Charles A. Mullins, Dennis Onks, and Roy Thompson

Most tomato cultivars were highly productive and fruit size of No. 1 grade fruit was rather large. ‘Mountain Fresh’ was one of the more productive cultivars in yield of No. 1 fruit. ‘EX 1446346’ yielded poorly. The yield of No.2 and cull fruit was excessively high, but harvest was over a very long period and temperatures were very hot resulting in many small fruit. ‘Mountain Fresh’, ‘Florida 47', ‘Floralina,’ and ‘Carolina Gold’ appeared to be the most satisfactory cultivars.

Tomatoes are grown across Tennessee and are the highest value vegetable crop grown in the state. Most Tennessee tomatoes are grown for the fresh market. Although some tomatoes are grown for local markets, most tomatoes are grown for the shipping market. This market prefers relatively large fruit that are firm and free from defects. Cultivars have been found to perform differently at different locations. The relatively hot climate of middle Tennessee is less conducive to tomato production than the cooler areas of east Tennessee and the Plateau. An experiment was conducted at the Middle Tennessee Experiment Station at Spring Hill, TN in 2000 to evaluate performance of 8 tomato cultivars. Some of the cultivars are hotset type which are reported to set more fruit in relatively warm conditions.

The site was prepared for planting by conventional tillage methods. Fertilizer was broadcast at 750 lb/A of 15-15-15 and incorporated with a disk on May 16. Trifluralin (Treflan) at 0.50 lb ai/A and metribuzin (Sencor) at 0.5 lb ai/A were soil incorporated on May 16. Greenhouse grown seedlings were transplanted to the field on May 16. Plot size was one row, 16 ft long with 6 ft between rows. Each row contained 8 plants. Experimental plot design was a randomized complete block with four replications. Fourteen applications of insecticides and fungicides were applied to the planting. Insecticides were carbaryl (Sevin) at 1.0 lb ai/A or esfenvalerate (Asana) at 0.05 lb ai/A. Fungicides applied with the insecticides were chlorothalonil (Bravo) at 1.5 lb ai/A alternated with azoxystrobin (Quadris) at 0.1 lb ai/A.

Eleven harvests were made between July 21 and Sept 11. Tomatoes were graded into grades of No. 1, No. 2, and cull. All data were analyzed by analysis of variance methods, and means were separated by Duncan’s multiple range tests at the 0.05 level of probability.

Tomato yields were relatively high for most cultivars (Table 1). ‘Mountain Fresh’ was one of the most productive cultivars and produced a higher yield of No.1 grade fruit than all cultivars except ‘Florida 47’, ‘Floralina', and ‘Carolina Gold'. The No. 1 grade is usually the only grade that is marketed. ‘Carolina Gold’ produced more No. 2 grade fruit than all cultivars except ‘Sunbrite’, ‘Florida 47', and ‘Mountain Fresh’. No.2 grade fruit is sometimes marketable, but much of this grade is not marketed. The yield of No. 2 fruit was excessive in this trial. The harvest season was long as several fruit of No. 1 grade were produced throughout the season. Temperatures were relatively high during the harvest season. ‘Mountain Fresh' and ‘EX 1446346’ were among cultivars that produced the most culls. ‘Florida 91' had heavier fruit than all cultivars except ’Sunbrite’, and ‘Floralina’. Sources of seed used in the trial are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Yield in tons per acre of No.1, No.2, and cull grade fruit; average fruit weight of No. 1 grade, and source of seed of tomato cultivars at The University of Tennessee Middle Tennessee Experiment Station at Spring Hill, 2000.