Processing Tomato Breeding and Genetics Research 2006.

Transcription

1 2006 Tomato Breeding 1 Processing Tomato Breeding and Genetics Research (Field and Raw-Product Quality Evaluation) Troy Aldrich Audrey Darrigues Alba McIntyre Matt Robbins Sung-Chur Sim David M. Francis francis.77@osu.edu The Ohio State University, OARDC 1680 Madison Ave. Wooster, OH Horticulture and Crop Science Series No. xxx, 2007

2 2006 Tomato Breeding 2 Processing Tomato Breeding and Genetics Research Summary Our research continued to focus on parent line and hybrid development. Despite challenging conditions in 2006, the variety OX325 performed well in small-scale commercial trials. A new variety, FG01-160, has performed well in plot trials, and should be considered for commercialization. Varieties with bacterial spot resistance performed well in disease evaluation trials, but further work is required to combine resistance with acceptable yield, fruit size, or fruit firmness. Studies to manage color quality demonstrated the importance of K and P nutrition, suggest that soils with >20% clay and sandy soils should be managed differently, and lead to new guidelines for K and P levels in the soil. New recommendations for P nutrition should be validated through experimentation to verify that amendments can achieve desired results. Introduction The Ohio State University/OARDC tomato breeding program aims to develop hybrid varieties, inbred parents, and improved genetics for the processing industry in the Mid-West and Mid-Atlantic states. Growing conditions are characteristically humid, and varieties developed for arid or Mediterranean climates do not perform well due to fruit cracking, fruit and foliar disease, and lack of general adaptation. Our evaluation emphasizes field performance and processing quality, with specific research projects in the areas of resistance to bacterial spot, bacterial canker, color (including color uniformity), and yield. Because the sustainability of plant breeding efforts requires the identification of new sources of genetic variation and new traits, the OSU/OARDC program develops new populations to expand our base of useful genetics. Developmental research has centered on structuring populations for simultaneous trait identification, genetic mapping, and breeding. Our goal is to apply new discoveries through variety development. Environments -Trial Locations and Weather Data It is our standard practice to trial varieties at the Horticulture and Crop Science farm in Wooster, OH; at the OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station (Fremont, OH), and on grower farms in Ohio and Indiana. Additional plot trials are established by collaborators in Canada (Steve Loewen), New Jersey (Tom Orton and Steve Garrison), and Pennsylvania (Ken Martin). The purpose of these multi-location tests is to observe variety performance under diverse environments in a single year. OSU/OARDC variety release and distribution guidelines require data for at least three locations and three years prior to release. Table 1. Summary statistics for field trials, three-year period Yield FRT Sz Disease Year T/A % Cull (gm) Severity Brx LSD * 4.52 * 4.66 ns 0.24 * 0.26 *

3 2006 Tomato Breeding 3 The 2006 growing season was characterized by a wet spring and wet fall, separated by a dry mid-season; Our variety trial locations experienced as little as 0.0 inches and as much as 10 inches of precipitation in a single week this past season. The stress of the 2006 season combined with excess rain when ripe fruit were on the vine decreased yield, fruit size and increased fruit cracking (reflected by the % Cull) relative to previous years (Table 1). Breeding New Varieties and Parental Lines for the Great Lakes Tomato Industry Despite diverse and adverse conditions, OX325, continued to perform well in plot trials and in small-scale commercial trials. OX325 carries the alcabaça (alc) gene in the heterozygous condition and is homozygous for crimson (og c ). This combination of genes imparts good color, firmness, and field storage. FG continues to perform well in trials across the growing region (Table 2). FG is similar to OX325 with respect to yield, but has larger fruit and higher soluble solids. Sufficient objective data exist to justify release of FG as a variety if a commercial partner can be identified. Promising varieties from commercial sources include several Tomato Solutions varieties that offer yield and quality in the early season. TC680 from Harris Moran continued to yield well while also combining above average fruit size and soluble solids. Heinz 9704 has become a new standard for yield performance while Heinz 3402 offers improved foliar resistance and comparable yield. Several GEM varieties performed well across field and quality evaluations (see Table 2). New disease resistant hybrids FG02-107, FG02-109, FG04-472, FG04-478, and FG demonstrated very good tolerance to bacterial diseases, but in general these varieties yield fruit that are too soft. The FG02 series combines resistance to bacterial speck race 0 (Pto) and bacterial spot race T1 (Rx3, from Hawaii 7998). New experimental hybrids in the FG04 series carry partial resistance to multiple races of bacterial spot derived from PI (Table 3). Crosses to combine this resistance improved fruit firmness are underway. Parent performance. Data from our variety trials is also analyzed to identify parent lines that demonstrate exceptional performance across multiple hybrids. This analysis helps us determine which parents have good general combining ability (GCA). Parents with good GCA include: Ohio 1067 (alc, og c ), F (alc, og c ), and F (Pto, Rx3). Parents Ohio 2641, Ohio 3614 Ohio 1439 impart good to excellent color and excellent adaptation to humid growing conditions. Several inbred lines offer excellent GCA for bacterial spot resistance. These include Ohio 6631, Ohio 6569, Ohio 6570, Ohio 8605, and Ohio 8614 (Table 4). These parents may be of interest to breeding programs that seek peeler quality and humid environment adaptation. Evaluation of Breeding Progress. The goal of plant breeding is to improve population performance for important traits, and then developing the best varieties from these populations. Breeding processing tomatoes presents challenges due to the large number of traits, from field to processing, that are important. There is a risk that placing too much emphasis on one trait may limit progress on other traits. For example, soluble solids decreased during the late 1990 s while we emphasized color and color uniformity. In the past five years, the average soluble solids have increased 5%. Fruit size, an important characteristic for diced recovery, has increased 9.5% when adjusted for control varieties. Improvement of color and color uniformity has reached a plateau since 2000, but gains made between 1996 and 1999 have not been eroded.

4 2006 Tomato Breeding 4 Technology Transfer The OSU office of technology licensing continues to provide service and outreach efforts. Material Transfer Agreements for obtaining tomato seed may be obtained by through the address MTA-CDA@rf.ohio-state.edu. Copies of the MTA may also be obtained on the world wide web at In 2006 we executed five MTA s to distribute germplasm to commercial seed companies. One commercial license for parent material was initiated. Interpreting Table 2: Varieties in Table 2 are ed for all traits. An overall is calculated based on based on a combined score of the individual s. Therefore, the lowest number is the best variety. Note that this approach assumes that traits are equally important. In addition, performance relative to the trial average is highlighted with above average performance indicated by [ ]; and below average, by [ ]. This shading serves to draw attention to the difficulty of identifying a variety that excels in all areas of evaluation. Table Variety performance Evaluation. Varieties are sorted by overall. Above average performance is highlighted by [ ] and below average performance by [ ]. adj Yld T/A Frt Wt. Oz Frt Wt. gm Maturity (Days to Harvest) score % % variety Source T/A Cull Crack Brx ph TSH4 Tom. Sol GEM111 GEM H9704 Heinz H3402 Heinz FG OSU PS696 Seminis TSH18 Tom. Sol FG OSU OX325 GEM OX23 Hirzel TC680 HarrisMoran FGH OSU FG OSU FGH OSU Gem94 GEM Gem31 GEM C258 Unilvever FGH OSU Progress Seminis TSH16 Tom. Sol TSH8 Tom. Sol H9423 Heinz FG OSU OX52 Seminis FGH OSU

5 2006 Tomato Breeding 5 FGH OSU Gem46 GEM Gem818 GEM FG OSU OH7983 GEM FGH OSU FGH OSU FGH OSU FGH OSU FG OSU FGH OSU FGH OSU Gem611 GEM FGH OSU FG OSU OSU FGH OSU FGH OSU FGH OSU FG OSU FGH OSU FG OSU FGH OSU FGH OSU H9364 Heinz FGH OSU FGH OSU FG OSU FGH OSU Average LSD

6 2006 Tomato Breeding 6 Table 3. Bacterial spot rating (T1, T2, and T3 combined inoculations). Varieties with a low rating are more resistant. Genotype Mean OX FG OX H H TSH FGH FG FG FGH FGH FGH GEM TSH FG FG FG FGH H OX Progress 7.0 PS TC TSH4 7.0 FG FGH FGH Gem GEM OH FG FGH FGH FGH FGH FGH Gem H OH C FGH FGH GEM C FGH FGH FGH Gem TSH8 5.0 FGH FGH MR FGH FGH FGH FGH Average LSD Tabel 4. Parent performance in bacterial disease trials (T1, T2, and T3 combined inoculations). Parents with a low rating are more resistant.. Parent Mean OH OH OH K OH OH F PS OH OH OH K F K OH OH K OH OH OH OH OH OH LSD

7 2006 Tomato Breeding 7 Managing Tomatoes for Color Quality Internal white tissue, yellow eye, yellow shoulder, and green shoulder represent a range of symptom severity for a single problem, Yellow Shoulder Disorder (YSD). YSD is due to abnormal development, not a delay in ripening. Abnormalities include a reduction in cell size and a more random arrangement of cells in the affected tissue. These alterations are triggered very early in fruit development and are not reversed by delaying harvest. There is a large environmental component that contributes to YSD. Results from studies that aim to identify and manage environmental causes of YSD are summarized under the managing color disorders link at The web site also contains some tools that will facilitate information and technology transfer related to color quality management. There is a strong association between high YSD and low available Potassium (K) and low Phosphorous (P). The Midwest growing region can be divided into two main soil types that track closely with soil texture and mineralogy. Southern Michigan and Southern Indiana contain Course soils, while central Indiana and all of the Ohio growing region contain Fine soil (higher than 20% clay). The figures below document maximum quality based on soil K and P. Table 5 presents guidelines for maximum fruit quality. Number of Observations Exchangeable K Fine Soil (clay) 0.6% 12.9% 25.8% 25.8% 16.0% 10.4% 6.2% 1.7% 0.6% Soil Exchangeable K (cmol. Kg -1 ) Coarse Soils L* L*diff Hue o Hue o diff Slope of Expected Probability Number of Observations Coarse Soil (sand) 30.0% 0.9 Fine S oils L* L* diff 0.8 H ue o 23.0% H ue o diff % % % 4.5% % 1.4% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% Soil Echangeable K (cmol. Kg -1 ) Slope of Expected Probability Field experiments to amend soils with Potassium fertilizer have demonstrated that YSD can be reduced by drip irrigation and fertigation as well as side-dressing with K while the tomato plant is in bloom. Foliar applications are not effective. Field experiments to determine the effectiveness of added Phosphorous have not been conducted, and the new findings that low levels of P are associated with higher levels of YSD should be interpreted cautiously. These results may lead to new recommendations for fertility management. Phosphorus (PPM) Table 5. Suggested fertility guidelines. Number of Observations Fine Soil (clay) 0.0% 6.5% 29.5% 23.3% 16.6% 12.9% 5.6% 3.1% 1.1% 0.8% 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% Soil Availabe P (ug. g -1 ) Coar se S oils L* L* diff H ue o H ue o diff Slope of Expected Probability Number of Observations coarse Soil (sand) 0.0% 10.8% 32.1% 27.2% 17.1% 7.3% 3.8% 0.7% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% Soil Availabe P (ug. g -1 ) Interpret cautiously. New finding, more investigation is warranted. Fine S oils L* L* diff Hue o Hue o diff Coarse soils Fine soils K (Cmol/Kg) >0.4 Hartz >.35 Kact No value K%CEC 7 4 >4 P ppm >30 %OM 2 2 No value S lope of Expected P r obability Website values

8 2006 Tomato Breeding 8 Acknowledgements Thanks to Matt Hoefelich, Sean Mueller, and Troy Aldrich for technical assistance in planting, care, and harvesting of plots and Audrey Darrigues, Alba McIntyre, Sung-Chur Sim and Matt Robbins for assistance in the Quality Lab. Salaries and research support were provided by state and federal funds appropriated to The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, the USDA/IFAFS program, and grant funds from the Mid-America Food Processors Association. The mention of firm names or trade products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by The Ohio State University over other firms or similar products not mentioned. All programs of the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center are available to all potential clientele without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, gender, age, disability, or Vietnam-era veteran status. HCS Series number No. xxx, 2007