Chapter 4. Red and Purple-Skinned Fresh Market Potato Variety Trial, 2006
Click here to view a PDF version of this document.
Home Search What's New Products Survey Help
Chapter 4. Red and Purple-Skinned Fresh Market Potato Variety Trial, 2006

   

Chapter 4. Red and Purple-Skinned Fresh Market Potato Variety Trial, 20061

C.M. Hutchinson and Doug Gergela2

General Comments: A goal of the red/purple-skinned fresh market variety trial is to identify a red potato that has better quality and production characteristics than Red LaSoda or LaRouge.Identification of "specialty" potatoes that expand the marketable varieties produced in Florida is also a priority. Established varieties were included to provide a baseline for the numbered clones.


Planting Information


Planting Site


PSREU - Hastings Farm, Hastings, FL


Planting Date


January 31, 2006


Vine Kill Date


April 28, 2006


Harvest Date


May 15, 2006


Season Length


87 days planting to vine kill; 104 days planting to harvest


Fertilizer Program


preplant, 100-43-86 lb/A; sidedress, 65-0-56 lb/A; (2 appl.)


Irrigation Program


seepage


Experimental Design


Number of Varieties


9 (Standard: Red LaSoda)


Number of Clones


7


Within Row Spacing


8 in (20 cm)


Between Row Spacing


40 in (102 cm)


Replications


4


Plot Size


16 ft (4.9 m)


Production Statistics


Early Vigor Ratings


41 days after planting


Highest Total Yield


Red LaSoda (431 cwt/acre or 48.3 MT/ha)


Highest Marketable Yield


Red LaSoda (399 cwt/acre or 44.7 MT/ha)


Best Appearance Rating


B2327-2 (6.5, fair to good)


Tables

Table 2. Production statistics for Red and Purple-Skinned potato selections.


Total

Marketable Yield1

Size

Size Class



Yield


% of

Distribution by Class (%)2

Range (%)

Specific

Clone


(cwt/A)

(cwt/A)

standard

C

B

A1

A2

A3

A4

A1 to A3

A2 to A3

Gravity

Red LaSoda


431

399

100

1

4

66

28

0

0

95

29

1.063

Red LaSoda10


376

347

87

0

5

74

20

1

0

94

21

1.064

Red LaSoda13


391

356

89

0

3

70

23

4

0

97

26

1.063

All Blue


266

87

22

4

63

33

0

0

0

33

0

1.071

Cherry Red


256

221

55

1

11

84

4

0

0

88

4

1.071

Chieftain


314

263

66

1

13

84

2

0

0

87

3

1.060

Dark Red Norland


318

282

71

1

7

85

7

0

0

92

7

1.063

LaRouge


412

374

94

1

7

84

8

0

0

92

8

1.063

Red Pontiac


374

337

84

1

6

72

21

1

0

93

22

1.062

B0984-1


340

296

74

1

9

66

22

2

0

90

25

1.074

B1816-5


333

273

68

2

15

84

0

0

0

84

0

1.070

B2152-17


316

221

55

1

28

69

1

0

0

70

1

1.069

B2327-2


225

138

35

5

33

62

0

0

0

62

0

1.064

B2332-2


379

325

81

2

9

58

22

9

0

89

31

1.063

NY129


226

193

48

1

11

86

2

0

0

88

2

1.057

NY136


322

234

58

2

25

68

6

0

0

73

6

1.066

MSD3


67

76


2

10

14

6

6

0

11

10

0.006

P Value


0.0001

0.0001


0.0001

0.0001

0.0001

0.0001

0.0015

-

0.0001

0.0001

0.0001

1Marketable Yield: size classes A1 to A3.

2Size classes: C = .5 to 1.5" , B = 1.5 to 1 7/8", A1 = 1 7/8 to 2.5", A2 = 2.5 to 3.25", A3 = 3.25 to 4", A4 = >4"

3Means separated within columns by Tukey's Studentized Range (HSD) Test.


Table 3. Plant growth and tuber characteristics of Red and Purple-Skinned potato selections.


Plant Growth Characteristics1

Tuber Characteristics2



%

Early

Vine

Vine








Clone


Stand

Vigor

Type

Maturity

IFC

SC

ST

TS

ED

APP

Tuber Comments


Red LaSoda


100

5.5

9.0

8.0

1.0

2.5

7.0

2.5

4.0

6.0

light skin color


Red LaSoda10


95

6.5

9.0

7.0

1.0

2.5

7.0

2.5

4.0

6.0

light skin color


Red LaSoda13


98

5.5

9.0

8.0

1.0

2.5

7.0

2.5

4.0

6.0

light skin color


All Blue


79

5.0

8.8

8.0

8.0

1.0

5.5

4.5

4.5

4.5

mottled flesh color


Cherry Red


95

5.5

8.3

8.3

2.0

2.0

6.0

3.5

5.0

5.5

too much netting


Chieftain


100

6.0

9.0

7.8

1.0

3.0

6.0

2.5

5.5

5.0

too much netting


Dark Red Norland


96

6.5

8.3

6.5

1.0

2.5

6.5

3.5

7.0

6.0

sl. flat


LaRouge


97

6.3

9.0

7.3

2.0

2.5

7.0

3.5

4.5

5.5

all shapes


Red Pontiac


100

6.5

9.0

8.0

2.0

2.5

6.0

2.5

5.5

4.0

very poor appearance


B0984-1


96

6.3

8.3

7.8

2.0

1.5

6.0

2.5

6.5

6.0

dark skin color


B1816-5


100

6.0

8.8

7.8

4.0

1.5

5.5

3.0

6.5

6.0

nice yellow flesh


B2152-17


100

6.5

9.0

7.5

3.0

2.0

6.0

2.5

6.5

6.0

dark skin color, flat


B2327-2


97

5.3

8.3

6.8

1.0

2.0

7.0

2.0

7.0

6.5

dark skin color


B2332-2


100

6.8

8.0

6.8

2.0

2.5

7.0

2.5

6.5

6.0

sl. mishapen


NY129


86

4.8

7.0

8.0

1.0

2.5

6.0

2.5

7.5

6.0

dark skin, too much netting


NY136


97

7.3

8.7

6.5

1.0

2.0

6.5

2.5

7.0

6.0

very dark skin


1See rating system outlined in Chapter 1.

2See rating system outlined in Chapter 1.






















































































Table 4. External and internal defects of Red and Purple-Skinned potato selections.


% External Tuber Defects

% Internal Defects2


Growth

Mis-

Sun-

Rotten

Total





Brown Center

Clone


Cracks

shapen

burned

& misc.

Culls1

HH

BR

CRS

IHN

L

M

H

Red LaSoda


0

0

0

2

3

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

Red LaSoda10


0

0

0

2

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Red LaSoda13


2

0

1

3

6

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

All Blue


0

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Cherry Red


0

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Chieftain


0

0

0

3

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Dark Red Norland


0

0

0

3

4

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

LaRouge


0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

5

1

0

Red Pontiac


0

0

1

2

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

B0984-1


0

0

0

3

4

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

B1816-5


0

0

1

1

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

B2152-17


0

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

B2327-2


0

1

0

2

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

B2332-2


0

0

2

2

4

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

NY129


0

0

0

3

3

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

NY136


0

0

1

1

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

MSD3


1

ns

2

3

ns

ns

0

0

ns

5

ns

0

P Value


0.0176

0.1345

0.0013

0.0185

0.0822

0.4613

-

-

0.4613

0.0176

0.4613

-

1Percent of Total Yield. Total culls include the sum of growth cracks, misshapen, sunburned and rotten/misc.

2Percent tubers; HH, hollow heart; BR, brown rot; CRS, corky ring spot; IHN, internal heat necrosis.

Brown Center: L = Light, M = Moderate, H = Heavy

3Means separated within columns by Tukey's Studentized Range (HSD) Test.



Footnotes

1. This document is HS1089, one of a series of the Horticultural Sciences Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication date June, 2007. Visit the EDIS Web Site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

2. Chad M. Hutchinson Associate Professor, Doug Gergela, Sr. Biological Scientist, Horticultural Sciences Department, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville 32611.


The use of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information. UF/IFAS does not guarantee or warranty the products named, and references to them in this publication do not signify our approval to the exclusion of other products of suitable composition. All chemicals should be used in accordance with directions on the manufacturer's label. Use pesticides safely. Read and follow directions on the manufacturer's label.


The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean.



Copyright Information

This document is copyrighted by the University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) for the people of the State of Florida. UF/IFAS retains all rights under all conventions, but permits free reproduction by all agents and offices of the Cooperative Extension Service and the people of the State of Florida. Permission is granted to others to use these materials in part or in full for educational purposes, provided that full credit is given to the UF/IFAS, citing the publication, its source, and date of publication.