|
|
|
|
Performance of Tomato Cultivars, Middle Tennessee Experiment Station, 2002 A. Brent Smith, Dennis Onks, Roy Thompson, and Charles A. Mullins Interpretative Summary Most tomato cultivars had lower than expected yield. ‘Cortez’ was one of the more productive cultivars in yield of No. 1 fruit. The yield of No.2 and cull fruit was excessively high, but harvest was over a long period and temperatures were very hot resulting in many small fruit. ‘Cortez' and ‘Florida 91’ appeared to be the most satisfactory cultivars. Introduction 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 2002 to evaluate performance of 10 tomato cultivars. Materials and Methods 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 April 16. Napropamide (Devrinol) at 3.0 lb ai/A and metribuzin (Sencor) at 0.5 lb ai/A were soil incorporated on May 23. Greenhouse grown seedlings were transplanted to the field on May 24. Plot size was one row, 16 ft long with 6 ft between rows. Each row contained 8 plants, and were tied using a Florida Weave system. Experimental plot design was a randomized complete block with four replications. Eight applications of insecticides and fungicides were applied to the planting. Insecticides were azinphos-methyl (Guthion) at 1lb ai/A, 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. Nine harvests were made between July 31 and August 30. 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. Results and Discussion Tomato yields were smaller than expected for most cultivars (Table 1). ‘Cortez’ was one of the most productive cultivars and produced a high yield of No.1 grade fruit. The No. 1 grade is usually the only grade that is marketed. ‘Mountain Fresh’ and ‘Florida 91' were among several cultivars that produced high numbers of No. 2 grade fruit. No.2 grade fruit is sometimes marketable, but much of this grade is not marketed. The harvest season was long as several fruit of No. 1 grade were produced throughout the season. Temperatures were relatively warm during the harvest season. ‘Mariana' and ‘Mountain Fresh’ were among cultivars that produced the most culls. No significant disease pressure was observed on any of the varieties tested. Small size and poor shape were the primary reason for culling fruit. ‘Mariana' and ‘Mountain Fresh' were among those cultivars that had the heaviest fruit. 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, 2002.
z Means within columns followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability, Duncan’s multiple range tests. |
|