0 3.5 5.0 3.0 3.0 A03921-2 95 3.8 2.8 3.6 5.0 3.0 3.3 A06021-1T 97 3.3 4.0 3.1 3.3 2.5 2.5 A06914-3CR 100 4.3 3.5 3.2 4.3 3.3 2.8 AC05039-2RU 98 3.0 3.5 2.6 2.3 2.3 1.5 AO01114-4 98 3.0 3.0 3.1 4.0 3.3 3.0 AO03123-2 99 3.5 3.0 3.4 4.0 3.0 3.3 AOR06070-1KF 96 4.8 3.5 3.9 4.3 3.0 3.3 CO05068-1RU 100 3.8 3.8 3.7 4.0 3.0 3.3 CO05110-6RU 99 3.3 4.0 2.4 3.0 2.3 1.8 CO05175-1RU 99 4.0 3.3 3.6 3.5 2.8 3.0 COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 87 1.0 2.5 1.2 2.5 2.8 3.8 OR05039-4 100 4.0 3.3 2.8 3.8 3.0 3.0 POR06V12-3 97 3.8 2.5 2.9 5.0 3.0 3.0 TX08352-5Ru 77 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 4.0 5.0 Canela Russet 95 2.5 2.0 2.7 3.5 3.0 3.0 Ranger Russet 98 3.3 2.5 3.4 4.0 3.0 3.0 Russet Burbank 99 4.5 3.8 3.3 4.0 3.0 3.0 Russet Norkotah 95 3.5 2.5 3.4 2.8 2.0 1.0 Shepody 99 4.3 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.8 Mean 96 3.4 3.0 3.0 3.6 2.9 2.9 LSD 6 (0.05) 5 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.5 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference. 55
Table 12D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 A03141-6 5.0 3.7 4.4 2.9 98 3.8 A03921-2 4.6 2.9 3.8 3.5 84 3.4 A06021-1T 4.9 4.0 4.4 2.3 140 3.0 A06914-3CR 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.2 91 4.0 AC05039-2RU 5.0 4.8 4.9 2.2 77 4.2 AO01114-4 4.9 4.2 4.6 2.5 112 4.2 AO03123-2 4.7 4.4 4.6 2.9 91 4.8 AOR06070-1KF 4.9 4.2 4.6 3.6 70 3.2 CO05068-1RU 5.0 4.0 4.5 3.1 49 2.2 CO05110-6RU 4.2 3.4 3.8 2.2 119 2.2 CO05175-1RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 2.7 56 3.6 COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 4.8 4.5 4.7 2.6 49 3.6 OR05039-4 5.0 4.2 4.6 3.2 91 2.2 POR06V12-3 5.0 4.4 4.7 2.2 63 4.6 TX08352-5Ru 4.8 4.3 4.3 1.4 112 4.0 Canela Russet 5.0 4.3 4.7 2.9 140 4.6 Ranger Russet 5.0 3.5 4.3 2.3 70 2.6 Russet Burbank 4.9 4.4 4.7 1.9 133 2.8 Russet Norkotah 4.9 4.8 4.9 3.1 84 3.6 Shepody 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.5 84 3.4 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 56
Table 12E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F A03141-6 1.099 1 1 4 4 A03921-2 1.101 1 1 3 3 A06021-1T 1.087 2 2 4 3 A06914-3CR 1.088 2 3 4 4 AC05039-2RU 1.084 0 2 3 3 AO01114-4 1.096 2 3 4 4 AO03123-2 1.083 1 2 3 4 AOR06070-1KF 1.098 1 1 4 4 CO05068-1RU 1.093 1 0 3 4 CO05110-6RU 1.087 1 3 3 4 CO05175-1RU 1.089 1 2 4 4 COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 1.085 1 2 4 3 OR05039-4 1.095 0 0 4 3 POR06V12-3 1.098 1 1 4 4 TX08352-5Ru 1.067 3 4 2 2 Canela Russet 1.098 2 3 4 3 Ranger Russet 1.089 1 3 2 3 Russet Burbank 1.091 0 2 3 2 Russet Norkotah 1.080 1 2 3 2 Shepody 1.077 1 3 3 3 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 57
Table 13A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T NDA050237B-1R 487 334 68 308 26 147 1.18/1.21 NDC081655-1R 322 154 48 148 6 167 1.09/1.15 NDC092298C-1R 305 185 60 178 7 111 1.18/1.15 Chieftain 425 369 87 275 94 42 1.32/1.26 Red LaSoda 360 303 84 249 55 47 1.14/1.23 Sangre-S10 499 443 89 307 136 41 1.19/1.18 Mean 400 298 73 244 54 93 1.18/1.20 LSD 2 (0.05) 65 63 5 55 22 19 0.06/0.04 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 58
Table 13B. Grade defects for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 NDA050237B-1R 1.1 MS, GC, GR* 0.1 NDC081655-1R 0.4 MS* 0.0 NDC092298C-1R 2.9 MS*, GC, GR 0.0 Chieftain 3.6 MS, SG, GC, GR* 1.1 Red LaSoda 2.5 MS, GC*, GR 2.7 Sangre-S10 3.1 MS, SG, GC*, GR 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 59
Table 13C. Growth characteristics of Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 NDA050237B-1R 91 2.5 3.0 4.1 4.0 3.0 3.0 NDC081655-1R 97 2.5 3.3 3.2 2.3 2.5 1.5 NDC092298C-1R 87 2.3 2.5 3.6 3.3 3.8 2.5 Chieftain 96 3.0 3.0 3.1 4.0 3.0 2.8 Red LaSoda 96 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.8 1.5 Sangre-S10 96 2.5 2.8 3.5 4.8 3.5 3.5 Mean 94 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.5 3.1 2.5 LSD 6 (0.05) 6 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.6 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference. 60
Table 13D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 NDA050237B-1R 5.0 4.9 5.0 3.3 63 4.4 NDC081655-1R 5.0 4.7 4.9 3.7 77 2.4 NDC092298C-1R 4.8 4.5 4.7 3.4 91 3.2 Chieftain 4.6 4.0 4.3 2.6 105 4.4 Red LaSoda 4.8 4.6 4.7 2.6 77 1.6 Sangre-S10 4.3 4.1 4.2 2.2 84 3.2 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 61
Table 13E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F NDA050237B-1R 1.069 4 4 2 2 NDC081655-1R 1.081 1 2 3 3 NDC092298C-1R 1.081 2 3 2 3 Chieftain 1.078 3 4 2 2 Red LaSoda 1.076 2 2 2 3 Sangre-S10 1.080 3 4 1 2 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 62
Table 14A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T A05180-3PY 446 319 72 288 32 124 1.03/1.22 A05182-7Y 440 177 40 174 3 261 1.14/1.18 AC05175-3P/Y 286 206 72 187 18 79 1.08/1.19 ATTX98514-1R/Y 315 193 61 154 40 63 1.42/1.29 ATX05202S-3W/Y 521 361 69 317 44 151 1.30/1.22 CO04021-2R/Y 500 399 80 248 151 47 1.52/1.27 CO05028-4P/PY 418 315 75 272 44 100 1.35/1.27 CO05028-11P/RWP 342 187 54 184 3 152 1.24/1.25 CO05035-1PW/Y 446 393 88 254 139 45 1.32/1.19 CO05037-2R/Y 234 55 24 55 0 179 1.78/1.19 CO05037-3W/Y 349 182 52 176 6 163 1.17/1.33 CO08352-2P/P 235 93 39 90 3 142 1.35/1.12 COA07365-4RY 323 181 56 177 3 132 1.09/1.12 NDA081451CB-1CY 480 271 57 266 4 202 1.24/1.14 Yukon Gold 312 264 85 183 81 30 1.30/1.22 Mean 376 240 62 202 38 125 1.29/1.22 LSD 2 (0.05) 56 55 8 45 26 25 0.08/0.05 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 63
Table 14B. Grade defects for Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 A05180-3PY 0.7 MS*, GR* 0.0 A05182-7Y 0.4 MS*, GR* 0.0 AC05175-3P/Y 0.5 MS*, GR* 0.0 ATTX98514-1R/Y 18.5 MS, SG, GC*, GR 0.0 ATX05202S-3W/Y 1.9 MS*, SG, GC, GR 0.0 CO04021-2R/Y 4.5 MS*, GR 0.3 CO05028-4P/PY 0.6 MS*, GC*, GR* 0.0 CO05028-11P/RWP 0.7 GC*, GR 0.2 CO05035-1PW/Y 2.1 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 CO05037-2R/Y 0.2 MS* 0.0 CO05037-3W/Y 1.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 CO08352-2P/P 0.2 GC* 0.0 COA07365-4RY 2.9 MS*, GC, GR* 0.0 NDA081451CB-1CY 1.4 MS, GC*, GR 0.0 Yukon Gold 5.6 MS, GC, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 64
Table 14C. Growth characteristics of Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 A05180-3PY 100 3.3 3.0 3.5 4.5 3.0 3.0 A05182-7Y 99 3.8 3.5 3.4 4.5 3.0 3.5 AC05175-3P/Y 95 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.3 3.0 1.0 ATTX98514-1R/Y 93 2.8 2.5 2.2 3.0 3.0 1.8 ATX05202S-3W/Y 95 4.8 3.3 3.5 4.3 3.0 3.0 CO04021-2R/Y 93 4.5 2.8 3.8 4.5 3.0 3.0 CO05028-4P/PY 93 4.0 3.5 3.1 4.0 3.0 2.8 CO05028-11P/RWP 96 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.5 3.0 1.8 CO05035-1PW/Y 98 4.0 3.0 3.9 4.3 3.3 3.0 CO05037-2R/Y 98 3.0 3.3 3.8 3.0 3.0 2.3 CO05037-3W/Y 93 4.5 3.5 5.2 3.0 2.5 1.3 CO08352-2P/P 94 3.3 2.3 3.1 2.5 2.8 1.0 COA07365-4RY 96 2.8 2.5 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.0 NDA081451CB-1CY 95 5.0 3.8 4.3 4.5 3.0 3.0 Yukon Gold 90 3.8 3.3 2.8 3.3 3.3 1.0 Mean 95 3.8 3.1 3.5 3.6 3.0 2.2 LSD 6 (0.05) 6 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.4 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference. 65
Table 14D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 A05180-3PY 4.7 4.2 4.5 3.1 70 1.6 A05182-7Y 4.9 2.9 3.9 1.8 105 2.6 AC05175-3P/Y 4.9 4.8 4.9 3.0 77 3.4 ATTX98514-1R/Y 4.8 4.2 4.5 2.4 63 2.6 ATX05202S-3W/Y 5.0 4.2 4.6 2.5 84 5.0 CO04021-2R/Y 5.0 4.5 4.8 3.6 77 2.0 CO05028-4P/PY 4.9 4.9 4.9 3.1 49 2.3 CO05028-11P/RWP -- -- -- 1.8 77 3.5 CO05035-1PW/Y 4.8 4.5 4.7 2.3 49 4.0 CO05037-2R/Y 4.8 4.7 4.8 2.6 49 3.8 CO05037-3W/Y 5.0 4.4 4.7 2.4 77 3.2 CO08352-2P/P -- -- -- 4.6 70 -- COA07365-4RY 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.2 84 4.2 NDA081451CB-1CY 5.0 4.3 4.7 2.3 42 4.4 Yukon Gold 5.0 4.8 4.9 1.4 98 4.2 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 66
Table 14E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Advanced and Western Regional Speciality Trial entries - 2015. Fry Color 1 Fry Texture 2 Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+ Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F A05180-3PY 1.081 3 3 1 3 A05182-7Y 1.084 3 4 1 2 AC05175-3P/Y 1.068 1 1 1 1 ATTX98514-1R/Y 1.071 4 4 1 2 ATX05202S-3W/Y 1.085 1 2 3 4 CO04021-2R/Y 1.091 2 3 3 3 CO05028-4P/PY 1.088 1 1 3 4 CO05028-11P/RWP 1.086 2 2 3 3 CO05035-1PW/Y 1.085 3 3 4 3 CO05037-2R/Y 1.089 1 1 4 4 CO05037-3W/Y 1.077 2 3 2 3 CO08352-2P/P 1.073 - - 3 3 COA07365-4RY 1.081 2 2 3 3 NDA081451CB-1CY 1.097 2 2 4 4 Yukon Gold 1.093 3 3 4 4 1 Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2 are acceptable. 2 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 67
Table 15A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015. Yield (Cwt/A) US #1 Tuber Shape 1 Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T AC00206-2W 296 237 80 168 69 49 1.03/1.13 AC01144-1W 470 265 56 241 24 200 1.02/1.27 AC03433-1W 309 242 79 169 73 41 0.98/1.23 AC03452-2W 388 321 83 264 57 60 1.03/1.19 AC05153-1W 301 161 51 151 10 137 1.15/1.26 AC08094-2W 417 354 85 251 103 56 0.91/1.18 CO09165-6W 367 248 68 206 42 114 1.94/1.19 TC09403-4W 312 224 71 193 31 82 1.05/1.19 Atlantic 441 383 86 218 164 30 1.09/1.27 Chipeta 452 338 74 209 129 78 1.33/1.19 Snowden 396 236 60 214 22 155 0.97/1.30 Mean 377 274 72 208 66 91 1.13/0.22 LSD 2 (0.05) 59 62 11 50 36 36 0.06/0.05 1 L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber. 2 LSD=least significant difference. 68
Table 15B. Grade defects for Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015. % % External External Hollow Clone Defects 1 Defects Observed 2 Heart 3 AC00206-2W 3.4 GC*, GR 0.0 AC01144-1W 0.9 MS*, GR* 0.0 AC03433-1W 8.3 MS, GC*, GR 0.4 AC03452-2W 1.9 MS*, GR* 0.0 AC05153-1W 1.0 GC, GR* 0.0 AC08094-2W 1.7 GC*, GR* 0.0 CO09165-6W 1.6 SG, GC, GR* 0.0 TC09403-4W 1.6 MS, GC*, GR 0.0 Atlantic 6.8 MS, GC, GR* 1.5 Chipeta 7.9 MS, SG, GC*, GR* 0.0 Snowden 1.2 MS*, GC*, GR* 0.0 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked. 3 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 69
Table 15C. Growth characteristics of Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015. % Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine Clone Stand Uniformity 1 Vigor 2 Plant Size 3 Type 4 Maturity 5 AC00206-2W 89 2.3 2.8 2.4 1.8 2.3 2.5 AC01144-1W 99 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.0 2.8 2.8 AC03433-1W 89 2.8 2.5 4.1 3.8 3.0 4.0 AC03452-2W 97 4.0 3.3 2.9 3.5 3.0 3.0 AC05153-1W 96 3.5 3.3 4.1 2.8 3.0 1.3 AC08094-2W 92 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.5 2.8 2.8 CO09165-6W 100 3.3 3.3 3.4 2.8 2.5 1.3 TC09403-4W 91 2.3 3.0 2.9 2.5 3.0 1.8 Atlantic 90 4.5 3.3 3.4 4.0 3.0 3.0 Chipeta 99 5.0 3.8 3.1 4.5 3.0 3.3 Snowden 100 4.0 3.0 4.9 4.3 3.5 2.3 Mean 95 3.5 3.2 3.5 3.3 2.9 2.5 LSD 6 (0.05) 8 0.5 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.6 1 Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence. 2 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 3 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 4 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 5 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 6 LSD=least significant difference. 70
Table 15D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015. % Blackspot Index 1 Clone Bud End Stem End Average Weight Loss 2 Dormancy (Days) 3 Enzymatic Browning 4 AC00206-2W 4.3 3.6 4.0 3.1 77 4.2 AC01144-1W 4.9 3.9 4.4 2.1 77 3.6 AC03433-1W 4.5 4.1 4.3 3.2 70 4.6 AC03452-2W 5.0 4.7 4.9 1.5 63 5.0 AC05153-1W 4.8 3.9 4.4 3.8 77 2.2 AC08094-2W 5.0 4.0 4.5 2.7 133 3.0 CO09165-6W 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.3 56 4.6 TC09403-4W 4.9 4.1 4.5 3.2 63 4.6 Atlantic 2.9 2.3 2.6 3.5 77 4.8 Chipeta 4.4 4.0 4.2 2.2 91 4.4 Snowden 3.5 2.9 3.2 2.7 91 2.2 1 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 2 Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days. 3 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 4 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 71
Table 15E. Chip color 1 after various storage regimes, and specific gravity of Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015. Specific 5 wks 5 wks/40f 5 wks 5 wks/50f Clone Gravity 40F +3 wks/60f 50F +3 wks/60f AC00206-2W 1.092 2.0 2.0 2.5 1.0 AC01144-1W 1.081 3.5 2.0 3.5 2.5 AC03433-1W 1.084 2.5 1.5 4.0 3.0 AC03452-2W 1.081 3.5 1.5 4.0 1.0 AC05153-1W 1.088 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.5 AC08094-2W 1.080 5.0 3.5 4.5 3.0 CO09165-6W 1.083 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 TC09403-4W 1.082 3.5 2.5 4.0 2.5 Atlantic 1.104 4.0 2.5 4.5 3.0 Chipeta 1.088 4.5 3.0 5.0 3.0 Snowden 1.095 5.0 3.0 4.0 1.5 1 Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0 are acceptable. 72
Table 16. Summary comparison of advanced selections and named cultivars for yield, grade, maturity, specific gravity, and grade defects. Total % % # Yield % Vine Specific External Hollow Clone Usage 1 Trials (Cwt/A) US #1 Maturity 2 Gravity Defects 3 Heart 4 Russets AC00395-2RU Dual 6 478 87 3.9 1.101 1.5 0.6 CO05068-1RU Dual 5 447 88 3.7 1.098 3.8 1.3 CO05175-1RU Dual 5 426 89 3.3 1.087 3.5 4.1 AC05039-2RU Dual 4 299 91 1.8 1.086 1.8 0.2 Canela Russet FM 35 349 90 3.3 1.096 1.2 0.1 Centennial Russet FM 35 294 77 3.0 1.079 0.8 0.3 Fortress Russet Dual 7 500 83 3.1 1.099 1.7 0.0 Rio Grande Russet FM 22 533 80 3.0 1.086 2.8 0.4 Russet Norkotah FM 102 369 84 1.7 1.079 2.4 0.4 Specialties CO04056-3P/PW Spec 5 353 32 2.8 1.086 0.2 0.0 CO04067-8R/Y Spec 5 431 65 2.7 1.082 2.6 0.0 CO04099-3W/Y Spec 5 394 52 2.8 1.091 1.1 0.5 AC05175-3P/Y Spec 5 329 64 1.0 1.072 0.1 0.0 CO05037-2R/Y Spec 5 314 32 2.9 1.089 0.0 0.0 CO05037-3W/Y Spec 5 435 55 2.2 1.079 1.0 0.0 CO05028-4P/PY Spec 4 457 69 3.0 1.083 0.5 0.0 CO05028-11P/RWP Spec 4 416 63 2.7 1.084 2.4 1.1 CO05035-1PW/Y Spec 4 472 91 3.3 1.081 1.3 0.7 AC99330-1P/Y Spec 7 495 58 2.9 1.082 0.0 0.2 Mountain Rose Spec 8 383 68 2.2 1.081 1.1 0.0 Purple Majesty Spec 26 463 53 2.2 1.085 0.6 1.0 Yukon Gold Spec 43 400 87 1.9 1.087 2.0 0.5 Table 14 continued on next page 73
Table 16 (cont d). Summary comparison of advanced selections and named cultivars for yield, grade, maturity, specific gravity, and grade defects. Total % % # Yield % Vine Specific External Hollow Clone Usage 1 Trials (Cwt/A) US #1 Maturity 2 Gravity Defects 3 Heart 4 Chippers AC01151-5W Chip 6 465 79 3.1 1.089 2.6 0.2 CO02024-9W Chip 6 416 79 3.0 1.088 1.5 0.2 CO02033-1W Chip 6 426 85 2.7 1.098 0.8 1.6 CO02321-4W Chip 6 423 80 2.8 1.100 3.6 0.0 AC03433-1W Chip 6 396 80 3.6 1.086 7.1 0.2 CO03243-3W Chip 6 465 86 3.3 1.088 2.0 0.5 AC00206-2W Chip 6 321 79 2.8 1.087 2.2 1.1 AC03452-2W Chip 6 446 85 3.1 1.078 1.6 0.5 AC05153-1W Chip 5 342 65 1.7 1.091 1.4 0.1 Atlantic Chip 48 458 86 3.2 1.098 2.8 4.9 Chipeta Chip 45 531 84 3.3 1.090 5.4 0.5 1 FM=fresh market; Dual= fresh market and processing potential; SPEC=specialty. 2 Vine maturity: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; 5=very late. 3 Includes defects such as second growth, growth crack, misshapen, and green. 4 Based on tubers greater than 10 ounces. Several selections that have been discontinued from grower evaluations are available for exclusive release through CSU. Data summaries for all clones are available on request. Please contact David Holm for further information. Included are russets - AC96052-1RU, CO97087-2RU, CO98067-7RU, CO99053-4RU, and CO03276-5RU; reds - CO98012-5R, CO99076-6R, CO99256-2R, CO00277-2R, and CO00291-5R; chippers - CO95051-7W, CO00188-4W, CO00197-3W, and CO00270-7W; and specialties (including yellows) - AC97521-1R/Y, ATC00293-1W/Y, CO97215-2P/P, CO97222-1R/R, CO97226-2R/R, CO97227-2P/PW, CO97232-1R/Y, CO97232-2R/Y, CO99045-1W/Y, CO00405-1RF, CO00412-5W/Y, CO00415-1RF, VC0967-2R/Y, VC1002-3W/Y, and VC1009-1W/Y. 74
Figure 1. Photographs of advanced selections. 75
Figure 1 (cont d). Photographs of advanced selections. 76
Figure 1 (cont d). Photographs of advanced selections. 77
Figure 1 (cont d). Photographs of advanced selections. 78
Table 17A. Detailed data summary for AC00395-2RU. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 478 393-574 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 412 344-478 % US #1 6 87 80-91 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 110 73-129 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 59 28-97 % External Defects 1 6 1.5 0.0-3.0 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.6 0.0-2.0 % Stand 6 99 98-100 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.4 2.8-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 6 3.3 2.3-4.3 Stems/Plant 6 2.8 1.9-3.4 Vine Size 4 6 4.7 4.3-5.0 Vine Type 5 6 3.2 3.0-4.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 3.9 3.8-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 7 7 7 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.6-5.0 4.7-5.0 Weight Loss 8 7 2.3 2.0-2.8 Dormancy 9 7 100 70-155 Enzymatic Browning 10 7 4.7 4.6-4.8 Specific Gravity 7 1.101 1.092-1.108 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 7 7 1.7 2.6 1.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 7 7 4.0 4.0 3.0-5.0 3.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 79
Table 17B. Detailed data summary for CO05068-1RU. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 447 420-489 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 393 357-423 % US #1 5 88 83-92 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 133 87-188 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 37 28-54 % External Defects 1 5 3.8 1.4-7.2 % Hollow Heart 2 5 1.3 0.3-3.4 % Stand 5 99 96-100 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.4 3.0-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 5 3.2 2.5-3.8 Stems/Plant 5 3.1 2.7-3.7 Vine Size 4 5 4.4 4.0-5.0 Vine Type 5 5 3.1 3.0-3.5 Vine Maturity 6 5 3.7 3.0-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 4.8 4.3 4.6 4.5-5.0 3.7-4.8 Weight Loss 8 6 3.0 2.5-3.7 Dormancy 9 6 65 42-84 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 2.2 2.0-2.8 Specific Gravity 6 1.098 1.093-1.106 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 0.3 0.7 0.0-1.0 0.0-1.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 3.5 3.8 3.0-4.0 3.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 80
Table 17C. Detailed data summary for CO05175-1RU. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 426 410-451 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 378 360-406 % US #1 5 89 82-92 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 195 153-264 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 34 17-49 % External Defects 1 5 3.5 1.7-7.8 % Hollow Heart 2 5 4.1 0.8-6.0 % Stand 5 96 92-99 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.1 2.5-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 5 3.2 2.5-3.5 Stems/Plant 5 3.6 3.2-3.9 Vine Size 4 5 4.1 3.5-4.5 Vine Type 5 5 2.9 2.8-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 5 3.3 3.0-3.5 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9-5.0 4.6-5.0 Weight Loss 8 6 3.3 2.7-4.3 Dormancy 9 6 69 56-77 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 3.2 2.0-4.0 Specific Gravity 6 1.087 1.083-1.093 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 1.0 1.3 0.0-2.0 0.0-2.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 3.8 4.2 3.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 81
Table 17D. Detailed data summary for AC05039-2RU. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 4 299 271-366 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 273 243-341 % US #1 4 91 89-93 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 71 52-97 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 22 19-27 % External Defects 1 4 1.8 0.5-3.8 % Hollow Heart 2 4 0.2 0.0-0.6 % Stand 4 98 92-100 Emergence Uniformity 4 3.3 3.0-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 4 3.1 3.0-3.5 Stems/Plant 4 2.6 2.3-3.0 Vine Size 4 4 2.2 1.0-3.0 Vine Type 5 4 2.4 2.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 4 1.8 1.5-2.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 5 5 5 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0-5.0 4.7-5.0 Weight Loss 8 5 2.3 1.8-3.0 Dormancy 9 5 82 55-101 Enzymatic Browning 10 5 4.4 4.2-4.6 Specific Gravity 5 1.086 1.084-1.088 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 5 5 1.0 2.2 0.0-2.0 1.0-3.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 5 5 3.4 3.2 3.0-4.0 3.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 82
Table 17E. Detailed data summary for Canela Russet. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 35 349 214-468 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 35 313 182-421 % US #1 35 90 77-96 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 35 100 28-203 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 35 31 14-61 % External Defects 1 35 1.2 0.0-6.0 % Hollow Heart 2 35 0.1 0.0-0.9 % Stand 34 95 82-100 Emergence Uniformity 34 2.9 2.5-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 34 2.3 1.0-3.0 Stems/Plant 34 2.0 1.1-4.2 Vine Size 4 34 3.8 3.0-5.0 Vine Type 5 34 3.5 3.0 4.3 Vine Maturity 6 34 3.3 2.8-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 44 44 44 4.8 4.4 4.6 3.7-5.0 2.5-5.0 Weight Loss 8 44 3.5 1.3-7.0 Dormancy 9 44 141 83-195 Enzymatic Browning 10 44 4.5 3.4-5.0 Specific Gravity 44 1.096 1.075-1.111 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 44 44 1.9 2.3 0.0-3.0 0.0-4.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 44 44 3.9 3.9 3.0-5.0 3.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 83
Table 17F. Detailed data summary for Centennial Russet. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 35 294 177-392 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 35 229 129-320 % US #1 35 77 62-89 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 35 26 4-72 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 35 62 32-102 % External Defects 1 35 0.8 0.0-3.3 % Hollow Heart 2 35 0.3 0.0-3.3 % Stand 35 97 90-99 Emergence Uniformity 15 3.2 3.0-3.5 Vine Vigor 3 15 2.2 1.0-3.0 Stems/Plant 27 3.0 2.2-3.6 Vine Size 4 15 2.6 2.0-3.0 Vine Type 5 15 3.2 2.8-3.8 Vine Maturity 6 35 3.0 2.5-3.5 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 48 48 51 4.9 4.8 4.8 3.7-5.0 4.2-5.0 Weight Loss 8 51 6.0 1.6-9.2 Dormancy 9 44 88 57-123 Enzymatic Browning 10 46 4.1 3.2-5.0 Specific Gravity 58 1.079 1.068-1.092 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 50 50 3.7 3.9 3.0-4.0 3.0-5.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 50 50 2.4 2.3 1.0-4.0 1.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 84
Table 17G. Detailed data summary for Fortress Russet. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 7 500 435-545 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 7 415 377-457 % US #1 7 83 77-91 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 7 105 74-148 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 7 75 32-118 % External Defects 1 7 1.7 0.3-3.5 % Hollow Heart 2 7 0.0 0.0-0.2 % Stand 7 97 94-100 Emergence Uniformity 7 3.4 2.8-4.8 Vine Vigor 3 7 3.7 2.5-4.3 Stems/Plant 7 3.7 2.1-6.3 Vine Size 4 7 4.4 3.0-5.0 Vine Type 5 7 3.1 3.0-3.5 Vine Maturity 6 7 3.1 3.0-3.5 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 8 8 8 4.6 4.4 4.5 3.8-5.0 3.7-5.0 Weight Loss 8 8 2.3 1.4-2.8 Dormancy 9 8 94 82-132 Enzymatic Browning 10 8 2.8 1.4-4.6 Specific Gravity 8 1.099 1.090-1.104 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 8 8 0.8 1.1 0.0-2.0 0.0-2.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 8 8 3.9 4.0 3.0-5.0 3.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 85
Table 17H. Detailed data summary for Rio Grande Russet. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 22 533 367-683 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 22 426 255-603 % US #1 22 80 65-91 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 22 123 14-275 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 22 92 33-202 % External Defects 1 22 2.8 0.1-8.7 % Hollow Heart 2 22 0.4 0.0-4.1 % Stand 22 99 96-100 Emergence Uniformity 22 3.5 3.0-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 22 3.6 2.0-4.5 Stems/Plant 22 3.4 2.0-4.8 Vine Size 4 22 4.1 3.5-5.0 Vine Type 5 22 3.1 3.0-3.5 Vine Maturity 6 22 3.0 2.5-3.5 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 33 33 33 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.1-5.0 3.0-5.0 Weight Loss 8 33 3.7 1.5-7.1 Dormancy 9 33 93 68-123 Enzymatic Browning 10 33 3.9 3.0-5.0 Specific Gravity 33 1.086 1.067-1.094 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 33 33 2.3 2.8 1.0-4.0 2.0-4.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 33 33 3.1 3.0 2.0-4.0 2.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 86
Table 17I. Detailed data summary for Russet Norkotah. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 102 369 159-557 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 102 311 101-480 % US #1 102 84 59-94 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 102 105 10-247 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 102 50 13-131 % External Defects 1 102 2.4 0.0-9.6 % Hollow Heart 2 102 0.4 0.0-2.8 % Stand 101 98 88-100 Emergence Uniformity 92 3.2 1.0-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 92 2.9 1.0-4.0 Stems/Plant 97 3.6 2.3-5.7 Vine Size 4 92 2.4 1.0-4.0 Vine Type 5 92 2.6 2.0-3.5 Vine Maturity 6 101 1.7 1.0-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 102 102 103 4.7 4.4 4.6 2.9-5.0 2.6-5.0 Weight Loss 8 103 3.5 1.0-7.1 Dormancy 9 102 97 70-140 Enzymatic Browning 10 102 3.4 2.2-4.8 Specific Gravity 106 1.079 1.066-1.091 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 103 103 2.0 2.4 1.0-4.0 1.0-4.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 103 103 2.7 2.8 1.0-4.0 1.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 87
Table 17J. Detailed data summary for CO04056-3P/PW. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 353 281-446 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 123 61-234 % US #1 5 32 20-52 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 2 0-5 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 230 211-249 % External Defects 1 5 0.2 0.0-0.3 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 5 98 97-99 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.0 2.8-3.3 Vine Vigor 3 5 2.4 1.8-3.0 Stems/Plant 5 4.4 3.6-5.6 Vine Size 4 5 3.5 3.0-4.0 Vine Type 5 5 3.0 3.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 5 2.8 2.0-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Weight Loss 8 6 3.0 1.7-6.6 Dormancy 9 6 85 70-102 Enzymatic Browning 10 --- --- --- --- Specific Gravity 6 1.086 1.077-1.094 Fry Color 11 Harvest --- --- --- --- Storage --- --- --- --- Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 2.7 3.0 2.0-3.0 2.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 88
Table 17K. Detailed data summary for CO04067-8R/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 431 369-504 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 283 221-372 % US #1 5 65 60-74 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 19 10-46 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 137 121-158 % External Defects 1 5 2.6 1.5-3.9 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 5 95 92-96 Emergence Uniformity 5 2.9 2.5-3.3 Vine Vigor 3 5 3.1 3.0-3.3 Stems/Plant 5 4.7 3.3-6.6 Vine Size 4 5 3.9 3.3-4.3 Vine Type 5 5 3.1 3.0-3.5 Vine Maturity 6 5 2.7 2.3-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 4.7 3.0 3.8 4.3-4.8 2.6-3.9 Weight Loss 8 6 3.5 1.5-5.1 Dormancy 9 6 57 49-74 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 3.8 2.8-4.6 Specific Gravity 6 1.082 1.079-1.089 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 1.3 1.2 1.0-2.0 1.0-2.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 2.3 2.3 2.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 89
Table 17L. Detailed data summary for CO04099-3W/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 394 335-454 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 207 168-274 % US #1 5 52 44-60 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 7 2-11 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 182 160-214 % External Defects 1 5 1.1 0.0-3.4 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.5 0.0-1.3 % Stand 5 98 96-100 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.4 3.0-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 5 3.5 3.3-4.0 Stems/Plant 5 4.6 3.3-5.7 Vine Size 4 5 3.7 3.0-4.0 Vine Type 5 5 2.9 2.8-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 5 2.8 1.8-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 4.2 3.7 4.0 3.6-4.7 2.3-4.6 Weight Loss 8 6 2.2 1.7-3.1 Dormancy 9 6 81 63-116 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 3.8 2.8-4.6 Specific Gravity 6 1.091 1.085-1.095 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 1.0 0.7 0.0-2.0 0.0-1.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 3.8 3.8 3.0-4.0 3.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 90
Table 17M. Detailed data summary for AC05175-3P/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 329 267-389 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 214 135-299 % US #1 5 64 48-81 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 15 4-43 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 115 69-171 % External Defects 1 5 0.1 0.0-0.5 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 5 96 93-98 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.3 3.0-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 5 2.8 2.5-3.0 Stems/Plant 5 3.6 2.8-4.4 Vine Size 4 5 2.1 1.5-2.5 Vine Type 5 5 2.8 2.5-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 5 1.0 1.0-1.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 4.9 4.6 4.8 4.6-5.0 4.1-5.0 Weight Loss 8 6 3.8 2.6-5.3 Dormancy 9 6 81 71-95 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 3.3 2.6-4.0 Specific Gravity 6 1.072 1.068-1.074 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 1.0 0.8 0.0-2.0 0.0-1.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 2.3 2.3 1.0-5.0 1.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 91
Table 17N. Detailed data summary for CO05037-2R/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 314 234-389 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 111 55-187 % US #1 5 32 22-47 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 6 0-28 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 202 179-226 % External Defects 1 5 0.0 0.0-0.2 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 5 99 97-100 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.3 3.0-3.5 Vine Vigor 3 5 2.6 1.8-3.3 Stems/Plant 5 4.8 3.8-5.5 Vine Size 4 5 3.1 2.5-3.5 Vine Type 5 5 3.2 3.0-3.8 Vine Maturity 6 5 2.9 2.3-3.3 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.6-5.0 4.2-5.0 Weight Loss 8 6 2.7 2.0-3.1 Dormancy 9 6 60 42-81 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 4.2 3.8-4.6 Specific Gravity 6 1.089 1.083-1.094 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 1.2 1.3 1.0-2.0 1.0-3.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 3.8 3.8 3.0-4.0 3.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 92
Table 17O. Detailed data summary for CO05037-3W/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 435 349-532 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 240 182-313 % US #1 5 55 51-60 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 9 2-19 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 190 163-211 % External Defects 1 5 1.0 0.4-1.4 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 5 93 88-96 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.4 2.5-4.5 Vine Vigor 3 5 3.8 3.3-5.0 Stems/Plant 5 6.6 5.2-7.5 Vine Size 4 5 3.3 3.0-3.5 Vine Type 5 5 3.0 2.8-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 5 2.2 1.3-2.8 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 6 6 6 4.9 4.7 4.8 4.7-5.0 4.5-5.0 Weight Loss 8 6 2.7 2.4-3.2 Dormancy 9 6 82 77-88 Enzymatic Browning 10 6 3.6 3.2-4.2 Specific Gravity 6 1.079 1.077-1.083 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 6 6 1.5 2.5 1.0-2.0 1.0-3.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 2.5 3.0 2.0-3.0 2.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 93
Table 17P. Detailed data summary for CO05028-4P/PY. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 4 457 393-568 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 322 202-452 % US #1 4 69 52-80 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 51 30-89 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 132 100-188 % External Defects 1 4 0.5 0.3-0.7 % Hollow Heart 2 4 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 4 96 93-99 Emergence Uniformity 4 3.4 3.0-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 4 3.4 2.5-4.0 Stems/Plant 4 3.2 2.2-3.8 Vine Size 4 4 3.9 3.5-4.0 Vine Type 5 4 3.0 3.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 4 3.0 2.8-3.3 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Weight Loss 8 5 3.4 2.7-4.5 Dormancy 9 5 60 49-91 Enzymatic Browning 10 4 4.0 3.2-4.8 Specific Gravity 5 1.083 1.078-1.088 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 4 4 1.3 1.5 1.0-2.0 0.0-3.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 5 5 2.6 3.4 2.0-3.0 3.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 94
Table 17Q. Detailed data summary for CO05028-11P/RWP. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 4 416 342-542 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 269 187-422 % US #1 4 63 54-78 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 9 2-25 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 137 109-176 % External Defects 1 4 2.4 0.7-3.8 % Hollow Heart 2 4 1.1 0.2-2.4 % Stand 4 97 94-100 Emergence Uniformity 4 3.5 3.0-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 4 3.1 2.0-4.0 Stems/Plant 4 3.2 2.4-3.6 Vine Size 4 4 3.8 3.5-4.0 Vine Type 5 4 3.0 3.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 4 2.7 1.8-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Weight Loss 8 5 2.2 1.6-3.1 Dormancy 9 5 85 76-103 Enzymatic Browning 10 4 4.2 3.5-5.0 Specific Gravity 5 1.084 1.079-1.088 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 4 4 2.0 2.5 1.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 5 5 2.8 2.6 2.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 95
Table 17R. Detailed data summary for CO05035-1PW/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 4 472 416-560 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 429 379-525 % US #1 4 91 88-94 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 181 139-221 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 38 31-45 % External Defects 1 4 1.3 0.0-2.1 % Hollow Heart 2 4 0.7 0.0-2.1 % Stand 4 93 84-98 Emergence Uniformity 4 3.2 2.8-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 4 3.3 2.8-4.0 Stems/Plant 4 3.8 2.9-4.2 Vine Size 4 4 4.0 3.5-4.3 Vine Type 5 4 2.7 2.0-3.3 Vine Maturity 6 4 3.3 3.0-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 5 5 5 4.9 4.7 4.8 4.8-5.0 4.5-5.0 Weight Loss 8 5 2.8 2.3-4.1 Dormancy 9 5 47 34-70 Enzymatic Browning 10 5 4.2 3.2-4.6 Specific Gravity 5 1.081 1.078-1.085 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 5 5 2.4 3.0 2.0-3.0 2.0-4.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 5 5 2.8 3.0 2.0-3.0 3.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 96
Table 17S. Detailed data summary for AC99330-1P/Y. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 7 495 441-531 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 7 288 208-376 % US #1 7 58 43-74 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 7 24 3-69 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 7 207 129-271 % External Defects 1 7 0.0 0.0-0.2 % Hollow Heart 2 7 0.2 0.0-0.6 % Stand 7 98 96-99 Emergence Uniformity 7 3.2 2.8-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 7 3.7 3.0-4.5 Stems/Plant 7 4.9 3.0-6.7 Vine Size 4 7 3.4 2.8-4.0 Vine Type 5 7 2.5 2.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 7 2.9 2.0-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 8 8 8 4.7 4.4 4.6 4.0-5.0 3.7-4.8 Weight Loss 8 8 3.3 1.4-5.0 Dormancy 9 8 60 49-66 Enzymatic Browning 10 8 2.9 2.2-3.6 Specific Gravity 8 1.082 1.075-1.090 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 8 8 1.9 3.1 1.0-4.0 3.0-4.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 8 8 2.9 3.1 2.0-4.0 3.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 97
Table 17T. Detailed data summary for Mountain Rose. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 8 383 288-449 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 8 262 150-354 % US #1 8 68 52-79 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 8 23 4-63 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 8 116 91-148 % External Defects 1 8 1.1 0.0-2.4 % Hollow Heart 2 8 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 8 98 94-100 Emergence Uniformity 8 3.6 3.0-4.3 Vine Vigor 3 8 2.7 2.0-3.0 Stems/Plant 8 3.7 2.9-4.9 Vine Size 4 8 2.7 2.3-3.0 Vine Type 5 8 2.9 2.5-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 8 2.2 1.5-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Weight Loss 8 11 4.1 1.3-6.3 Dormancy 9 11 102 77-153 Enzymatic Browning 10 --- --- --- --- Specific Gravity 11 1.081 1.074-1.086 Fry Color 11 Harvest --- --- --- --- Storage --- --- --- --- Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 6 6 2.5 2.7 1.0-3.0 2.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 98
Table 17U. Detailed data summary for Purple Majesty. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 26 463 251-606 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 26 250 57-401 % US #1 26 53 23-72 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 26 27 0-61 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 26 210 118-326 % External Defects 1 26 0.6 0.0-1.7 % Hollow Heart 2 26 1.0 0.0-3.4 % Stand 26 97 92-100 Emergence Uniformity 26 3.3 2.5-5.0 Vine Vigor 3 26 3.5 2.3-4.5 Stems/Plant 26 4.4 3.2-6.1 Vine Size 4 26 3.1 2.3-4.0 Vine Type 5 26 2.7 2.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 26 2.2 1.5-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Weight Loss 8 36 3.6 1.1-6.8 Dormancy 9 36 61 41-85 Enzymatic Browning 10 --- --- --- --- Specific Gravity 36 1.085 1.074-1.094 Fry Color 11 Harvest --- --- --- --- Storage --- --- --- --- Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 31 31 2.7 2.8 1.0-4.0 1.0-4.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 99
Table 17V. Detailed data summary for Yukon Gold. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 43 400 308-513 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 43 355 257-444 % US #1 43 89 78-94 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 43 150 55-248 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 43 37 22-66 % External Defects 1 43 2.0 0.0-5.6 % Hollow Heart 2 43 0.5 0.0-2.2 % Stand 43 96 90-100 Emergence Uniformity 43 3.3 2.5-4.3 Vine Vigor 3 43 3.7 3.0-5.0 Stems/Plant 43 2.5 1.6-3.8 Vine Size 4 43 3.2 2.5-4.5 Vine Type 5 43 2.7 2.0-3.5 Vine Maturity 6 43 1.9 1.0-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 55 55 55 4.4 4.2 4.3 2.0-5.0 2.4-5.0 Weight Loss 8 55 2.1 1.0-4.3 Dormancy 9 55 90 63-132 Enzymatic Browning 10 55 4.4 3.4-5.0 Specific Gravity 55 1.087 1.079-1.093 Fry Color 11 Harvest Storage 55 55 1.7 2.7 1.0-4.0 1.0-4.0 Fry Texture 12 Harvest Storage 55 55 3.2 3.1 1.0-4.0 1.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 100
Table 17W. Detailed data summary for AC01151-5W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 465 402-557 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 368 303-430 % US #1 6 79 67-90 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 68 53-115 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 85 45-134 % External Defects 1 6 2.6 0.6-7.4 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.2 0.0-0.6 % Stand 6 97 96-99 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.3 2.8-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 6 3.0 2.8-3.5 Stems/Plant 6 3.5 2.3-4.8 Vine Size 4 6 3.4 3.0-3.8 Vine Type 5 6 3.0 3.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 3.1 3.0-3.3 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 15 15 15 4.5 3.2 3.9 3.2-5.0 1.3-5.0 Weight Loss 8 15 2.5 1.6-4.4 Dormancy 9 15 96 70-127 Enzymatic Browning 10 15 1.9 1.2-3.6 Specific Gravity 16 1.089 1.075-1.103 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 16 16 16 16 4.4 3.6 2.5 2.4 3.0-5.0 2.5-4.5 1.0-4.0 1.0-3.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 101
Table 17X. Detailed data summary for CO02024-9W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 416 343-480 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 327 295-369 % US #1 6 79 69-89 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 50 25-71 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 83 39-146 % External Defects 1 6 1.5 0.3-3.7 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.2 0.0-0.8 % Stand 6 97 96-98 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.2 3.0-3.5 Vine Vigor 3 6 3.5 3.3-4.0 Stems/Plant 6 3.5 2.6-4.9 Vine Size 4 6 3.2 2.8-3.8 Vine Type 5 6 3.0 2.8-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 3.0 3.0-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 15 15 15 4.4 3.0 3.7 3.8-5.0 1.6-4.7 Weight Loss 8 15 3.1 2.1-3.9 Dormancy 9 15 100 84-134 Enzymatic Browning 10 15 3.5 1.8-4.6 Specific Gravity 16 1.088 1.080-1.095 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 16 16 16 16 3.8 2.6 1.6 1.5 2.5-4.5 1.5-4.0 1.0-2.5 1.0-2.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 102
Table 17Y. Detailed data summary for CO02033-1W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 426 368-484 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 361 317-399 % US #1 6 85 79-89 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 50 15-75 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 61 36-92 % External Defects 1 6 0.8 0.2-1.6 % Hollow Heart 2 6 1.6 0.0-2.6 % Stand 6 98 96-100 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.2 3.0-3.5 Vine Vigor 3 6 3.7 3.0-4.0 Stems/Plant 6 3.6 2.7-4.7 Vine Size 4 6 3.3 3.0-3.8 Vine Type 5 6 3.0 2.8-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 2.7 2.0-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 15 15 15 3.7 3.3 3.5 2.7-5.0 2.0-4.7 Weight Loss 8 15 3.4 2.3-5.2 Dormancy 9 15 111 70-167 Enzymatic Browning 10 15 3.6 2.4-4.6 Specific Gravity 16 1.098 1.090-1.106 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 16 16 16 16 3.4 2.7 1.9 2.0 2.5-4.0 1.0-3.5 1.0-3.0 1.0-3.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 103
Table 17Z. Detailed data summary for CO02321-4W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 423 351-508 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 340 250-397 % US #1 6 80 71-85 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 76 54-105 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 66 43-95 % External Defects 1 6 3.6 2.5-5.6 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.0 0.0-0.0 % Stand 6 96 91-99 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.5 3.0-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 6 4.1 3.5-4.8 Stems/Plant 6 3.2 2.1-4.1 Vine Size 4 6 3.3 3.0-3.5 Vine Type 5 6 2.9 2.8-3.3 Vine Maturity 6 6 2.8 2.5-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 15 15 15 4.7 3.9 4.3 4.0-5.0 3.0-4.5 Weight Loss 8 15 3.5 2.5-4.5 Dormancy 9 15 83 63-106 Enzymatic Browning 10 15 4.3 3.6-4.8 Specific Gravity 16 1.100 1.092-1.109 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 16 16 16 16 3.7 2.5 1.7 1.8 2.0-4.5 1.0-3.5 1.0-2.5 1.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 104
Table 17AA. Detailed data summary for AC03433-1W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 396 309-492 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 320 242-421 % US #1 6 80 74-86 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 69 22-95 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 50 41-64 % External Defects 1 6 7.1 3.7-10.1 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.2 0.0-1.0 % Stand 6 94 89-98 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.0 2.3-4.3 Vine Vigor 3 6 2.8 2.5-3.3 Stems/Plant 6 3.4 2.5-4.6 Vine Size 4 6 3.8 3.5-4.0 Vine Type 5 6 3.0 3.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 3.6 3.0-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 14 14 14 4.8 4.2 4.5 4.3-5.0 2.5-5.0 Weight Loss 8 14 3.4 2.2-5.5 Dormancy 9 14 81 69-101 Enzymatic Browning 10 14 4.4 3.4-5.0 Specific Gravity 15 1.086 1.076-1.092 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 15 15 15 15 3.3 2.6 1.8 1.8 2.5-5.0 1.5-4.0 1.0-4.0 1.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 105
Table 17AB. Detailed data summary for CO03243-3W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 465 439-501 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 401 357-438 % US #1 6 86 81-88 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 93 76-113 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 55 46-71 % External Defects 1 6 2.0 0.6-2.8 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.5 0.0-0.9 % Stand 6 97 92-99 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.3 2.5-5.0 Vine Vigor 3 6 3.6 3.3-4.3 Stems/Plant 6 3.0 2.5-3.5 Vine Size 4 6 4.0 3.8-4.3 Vine Type 5 6 3.0 3.0-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 3.3 3.0-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 14 14 14 4.4 3.7 4.1 3.4-5.0 2.9-4.5 Weight Loss 8 14 3.3 2.3-4.9 Dormancy 9 14 82 63-101 Enzymatic Browning 10 14 3.2 2.4-4.2 Specific Gravity 15 1.088 1.082-1.095 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 15 15 15 15 3.8 2.7 2.0 1.9 2.5-5.0 1.0-4.0 1.0-3.0 1.0-3.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 106
Table 17AC. Detailed data summary for AC00206-2W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 321 279-362 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 255 210-299 % US #1 6 79 75-83 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 38 16-69 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 60 49-70 % External Defects 1 6 2.2 0.5-3.4 % Hollow Heart 2 6 1.1 0.0-2.5 % Stand 6 96 89-98 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.1 2.3-3.3 Vine Vigor 3 6 2.6 2.0-3.0 Stems/Plant 6 2.5 2.2-2.9 Vine Size 4 6 2.1 1.3-2.8 Vine Type 5 6 2.7 2.5-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 2.8 2.3-3.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 13 13 13 4.5 3.8 4.2 3.7-5.0 2.0-4.9 Weight Loss 8 13 3.4 2.5-5.0 Dormancy 9 13 85 63-103 Enzymatic Browning 10 13 4.4 3.4-5.0 Specific Gravity 13 1.087 1.083-1.092 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 14 14 14 14 2.6 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.5-3.5 1.0-3.0 1.0-3.0 1.0-2.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 107
Table 17AD. Detailed data summary for AC03452-2W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 446 388-505 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 377 321-428 % US #1 6 85 81-88 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 63 34-91 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 62 46-74 % External Defects 1 6 1.6 1.2-2.2 % Hollow Heart 2 6 0.5 0.0-1.5 % Stand 6 98 97-99 Emergence Uniformity 6 3.6 3.3-4.0 Vine Vigor 3 6 3.8 3.3-4.3 Stems/Plant 6 3.4 2.7-4.4 Vine Size 4 6 3.4 3.0-3.8 Vine Type 5 6 2.8 2.3-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 6 3.1 3.0-3.3 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 13 13 13 4.9 4.8 4.9 4.6-5.0 3.6-5.0 Weight Loss 8 13 1.9 1.4-2.8 Dormancy 9 13 72 52-95 Enzymatic Browning 10 13 4.8 4.4-5.0 Specific Gravity 14 1.078 1.073-1.087 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 14 14 14 14 3.4 2.7 1.8 1.8 2.5-4.5 1.0-4.0 1.0-4.0 1.0-3.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 108
Table 17AE. Detailed data summary for AC05153-1W. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 5 342 301-376 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 228 161-277 % US #1 5 65 51-74 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 15 10-22 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 110 75-137 % External Defects 1 5 1.4 0.1-3.5 % Hollow Heart 2 5 0.1 0.0-0.3 % Stand 5 97 96-99 Emergence Uniformity 5 3.6 3.3-3.8 Vine Vigor 3 5 3.5 3.0-4.0 Stems/Plant 5 4.9 4.1-5.7 Vine Size 4 5 2.5 2.0-3.0 Vine Type 5 5 2.8 2.3-3.0 Vine Maturity 6 5 1.7 1.0-2.8 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 11 11 11 4.6 3.9 4.3 3.9-4.9 2.1-4.7 Weight Loss 8 11 4.6 3.5-6.7 Dormancy 9 11 88 77-113 Enzymatic Browning 10 11 3.2 2.0-4.4 Specific Gravity 12 1.091 1.085-1.099 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 12 12 12 12 4.0 3.0 2.3 2.2 2.5-4.5 1.0-4.0 1.5-4.0 1.0-3.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 109
Table 17AF. Detailed data summary for Atlantic. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 48 458 307-597 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 48 394 265-512 % US #1 48 86 76-93 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 48 146 58-290 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 48 50 19-109 % External Defects 1 48 2.8 0.1-9.1 % Hollow Heart 2 48 4.9 0.2-16.4 % Stand 48 96 88-100 Emergence Uniformity 42 3.6 3.0-4.8 Vine Vigor 3 42 3.6 2.8-4.3 Stems/Plant 48 3.2 2.2-4.9 Vine Size 4 42 3.3 2.2-4.0 Vine Type 5 42 3.0 2.8-3.8 Vine Maturity 6 48 3.2 2.8-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 70 70 71 3.3 2.8 3.1 1.8-5.0 1.4-4.3 Weight Loss 8 71 4.3 1.1-7.9 Dormancy 9 68 85 56-119 Enzymatic Browning 10 69 4.5 3.8-5.0 Specific Gravity 72 1.098 1.083-1.120 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 72 72 72 72 4.1 3.6 2.8 2.6 2.0-5.0 1.5-5.0 1.0-4.5 1.0-5.0 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 110
Table 17AG. Detailed data summary for Chipeta. Variable # Trials Mean Range Total Yield (Cwt/A) 45 531 355-757 Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 45 447 249-606 % US #1 45 84 70-90 Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 45 166 52-388 Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 45 55 22-119 % External Defects 1 45 5.4 1.1-13.0 % Hollow Heart 2 45 0.5 0.0-4.0 % Stand 45 98 94-100 Emergence Uniformity 38 3.6 3.0-5.0 Vine Vigor 3 38 4.1 3.2-5.0 Stems/Plant 44 3.4 2.0-4.9 Vine Size 4 38 4.4 4.0-5.0 Vine Type 5 38 3.1 2.5-4.0 Vine Maturity 6 45 3.3 3.0-4.0 Blackspot 7 Bud End Stem End Average 66 66 68 4.0 3.8 3.9 2.2-5.0 1.4-5.0 Weight Loss 8 68 3.0 1.0-8.0 Dormancy 9 64 102 70-153 Enzymatic Browning 10 65 4.0 2.8-5.0 Specific Gravity 68 1.090 1.070-1.107 Chip Color 11 40 40R 50 50R 68 68 68 68 4.6 3.8 2.7 2.4 3.0-5.0 1.5-5.0 1.0-5.0 1.0-4.5 Refer to footnotes on page 112. 111
Footnotes for Tables 17A-17AG: 1 Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects. 2 Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100. 3 Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines. 4 Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines. 5 Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines. 6 Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very late. 7 Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 8 Tubers were stored at 45F for approximately 3 months. 9 Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F. 10 Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. 11 Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0 are acceptable. Reconditioned samples were stored at 60F for three weeks. Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2.0 are acceptable. 12 Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. 112
APPENDIX 1. Cultural management information for the Potato Breeding and Selection Program s trials at the San Luis Valley Research Center - 2015. LOCATION:San Luis Valley Research Center SOIL TYPE: Sandy Loam (Dunul cobbly sandy loam) DATE: Planted - 5/15/15 Hilled - 6/3/15 Vines Killed - 9/2/15 (sulfuric acid - 25gal/A) 110 days after planting Harvested - 9/29/15 PLOT INFORMATION: Size of Plots - 1 row x 25' Spacing Between Hills - 12" Spacing Between Rows - 34" Hills Per Plot - 25 Number of Reps - 4 except 2 for Intermediate Yield Trials METHOD OF HARVEST: Machine (Grimme 1-row) FERTILIZER: 5/15/15-80 lbs N + 60 lbs P 2 O 5 + 40 lbs K 2 0 + 25 lbs S + 2.5 lb Zn/A (dual band in-row liquid application) 7/18/15-10 lbs N (fertigated) 7/23/15-15 lbs N (fertigated) 7/27/15-15 lbs N (fertigated) Total fertilizer applied: 120 lbs N + 60 lbs P 2 O 5 + 40 lbs K 2 0 + 25 lb S + 2.5 lb Zn/A IRRIGATION: Center Pivot -15.05" gross application (application frequency and amount based on ET) Rainfall - 4.74" (5/16/15-9/29/15) INSECTICIDES APPLIED: 7/15/15 - Leverage 360 (0.175 lb a.i./a imidacloprid and ß-cyfluthrin) 8/4/15 - Belay (0.175 lb a.i./a clothianidin) FUNGICIDES APPLIED: 7/15/15 - Quadris Opti (0.202 lb a.i./a) 8/4/15 - Luna Tranquility (0.7 lb a.i./a fluoryram and pyrimethanil) HERBICIDES APPLIED: 6/5/15 - Dual Magnum (1.432 lb a.i./a) 6/5/15 - Boundary (0.984 lb a.i./a S-metolachlor and 0.234 lb a.i./a metribuzin) 113
APPENDIX 2. General procedures used for postharvest evaluations. Blackspot. Ten randomly selected tubers for each clone tested are bruised on the stem and bud ends with a 150 g weight dropped from a height of 60 cm. Tubers are stored at 40F prior to bruising and warmed up for 24 hours prior to bruising. After bruising, tubers are stored at room temperature for two days prior to evaluation. Blackspot susceptibility is evaluated by cutting the tubers in half longitudinally and rating the extent of damage. Blackspot is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. Storage Weight Loss and Dormancy. Ten randomly selected tubers are weighed and stored at 45F for approximately a three month period under low relative humidity conditions to evaluate storage weight loss potential. These tubers are also observed weekly for sprout growth. Dormancy is reported as days after harvest to first visible sprout growth. Enzymatic Browning. Five tubers of each clone are cut in half lengthwise and rated for degree of darkening 60 minutes later. Degree of darkening is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration. Specific Gravity. Specific gravity is determined using the air/water method. Fry Color and Texture. Fry color and texture is determined at or shortly after harvest and after a minimum of eight weeks of storage at 45F. Fries are cooked for 3 ½ minutes at 375F. Fry color is rated on a 0-4 scale using the USDA color standards. Color ratings <2 are acceptable. Fry texture is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating that the cooked flesh was dry and mealy, with 1 representing a soggy, wet texture. Chip Color. Chip color is determined after an interval of storage at 40 and 50F and after reconditioning for three weeks at 60F. Chips are cooked at 365F until bubbling slows. Chip color is rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings <2.0 are acceptable. 114
Notes