2015 OHIO POTATO GERMPLASM EVALUATION REPORT · PDF file2015 OHIO . POTATO GERMPLASM...

Horticulture and Crop Science Series No. 838 December 2015

2015 OHIO POTATO GERMPLASM EVALUATION

REPORT

Matthew D. Kleinhenz, Jennifer B. Moyseenko, Sonia D. Walker and Bruce Williams

Department of Horticulture and Crop Science

The Ohio State University

IN COOPERATION WITH NORTHEAST (NE-1231) REGIONAL PROJECT

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project was funded by a grant from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and by the OARDC, OSU Extension and the Department of Horticulture and Crop Science.

Special thanks to Bayer Corporation, Cerexagri, Inc., Dow AgroSciences LLC, Gowan,

Gustafson, Shearer’s Foods, Inc., and Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. for support. The technical assistance of Bruce Williams, Josh Heller, Terry Miller, Sonia Walker,

Christopher Courtney, Bree Ann Crider, Jeremy Hershberger, Bizhen Hu, Julie Laudick, Julie Lawson, Max Meler, Martin Merrick, Nick Sedivy, Susie Walden, Zheng Wang, Taylor Whitworth, and Ben Wilhelm is gratefully acknowledged.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ All programs of the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center are available to clientele without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, gender, age, disability or Vietnam-era status.

TABLE of CONTENTS Section Page Ohio Potato Germplasm Evaluation

Summary….………………………………………………......................................... . 1 Procedures

Planting, Stand Establishment, and Cultural Practices ..................................... 1 Crop Yield and Quality ……………………………………………………… 1 Chipping Quality Evaluation ............................................................................ 2 Results ............................................................................................................... 2

Table 1. List of participating breeding programs ........................... 4 Table 2. List of entries evaluated ........................... 5 Table 3. Marketable yield for standard varieties 2005-2015 ........................... 6 Table 4. Cultural, nutrient, and pest management practices in 2015 ..................... 6 Table 5. Seasonal and historical climatic data for the study site ................................. 7

Results Table 6. Percent stand, yield, and chip quality for NE-1231 ……………………... .. 8 Table 7. Tuber characteristics for NE-1231 ................................................................ 9 Table 8. Percent stand, yield and chip quality for Observation Studies ..................... 10 Table 9. Tuber characteristics for Observation Studies .............................................. 13

Reference Conversion Table for Specific Gravity ......................................................................... 16 Tuber Rating System..................................................................................................... 17

1

OHIO POTATO GERMPLASM EVALUATIONS - 2015 Summary

Ohio cooperates with private and public breeders in the U.S. and elsewhere in evaluating varieties and experimental lines of fresh and processing potatoes. A total of seventy-one distinct varieties and experimental lines developed in three breeding programs were evaluated in 2015 (Table 1). Entries were placed into one of four experiments completed at the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC) in Wooster, OH; Northeast Regional Project 1231 (NE-1231), Triple Observation (OBT), Double Observation (OBD) and Single Observation (OBS). Named varieties were included in one study, and numbered entries in one study. Entries were contributed by breeding programs in Maine (ME), New York (NY), and USDA (in Beltsville, MD). Entries are listed in Table 2 and include a total of forty-one varieties contributed by ME, one by NY, two by the USDA, and eight varieties included as standards. The studies were established to evaluate the growth and market traits of each entry when grown under non-irrigated conditions in Ohio. The fact that the trials at the OARDC are not irrigated tends to affect the performance of individual entries. Marketable yield of six varieties and seasonal rainfall for 2005-2015 at the OARDC are shown in Table 3. Procedures

Planting, Stand Establishment and Cultural Practices Seed potatoes were cut on May 4, 5, and 6, 2015 and allowed to cure under recommended

temperature and humidity conditions. Plots were established on May 12, 2015. All entries in the NE-1231 experiment were replicated three times. Entries in the Observation studies were replicated once, twice or three times depending on the study. Percent stand was recorded 4 weeks after planting.

Tables 3, 4 and 5 contain plot management, climatic and historical yield data for the study site, located on a well-drained Wooster silt loam. Pest, weed and disease pressure were minimized using procedures and materials consistent with local commercial practice, including weekly pesticide applications. Plants were not vine-killed.

Crop Yield and Quality Whole plots in the NE-1231 and Observation trials were harvested on September 24, 2015.

Tubers were placed in a barn under ambient conditions and covered with a single layer of Agribon + AG-50 Row Cover (1.5 oz/yd ²) to prevent freezing. Tubers were transferred to humidified refrigerated (50 - 52° F) storage after grading on October 22, 2015.

On October 22, 2015, tubers were removed for grading. At grading, the total weight of tubers produced by each genotype (across multiple plots, if present) was recorded. The entire harvested weight from all plots of each genotype was retained and graded. The weight of tubers in the A-size (US #1), B-size, and cull categories was recorded. These weights were also expressed as percentages of the weight of the graded potatoes, and percentages were then applied to the total weight of the potatoes harvested for each genotype in order to calculate its marketable yield (cwt/A).

2

After grading, tubers were retained for internal and external quality ratings and chipping quality evaluations. Tubers set aside for internal and external quality ratings were placed in refrigerated (42 - 44° F) storage. Tubers set aside for chipping were retained in humidified refrigerated (50 - 52° F) storage.

Tubers were rated for internal and external quality on December 1 and 2, 2015. Ten randomly selected, A-size, marketable tubers collected at grading were scored for tuber shape, color, surface texture, eye depth, general appearance, and the presence or absence of hollow heart, brown center, internal necrosis, and vascular discoloration using accepted protocols. (See Tuber Data Rating System on p.17). Digital images representing internal and external quality of each genotype were recorded.

In addition, three healthy tubers per genotype were evaluated for glucose content on November 6, 2015 (1 week after chipping). Tubers were cut in half lengthwise and glucose content rated using Potato Test Strips (Precision Labs, Inc., 9889 Crescent Park Drive, West Chester, OH 45069). Ratings of three tubers were averaged. Temperature of the storage facility was adjusted to 43°F on November 15, 2015. Glucose evaluations were repeated for all genotypes on December 14, 2015, 6 weeks after chipping, and after 4 weeks in humidified refrigerated (42-44°F) storage.

Chipping Quality Evaluation

Tubers were held in refrigerated humidified storage (48-50o F) until October 28, 2015. They were removed and held under ambient conditions (approx. 65oF) until being processed on October 29, 2015. Chipping quality evaluation began with measurements of specific gravity. Eight pounds of potatoes were placed in a hydrometer and specific gravity was recorded. A subset of three potatoes was selected and peeled using a Rotato Express electric potato peeler. These potatoes were sliced to an approximate thickness of 0.051 inches using a DeBuyer Kobra mandolin slicer. Slices were rinsed in cold water and then fried in a Commercial Pro Model CPF32 electric fryer containing corn oil donated by Shearer’s Foods, Inc. at 166-168°C (330-335°F) for approximately 3 minutes. After frying, a representative sample was visually evaluated for color using color standards in the Potato Chip Color Reference Chart published by the Snack Food Association. Chips that are very light in color are scored “1” and very dark chips are scored “6”. The percentage of chips with blister(s) greater than 1 cm (0.39 in) in diameter was recorded. Digital images of chips for each genotype were recorded.

Results Yield, tuber characteristics, and chipping quality data are presented in Tables 8-9. Total yield and US #1 yield averaged 273 and 223 (cwt/A) across all studies respectively, with a range of 150-361 (total) and 109-327 (US #1). Average total yield in the NE-1231 study was 281 cwt/A among varieties and 278 cwt/A among the selections, with a study range of 174 - 338 cwt/A. Of the 71 entries evaluated, overall tuber appearance was rated poor-fair (scale rating of 1-3), fair-good (scale rating of 4-6), and good-excellent (scale rating of 7-9) in 0, 24, and 47 entries, respectively.

1. Entries having an overall appearance rating of ≥ 7 (good-excellent) at grading:

• NE-1231: Atlantic, Chieftain, Katahdin, Kennebec, Superior, Yukon Gold, AF 4124-7,

3

AF 4172-2, AF 4648-2, AF 4975-3, AF 4985-1, AF 4157-6, AF 4442-4, BNC 244-10, C 0098012-5R

• Triple Observation: AF 4138-8, AF 4157-6, AF 5215-2, AF 5225-1 • Double Observation: AF 4552-5, AF 5320-1 • Single Observation: AF 5447-4, AF 4659-12, AF 4831-2, AF 5425-1, AF 5275-1,

AF 5278-3, AF 5435-7, AF 5467-13, AF 5481-4, AF 5549-1, AF 5563-5, AF5577-1, AF 5577-2, COAF 10018-2, NDAF 102568C-2, NDAF 102571B-5, NDAF 102573-2, NDAF 102691B-7, NDAF 102696C-2, NDAF 102696C-3, NDAF 102696C-5, NDAF 102766-1, NDAF 102904-5, NDAF 102950-3, NDAF 113303C-8, WAF 10629-5

2. Entries having an external tuber rating of ≥ 7 (good-excellent) at grading and marketable yield ≥ the study average:

• NE-1231: Dark Red Norland, Superior, Yukon Gold, AF 4172-2, AF 4985-1, AF 4157-6, AF 4442-4, C 0098012-5R

• Triple Observation: AF 4157-6 • Double Observation: AF 4552-5 • Single Observation: AF 5447-4, AF 4831-2, AF 5428-7, AF 5435-7, AF 5481-4, AF

5549-1, AF 5574-16, AF 5589-11, NDAF 102568C-2, NDAF 102691B-7, NDAF 102696C-2, NDAF 102696C-3, NDAF 102696C-5, NDAF 102766-1, NDAF 102904-5

3. All entries had a chip score of ≤ 3 except the following: • NE-1231: Dark Red Norland, Yukon Gold • Double Observation: AF 5320-1 • Single Observation: AF 5563-5, AF 5584-1, AF 5589-11, NDAF 092239CB-2, NDAF

102691B-7, NDAF 10269C-5, WAF 10626-7

Table 1. List of programs participating in the 2015 Ohio Potato Germplasm Evaluations.

------------------------ 2015 experiment ------------------------

Genotype Triple Double Single1 TotalNumber Program Codes NE-1231 Observation Observation Observation

1 Univ. Maine AF, C, NDAF 10 6 3 41 602 Cornell Univ. NY 1 13 USDA B 1 1

BNC 1 14 Various named 8 8

Total 21 6 3 41 71

1 Refers to number of single row replicates. All other experiments contained two (Double Observation) or three (NE-1231, Triple Observation) replicates.

4

Table 2. List of varieties and experimental lines planted in the potato germplasm evaluations at the Ohio Agricultural Research and Developmental Center (OARDC) in Wooster, OH in 2015.

1 Atlantic 22 AF 0338-17 28 AF 4552-5 31 AF 5447-42 Chieftain 23 AF 4138-8 29 AF 5280-5 32 AF 4659-123 Dark Red Norland 24 AF 4157-6 30 AF 5320-1 33 AF 4831-24 Katahdin 25 AF 4975-3 34 AF 5033-135 Kennebec 26 AF 5215-2 35 AF 5245-16 NY 148 27 AF 5225-1 36 AF 5275-17 Snowden 37 AF 5278-38 Superior 38 AF 5281-49 Yukon Gold 39 AF 5403-3

10 AF 0338-17 40 AF 5416-211 AF 4124-7 41 AF 5428-712 AF 4138-8 42 AF 5435-713 AF 4172-2 43 AF 5467-1314 AF 4648-2 44 AF 5481-415 AF 4975-3 45 AF 5483-116 AF 4985-1 46 AF 5549-117 AF 4157-6 47 AF 5563-1218 AF 4442-4 48 AF 5563-519 B 2833-16 49 AF 5570-220 BNC 244-10 50 AF 5574-1621 C 0098012-5R 51 AF 5577-1

52 AF 5577-253 AF 5584-154 AF 5589-1155 C0 AF 10018-256 NDAF 092239CB-257 NDAF 102568C-258 NDAF 102571B-559 NDAF 102573-260 NDAF 102691B-761 NDAF 102696C-262 NDAF 102696C-363 NDAF 102696C-564 NDAF 102766-165 NDAF 102904-566 NDAF 102950-367 NDAF 113303C-868 WAF 10532-269 WAF 10626-770 WAF 10629-271 WAF 10629-5

------------------------------------------------ Experiment --------------------------------------------------------------------------

5

NE-1231 Triple Observation Double Observation Single Observation

Table 3. Yield (cwt/A) of marketable, A-size tubers of six varieties grown at the OARDC in Wooster, OH2005-2015.

Variety 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 average

Atlantic 211 327 225.36 277 276 197 153 57 391 290 262 242Dk. Red Norland 241 234 192 270 240 201 133 61 184 304 336 218Katahdin 211 241 231.76 256 280 79 70 25 304 214 230 195Kennebec 164 199 225.72 203 290 101 59 43 108 240 263 172Superior 140 149 140.52 226 224 104 110 45 174 295 257 170Yukon Gold 155 222 222.52 255 267 113 91 60 359 232 339 210

Rainfall (inches, 10.91 8.50 7.10 7.74 10.57 5.70 8.77 4.56 8.55 6.62 4.11 7.56July-Aug)

Table 4. Cultural, nutrient, and pest management practices for the potato germplasm evaluationscompleted at the OARDC in Wooster, OH in 2015.

Date plantedDate harvested2014 main crop wheat

Fertilizer 10-20-20 (400 lb/A)

Herbicide Dual-Magnum (1.33 pt/A), Sencor (1 lb/A)

Insecticide Admire (1 pt/A)

Spacing (ft.) within, between row 1 x 3Plot width, length (ft.) 3 x 30Soil conditions at planting MoistIrrigation (inches) None

Sprays applied 12-Jun Quadris (5 oz/A)19-Jun Bravo Weather Stik (5 oz/A), Baythroid (2.8 oz/A)

2-Jul Penncozeb (2 lb/A), Kocide (1.5 lb/A), Tanos (8 oz/A),Baythroid (3 oz/A)

12-Jul Bravo Weather Stik (2 pt/A), Baythroid (2.8 oz/A)17-Jul Quadris (5 oz/A), Entrust (2 oz/A)24-Jul Bravo Weather Stik (2 pt/A), Baythroid (2.8 oz/A)31-Jul Penncozeb (2 lb/A), Kocide (1.5 lb/A),Tanos (8 oz/A),

Asana (6 oz/A)7-Aug Quadris (5 oz/A), Baythroid (2.8 oz/A)

13-Aug Bravo Weather Stik (5 oz/A), Asana (6 oz/A)21-Aug Penncozeb (2 lb/A), Kocide (1.5 lb/A), Tanos (8 oz/A)11-Sep Bravo Weatherstik (2 pt/A), Baythroid (2.8 oz/A)

12-May

6

24-Sep

Table 5. Seasonal and historical climatic data for the potato germplasm evaluations completed at the OARDC inWooster, OH in 2015.

May June July August September

Avg. High Temp. (2015) (F) 73.7 77.9 81.7 81.0 79.9Avg. Low Temp. (2015) (F) 52.3 60.2 59.9 57.8 55.7Avg. Temp. (2015) (F) 63.0 68.8 70.5 69.4 66.9Normal Avg. Temp. (Historical) (F) 58.5 67.6 71.5 69.9 64.6

Total Precip. (2015) (in.) 3.45 5.42 3.33 0.78 3.14Normal Avg. Precip. (Historical) (in.) 2.7 3.9 4.1 3.6 2.5Precip. deficit/surplus (2015) (in.)

period 0.8 1.5 -0.8 -2.8 0.6cumulative 0.8 2.3 1.5 -1.3 -0.7

7

Table 6. Percent stand, yield and chip quality for entries grown in the Ohio NE-1231 Regional Project experiment in 2015.

Entry Entry Stand Total US # 1 US # 1 B-Size Cull Specific Specific Chip Blister % Glucose % Glucose# Name % cwt/A cwt/A % % % Gravity¹ Gravity² Color³ %⁴ at chipping⁵ after chipping⁶

1 Atlantic 96 262 214 82 7 11 1.095 1.094 1 10 0.00 0.002 Chieftain 98 290 224 77 11 12 1.070 1.069 2 5 0.20 0.033 Dark Red Norland 99 336 273 81 10 9 1.068 1.067 4 5 0.08 0.104 Katahdin 87 230 200 87 4 9 1.074 1.073 3 5 0.07 0.085 Kennebec 74 263 217 83 7 11 1.079 1.078 2 5 0.07 0.006 NY 148 98 264 229 87 7 6 1.092 1.091 1 0 0.00 0.007 Snowden 87 292 246 84 5 11 1.091 1.090 1 5 0.00 0.008 Superior 97 257 221 86 7 7 1.067 1.066 2 5 0.08 0.009 Yukon Gold 96 339 278 82 2 16 1.082 1.081 4 10 0.00 0.0310 AF 0338-17 91 283 243 86 6 9 1.090 1.089 1 15 0.08 0.0811 AF 4124-7 97 245 198 81 10 10 1.093 1.092 2 5 0.00 0.0012 AF 4138-8 91 292 253 87 5 8 1.068 1.067 1 0 0.00 0.0013 AF 4172-2 92 335 264 79 4 17 1.087 1.086 3 5 0.00 0.0014 AF 4648-2 93 230 187 81 8 11 1.082 1.081 1 10 0.00 0.0015 AF 4975-3 94 255 210 82 11 6 1.094 1.093 3 15 0.00 0.0016 AF 4985-1 84 281 235 84 7 9 1.064 1.063 2 5 0.03 0.0017 AF4157-6 96 331 283 86 9 6 1.086 1.085 2 5 0.03 0.0018 AF4442-4 82 318 295 93 5 2 1.083 1.082 2 10 0.00 0.1219 B 2833-16 90 278 238 86 5 9 1.086 1.085 2 5 0.00 0.1720 BNC 244-10 96 174 131 75 21 4 1.087 1.086 3 5 0.07 0.5021 C 0098012-5R 90 313 263 84 11 5 1.072 1.071 1 5 0.00 0.17

Average 92 279 233 83 8 9 1.081 1.080 2 6 0.03 0.06

1 Specific gravity recorded at chipping. 2 Specific gravity with correction factor based on SFA chart. See reference table on page 16 for starch and dry matter conversions.3 SFA Standard (1=light, 6 =dark).4 Percentage of chips that developed blisters greater than 1 cm in diameter during the frying process.⁵ Approximate % glucose 1 week after chipping. Average of 3 tubers using Potato Test Strips from Precision Labs, Inc., 9889 Crescent Park Drive, West Chester OH 45069.⁶ Approximate % glucose 6 weeks after chipping. Average of 3 tubers using Potato Test Strips from Precision Labs, Inc., 9889 Crescent Park Drive, West Chester OH 45069.

8

Table 7. Tuber Characteristics for entries grown in the Ohio NE-1231 Regional Project experiment in 2015.

-------------------- External1 -------------------- ------------------------- Internal 2 -----------------------Entry Entry Skin Skin Tuber Eye Overall Hollow Brown Vsclr % Defected

# Name Color Texture Shape Depth Appear. Heart Center Necrosis Dsclrtn Tubers

1 Atlantic 7 4 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 202 Chieftain 2 8 2 6 8 1 0 1 0 103 Dark Red Norland 2 7 3 6 6 0 0 0 1 04 Katahdin 7 7 3 7 8 1 0 0 2 105 Kennebec 7 7 3 7 7 0 0 0 0 106 NY 148 7 6 3 7 6 0 0 0 0 107 Snowden 6 4 3 5 6 0 0 0 4 08 Superior 7 8 2 5 8 0 0 0 0 09 Yukon Gold 6 8 2 7 7 0 0 0 0 010 AF 0338-17 6 7 3 5 6 1 0 0 0 2011 AF 4124-7 6 4 4 6 7 0 0 0 0 012 AF 4138-8 6 7 3 4 6 0 0 0 0 013 AF 4172-2 6 4 5 7 8 0 0 0 0 014 AF 4648-2 7 8 2 7 7 0 0 0 0 015 AF 4975-3 6 7 1 7 7 0 1 0 0 016 AF 4985-1 2 8 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 017 AF4157-6 7 7 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 018 AF4442-4 6 7 2 6 7 0 0 0 1 019 B 2833-16 6 4 3 8 6 0 0 0 0 1020 BNC 244-10 1 7 2 7 7 0 0 0 0 021 C 0098012-5R 2 9 2 8 8 0 0 0 0 0

1 See reference table for rating system on page 17.2 Number of tubers out of 10 that contain the defect.

9

Table 8. Percent stand, yield and chip quality for entries grown in the Ohio Triple Observation Trial in 2015.

Entry Entry Stand Total US # 1 US # 1 B-Size Cull Specific Specific Chip Blister Glucose GlucoseStudy # Name % cwt/A cwt/A % % % Gravity1 Gravity2 Color3 %⁴ at chipping⁵ after chipping⁶

OBT 22 AF 0338-17 97 299 262 88 5 7 1.093 1.092 1 0 0.00 0.00OBT 23 AF 4138-8 96 279 235 84 7 8 1.063 1.062 2 0 0.00 0.03OBT 24 AF 4157-6 93 320 269 84 9 7 1.085 1.084 2 5 0.03 0.28OBT 25 AF 4975-3 97 306 269 88 9 3 1.091 1.090 2 10 0.00 0.00OBT 26 AF 5215-2 99 323 240 74 24 1 1.073 1.072 3 25 0.00 0.00OBT 27 AF 5225-1 99 297 237 80 12 8 1.081 1.080 3 10 0.00 0.00

Average 97 304 252 83 11 6 1.081 1.080 2 8 0.01 0.05


10

Table 8 (cont.). Percent stand, yield and chip quality for entries grown in the Ohio Double Observation Trial in 2015.

Entry Entry Stand Total US # 1 US # 1 B-Size Cull Specific Specific Chip Blister Glucose GlucoseStudy # Name % cwt/A cwt/A % % % Gravity1 Gravity2 Color3 %⁴ at chipping⁵ after chipping⁶

OBD 28 AF 4552-5 93 280 236 84 11 5 1.085 1.084 3 5 0.03 0.03OBD 29 AF 5280-5 97 304 278 91 5 3 1.079 1.078 3 5 0.03 0.00OBD 30 AF 5320-1 100 222 172 78 15 7 1.066 1.065 4 5 0.07 0.07

Average 97 269 229 84 10 5 1.077 1.075 3 5 0.04 0.03


11

Table 8 (cont.). Percent stand, yield and chip quality for entries grown in the Ohio Single Observation Trial in 2015.

Entry Entry Stand Total US # 1 US # 1 B-Size Cull Specific Specific Chip Blister % Glucose % GlucoseStudy # Name % cwt/A cwt/A % % % Gravity¹ Gravity² Color³ %⁴ at chipping⁵ after chipping⁶

OBS 31 AF 5447-4 100 315 268 85 1 14 1.086 1.085 2 0 0.03 0.03OBS 32 AF 4659-12 87 292 160 55 44 1 1.085 1.084 3 0 0.00 0.33OBS 33 AF 4831-2 97 361 327 91 6 3 1.063 1.062 3 0 0.12 0.75OBS 34 AF 5033-13 100 242 133 67 25 7 1.084 1.083 2 0 0.00 0.00OBS 35 AF 5245-1 100 198 189 79 16 4 1.071 1.070 3 5 0.10 0.37OBS 36 AF 5275-1 97 237 181 74 20 6 1.078 1.077 2 0 0.00 0.00OBS 37 AF 5278-3 93 244 205 88 9 3 1.088 1.087 1 0 0.00 0.08OBS 38 AF 5281-4 100 234 262 84 9 7 1.096 1.095 2 15 0.00 0.00OBS 39 AF 5403-3 100 314 207 82 6 12 1.073 1.072 1 10 0.07 0.00OBS 40 AF 5416-2 93 253 215 82 7 11 1.076 1.075 3 5 0.00 0.00OBS 41 AF 5428-7 97 262 213 81 8 11 1.094 1.093 1 5 0.00 0.00OBS 42 AF 5435-7 100 263 269 82 8 10 1.078 1.077 2 5 0.00 0.00OBS 43 AF 5467-13 97 329 195 81 11 9 1.094 1.093 1 0 0.00 0.00OBS 44 AF 5481-4 97 292 251 86 4 10 1.083 1.082 3 15 0.00 0.28OBS 45 AF 5483-1 93 150 109 73 3 24 1.084 1.083 2 5 0.07 0.25OBS 46 AF 5549-1 100 310 232 75 1 24 1.089 1.088 2 10 0.07 0.12OBS 47 AF 5563-12 97 279 244 87 3 10 1.081 1.080 3 5 0.03 0.15OBS 48 AF 5563-5 97 319 250 85 8 7 1.074 1.073 4 5 0.03 0.33OBS 49 AF 5570-2 97 293 213 84 7 9 1.085 1.084 2 0 0.00 0.00OBS 50 AF 5574-16 100 254 220 80 8 12 1.080 1.079 2 5 0.00 0.00OBS 51 AF 5577-1 83 276 180 87 3 10 1.075 1.074 2 10 0.03 0.00OBS 52 AF 5577-2 90 206 250 82 8 11 1.090 1.089 1 0 0.00 0.00OBS 53 AF 5584-1 100 306 209 72 23 5 1.078 1.077 4 5 0.10 0.15OBS 54 AF 5589-11 93 292 243 81 17 3 1.079 1.078 4 10 0.00 0.03OBS 55 C0 AF 10018-2 100 301 162 73 4 22 1.076 1.075 1 0 0.03 0.00OBS 56 NDAF 092239CB-2 97 220 134 77 15 7 <1.060 1.059 5 15 0.03 0.07OBS 57 NDAF 102568C-2 93 173 281 88 1 11 1.080 1.079 1 10 0.03 0.20OBS 58 NDAF 102571B-5 90 210 152 72 22 6 1.073 1.072 2 5 0.20 0.33OBS 59 NDAF 102573-2 100 252 187 74 22 4 1.072 1.071 2 0 0.00 0.03OBS 60 NDAF 102691B-7 93 308 242 79 14 7 1.083 1.082 5 10 0.07 0.03OBS 61 NDAF 102696C-2 97 295 238 81 15 5 1.069 1.068 3 5 0.03 0.12OBS 62 NDAF 102696C-3 67 220 281 80 15 6 1.084 1.083 1 10 0.03 0.00OBS 63 NDAF 102696C-5 97 353 224 79 15 6 1.068 1.067 4 15 0.07 0.03OBS 64 NDAF 102766-1 100 283 248 81 17 2 1.068 1.067 3 10 0.08 0.07OBS 65 NDAF 102904-5 90 307 267 84 9 8 <1.060 1.059 3 15 0.07 0.03OBS 66 NDAF 102950-3 97 320 181 72 23 5 1.070 1.069 1 5 0.00 0.00OBS 67 NDAF 113303C-8 93 252 143 74 21 5 1.090 1.089 2 20 0.07 0.28OBS 68 WAF 10532-2 97 192 209 85 9 6 1.094 1.093 2 5 0.07 0.03OBS 69 WAF 10626-7 87 247 226 84 13 4 1.069 1.068 4 5 0.12 0.00OBS 70 WAF 10629-2 93 270 144 75 7 18 1.079 1.078 1 5 0.00 0.03OBS 71 WAF 10629-5 97 191 163 74 10 15 1.080 1.079 1 10 0.20 0.12

Average 95 266 212 79 12 9 1.080 1.078 2 6 0.04 0.10


12

Table 9. Tuber Characteristics for entries grown in the Ohio Triple Observation Trial in 2015. -------------------- External1 ----------------- ----------------------- Internal 2 -------------------------

Entry Entry Skin Skin Tuber Eye Overall Hollow Brown Vsclr % DefectedStudy # Name Color Texture Shape Depth Appear. Heart Center Necrosis Dsclrtn Tubers

OBT 22 AF 0338-17 6 6 3 8 6 0 0 0 0 0OBT 23 AF 4138-8 7 6 3 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBT 24 AF 4157-6 7 6 2 5 7 0 0 0 0 0OBT 25 AF 4975-3 6 4 2 7 6 0 0 0 0 0OBT 26 AF 5215-2 7 7 3 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBT 27 AF 5225-1 7 6 2 8 7 0 0 0 0 0


13

Table 9 (cont.). Tuber Characteristics for entries grown in the Ohio Double Observation Trial in 2015.

-------------------- External1 ------------------- ------------------------ Internal 2 -------------------------Entry Entry Skin Skin Tuber Eye Overall Hollow Brown Vsclr % Defected

Study # Name Color Texture Shape Depth Appear. Heart Center Necrosis Dsclrtn Tubers

OBD 28 AF 4552-5 7 7 2 7 7 0 1 0 0 10OBD 29 AF 5280-5 7 7 2 6 6 0 0 0 0 0OBD 30 AF 5320-1 6 7 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 0


14

Table 9 (cont.). Tuber Characteristics for entries grown in the Ohio Single Observation Trial in 2015.

------------------------ External1 ----------------- ------------------------ Internal 2 -------------------------Entry Entry Skin Skin Tuber Eye Overall Hollow Brown Vsclr % Defected

Study # Name Color Texture Shape Depth Appear. Heart Center Necrosis Dsclrtn Tubers

OBS 31 AF 5447-4 6 7 2 8 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 32 AF 4659-12 3 8 4 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 33 AF 4831-2 2 8 2 5 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 34 AF 5033-13 6 4 2 6 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 35 AF 5245-1 1 8 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 36 AF 5275-1 2 8 2 4 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 37 AF 5278-3 2 8 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 38 AF 5281-4 9 7 2 7 6 0 0 0 3 30OBS 39 AF 5403-3 7 4 2 5 5 0 0 0 3 30OBS 40 AF 5416-2 7 4 2 5 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 41 AF 5428-7 9 7 2 4 6 0 0 0 2 20OBS 42 AF 5435-7 7 7 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 43 AF 5467-13 6 7 3 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 44 AF 5481-4 7 7 2 8 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 45 AF 5483-1 6 1 2 7 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 46 AF 5549-1 8 7 3 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 47 AF 5563-12 7 6 2 6 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 48 AF 5563-5 7 7 3 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 49 AF 5570-2 7 8 2 4 6 0 0 0 1 10OBS 50 AF 5574-16 6 1 2 5 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 51 AF 5577-1 7 7 2 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 52 AF 5577-2 7 7 3 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 53 AF 5584-1 7 7 3 5 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 54 AF 5589-11 7 7 3 7 6 0 0 0 1 10OBS 55 C0 AF 10018-2 7 7 2 8 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 56 NDAF 092239CB-2 6 6 2 8 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 57 NDAF 102568C-2 2 8 3 8 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 58 NDAF 102571B-5 2 8 2 7 8 0 0 0 0 0OBS 59 NDAF 102573-2 2 7 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 60 NDAF 102691B-7 2 8 2 7 8 0 0 0 0 0OBS 61 NDAF 102696C-2 3 8 2 7 8 0 0 0 0 0OBS 62 NDAF 102696C-3 1 8 2 7 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 63 NDAF 102696C-5 2 8 1 7 8 0 0 0 0 0OBS 64 NDAF 102766-1 2 8 1 7 8 0 0 0 0 0OBS 65 NDAF 102904-5 2 8 3 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 66 NDAF 102950-3 3 9 2 6 8 0 0 0 0 0OBS 67 NDAF 113303C-8 2 8 2 6 7 0 0 0 0 0OBS 68 WAF 10532-2 6 7 4 5 6 0 0 0 2 20OBS 69 WAF 10626-7 6 7 2 5 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 70 WAF 10629-2 7 7 4 5 6 0 0 0 0 0OBS 71 WAF 10629-5 7 7 4 7 7 0 0 0 0 0


15

16

Conversion Table for Specific Gravity of Potato Tubers to Content of Starch and Dry Matter % (Calculated from Von Scheele equations: % starch = 17.565 + 199.07 (Sp. Gr.-1.0988); % dry matter = 24.181 + 211.04 (Sp. Gr.-1.0988)

Specific Gravity

Starch %

Dry Matter %

Specific Gravity

Starch %

Dry Matter%

1.050

7.85

13.88

1.081

14.02

20.43

1.051

8.05

14.09

1.082

14.22

20.64

1.052

8.25

14.31

1.083

14.42

20.85

1.053

8.45

14.32

1.084

14.62

21.06

1.054

8.65

14.73

1.085

14.82

21.27

1.055

8.85

14.94

1.086

15.02

21.48

1.056

9.04

15.15

1.987

15.22

21.69

1.057

9.24

15.38

1.088

15.41

21.90

1.058

9.44

15.57

1.089

15.61

22.11

1.059

9.64

15.78

1.090

15.81

22.33

1.060

9.84

15.99

1.091

16.01

22.54

1.061

10.04

16.21

1.092

16.20

22.75

1.062

10.24

16.42

1.093

16.41

22.96

1.063

10.44

16.63

1.094

16.61

23.17

1.064

10.64

16.84

1.095

16.81

23.38

1.065

10.84

17.05

1.096

17.01

23.59

1.066

11.04

17.26

1.097

17.21

23.89

1.067

11.23

17.47

1.098

17.41

24.01

1.068

11.43

17.68

1.099

17.60

24.22

1.069

11.63

17.89

1.100

17.80

24.44

1.070

11.83

18.10

1.101

18.00

24.65

1.071

12.03

18.32

1.102

18.20

24.86

1.072

12.23

18.53

1.103

18.40

25.07

1.073

12.43

18.74

1.104

18.60

25.28

1.074

12.63

18.95

1.105

18.80

25.49

1.075

12.83

19.16

1.106

19.00

25.70

1.076

13.03

19.37

1.107

19.20

25.91

1.077

13.22

19.58

1.180

19.40

26.12

1.078

13.42

19.79

1.109

29.60

26.34

1.079

13.62

20.00

1.110

19.79

26.55

1.080

13.82

220.21

1.111

19.99

26.76 Factors Affecting the Specific Gravity of the White Potato in Maine. Maine Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 583. May 1959.

TUBER DATA RATING SYSTEM Tuber Skin Color Skin Texture Tuber Shape 1. Purple 1. Part. russet 1. Round 2. Red 2. Heavy russet 2. Mostly round 3. Pink 3. Mod. russet 3. Round to oblong 4. Dark Brown 4. Light russet 4. Mostly oblong 5. Brown 5. Netted 5. Oblong 6. Tan 6. Slight netting 6. Oblong to long 7. Buff 7. Mod. smooth 7. Mostly long 8. White 8. Smooth 8. Long 9. Cream 9. Very smooth 9. Cylindrical Eye Depth Appearance 1. VD 1. Very poor 2. -- 2. -- 3. D 3. Poor 4. -- 4. -- 5. Intermediate 5. Fair 6. -- 6. -- 7. S 7. Good 8. -- 8. -- 9. VS 9. Excellent

PLANT RATING SYSTEM

Plant Type Air Pollution 1. Decumbent-poor canopy 1. Dead 2. Decumbent-fair canopy 2. --- 3. Decumbent-good canopy 3. Mod. Defol. 4. Spreading-poor canopy 4. --- 5. Spreading-fair canopy 5. Mod. Injury 6. Spreading-good canopy 6. --- 7. Upright-poor canopy 7. Mild Injury 8. Upright-fair canopy 8. --- 9. No symptoms Plant size Plant Maturity Plant Appearance 1. Very small 1. Very early 1. Very poor 2. + 2. Early 2. Poor 3. Small 3. + 3. + 4. + 4. Medium early 4. -- 5. Medium 5. Medium 5. Fair 6. + 6. Medium late 6. + 7. Large 7. + 7. -- 8. + 8. Late 8. Good 9. Very large 9. Very late 9. Excellent

2015 OHIO POTATO GERMPLASM EVALUATION REPORT · PDF file2015 OHIO . POTATO GERMPLASM...

Documents

Transcript of 2015 OHIO POTATO GERMPLASM EVALUATION REPORT · PDF file2015 OHIO . POTATO GERMPLASM...