G.E. Boyhan
University of Georgia Department of Horticulture
Statesboro, Georgia
C.R. Hill
Vidalia Onion & Vegetable Research Center
Lyons, Georgia
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Table 1. Watermelon variety trial entries, source, company description, yield and size
distribution, 2005
Table 2. Watermelon fruit characteristics
Table 3. Cantaloupe Variety Trial 2005
Photographs of Watermelon Varieties
Watermelon and cantaloupe variety trials were conducted in 2005 at the Vidalia Onion and Vegetable Research Center, Lyons, Ga. These trials were to evaluate commercial varieties as well as advanced breeding lines as determined by the participating companies. Each year for the past 8 years, we have conducted these trials. These trials are to assess yield and fruit characteristic of the varieties entered.
Watermelon and cantaloupe seed were sown in 1-inch Styrofoam cells of commercial mix at a local commercial greenhouse on 15 April 2005. These seedlings were transplanted to the field on 16 May 2005.
Prior to transplanting, the field was prepared according to University of Georgia Cooperative Extension recommendations and had 750 lbs/acre of 10-10-10 fertilizer preplant encorporated.
The watermelon seedlings were planted with a 5-foot in-row and a 6-foot between-row spacing. In addition, there was a 5-foot in-row alley between adjacent plots. Each plot or experimental unit consisted of 10 plants. The experiment was arranged as a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications.
The cantaloupe seedlings were planted with a 3-foot in-row and 6-foot between-row spacing. In all other respects the experimental layout mirrored the watermelon trial, including the RCBD.
An additional 750 lbs/acre of 10-10-10 was applied 4 weeks after transplanting, just prior to vine cover. Weed control followed University of Georgia Cooperative Extension recommendations. No insect or disease control measures were used.
The watermelon fruit were harvested on 20-21 July 2005, and the cantaloupe fruit were harvested on 15 July and 22 July 2005. The watermelon fruit were weighed individually so an assessment of weight classes could be made. Cantaloupe fruit were counted and then weighed together.
Two fruit from each plot of watermelons were cut and the length (stem end to blossom end) measured. In addition, the width and rind depth were measured. A sample from the central part of the watermelon was used to determine percent soluble solids (sugar content). Finally, the flesh color was noted and rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 indicating the best and 5 the worst for the visual appeal of the flesh.
Four fruit of cantaloupe were cut with the length and width determined as per the watermelon. In addition, the flesh depth was measured from the central cavity to the rind. A portion of the flesh next to the cavity was used to determine soluble solids.
Yield parameters and soluble solids were subjected to analysis of variance with Fisher’s Protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) and coefficient of variation (CV) calculated.
There were 34 entries in the watermelon trial and 7 in the cantaloupe trial. Of the 34 watermelon entries, two-thirds of the entries (23) were from D. Palmer Seed and represented both commercial varieties and advanced breeding lines from this company (Table 1). The other two companies represented in the watermelon trial were Seminis and Rogers.
Only two entries had any watermelons in the over-30-lb class range, and they were WD-05-96 and WD-05-57, both from D. Palmer Seed. The majority of entries had sizes in the 20-lb and under size classes.
Five entries had all of their fruit in the under 10-lb size class. These included ‘Petite Perfection,’ ‘Bambino,’ ‘Bibo,’ ‘RWT 8149,’ ‘Mini Yellow’ and ‘Precious Petite.’ All were among the lowest yielding except ‘Petite Perfection.’ All of these would be classed as “palm” melons, which are very small (about the size of an average cantaloupe). These melons generally have produced lower yields in our trials and probably should be grown at closer spacing in a separate trial — perhaps 20 square feet per plant or less instead of the 30 square feet as in this trial. These varieties are often handled in a vertical production system, where the grower is contracted to grow the melons and they are sold by melon rather than by weight. These melons may represent a whole new market for water-melons that caters to a more affluent, urban customer.
Yields ranged from 513 to 30,250 lbs/acre, which is marginally acceptable. A well-managed crop can yield twice the highest yield in this study. Watermelons in the 18-25 lb size class continue to dominate with some-what smaller triploids.
Allsweet rind patterns continue to predominate, although there are some other types and a few yellow fleshed entries. The three entries with the highest soluble solids or sugar content were ‘Petite Perfection,’ ‘Bibo’ and ‘Precious Petite,’ all from Rogers and all in the palm size class. There were 12 entries that had soluble solids content below 10 percent, which is the minimum for “very good internal quality.”
The yields in the cantaloupe trial ranged from 19,421 to 36,929 lbs/acre, and the number of fruit ranged from 3,328 to 6,776. The soluble solids were lower than would be expected in commercial production. We have tremendous problems with southern blight as the fruit ripen. We, therefore, harvested the fruit to minimize this problem, which caused under-ripe fruit.
In conclusion, we hope to have better trials in the future with the acquisition of plastic laying equipment. This should allow us to have better weed control, particularly early in the crop as well as more rapid early growth. In particular, we hope this will improve conditions for the cantaloupe trial. We will be able to leave fruit on the plastic, allowing it to more fully mature without rotting.
Entries |
Color
Ratingz |
Color |
Length |
Width |
Rind Depth |
Sugar |
Royal Flush |
2.5 |
Red - Dark red |
15.0 |
7.1 |
0.7 |
10.1 |
WD-04-61 |
2.0 |
Red |
14.8 |
6.7 |
0.7 |
9.5 |
Wrigley |
3.7 |
Red - Dark red |
10.8 |
7.8 |
0.6 |
11.4 |
Sentinel |
2.5 |
Red - Dark red |
11.8 |
7.2 |
0.7 |
10.7 |
Plantation Pride |
2.3 |
Red |
13.7 |
7.0 |
0.8 |
9.4 |
WD-05-97 |
2.8 |
Red - Dark red |
12.1 |
7.3 |
0.7 |
10.0 |
WD-05-96 |
2.5 |
Red - Dark red |
13.1 |
8.3 |
0.7 |
10.7 |
WT-05-92 |
1.6 |
Red |
10.9 |
7.4 |
0.7 |
9.5 |
WD-05-57 |
2.8 |
Red |
11.3 |
9.3 |
0.6 |
9.5 |
Waddie |
2.5 |
Red |
14.1 |
7.3 |
0.6 |
9.7 |
WT-05-91 |
3.8 |
Dark red |
10.0 |
8.1 |
0.6 |
11.2 |
Cooperstown |
2.3 |
Red - Dark red |
11.0 |
8.3 |
0.8 |
10.7 |
WD-02-25 |
3.5 |
Red - Dark red |
15.0 |
6.9 |
0.6 |
9.9 |
WD-04-56 |
3.3 |
Red - Dark red |
10.1 |
8.5 |
0.7 |
11.3 |
WT-05-90 |
1.3 |
Red |
9.1 |
8.3 |
0.8 |
10.0 |
Comiskey |
2.5 |
Red |
11.7 |
6.7 |
0.7 |
10.7 |
WT-04-41 |
3.0 |
Red - Dark red |
10.1 |
7.9 |
0.8 |
11.1 |
Petite Perfection |
3.0 |
Red - Dark red |
7.4 |
6.2 |
0.5 |
12.4 |
WD-02-45 |
1.5 |
Red |
13.3 |
6.2 |
0.6 |
8.7 |
WD-02-23 |
1.8 |
Red |
12.8 |
7.5 |
0.7 |
9.7 |
Promise |
2.2 |
Red |
9.8 |
7.6 |
0.7 |
9.4 |
Yellow Bird |
2.3 |
Yellow |
8.2 |
7.4 |
0.7 |
8.9 |
Summertime |
2.4 |
Red |
9.2 |
7.8 |
1.0 |
11.3 |
WT-04-63 |
3.0 |
Red |
9.0 |
7.9 |
0.7 |
11.3 |
Sunsation 2 |
1.5 |
Red |
12.2 |
7.3 |
0.9 |
9.8 |
Butterball |
2.3 |
Yellow |
7.6 |
6.8 |
0.7 |
9.0 |
Sweet Eat’n |
3.0 |
Red |
9.8 |
7.3 |
0.9 |
10.5 |
Majestic |
1.8 |
Red |
10.1 |
7.7 |
0.8 |
10.3 |
Bambino |
2.8 |
Red |
7.3 |
6.7 |
0.8 |
10.7 |
Bibo |
3.8 |
Red - Dark Red |
7.3 |
5.6 |
0.5 |
12.1 |
RWT 8149 |
3.5 |
Dark red |
7.3 |
6.2 |
0.5 |
11.2 |
Mini Yellow |
5.0 |
Yellow |
7.3 |
6.6 |
0.8 |
11.0 |
Precious Petite |
4.5 |
Dark red |
6.8 |
6.1 |
0.5 |
11.5 |
zColor: 1-5, 1 - best, 5 - worst |
|
|
|
CV |
12% |
|
|
|
|
|
LSD (P≤0.05) |
1.7 |
|
Entries |
Company |
Yield |
Yield |
Fruit Length |
Fruit Width |
Flesh Depth |
Soluble Solids |
Orange Sherbet |
D. Palmer Seed |
36,929 |
5,687 |
8.4 |
6.4 |
1.9 |
7.6 |
Orange Star |
Seminis |
28,859 |
6,474 |
7.1 |
6.1 |
1.9 |
6.8 |
Savannah |
D. Palmer Seed |
28,641 |
5,929 |
6.4 |
6.2 |
1.7 |
7.4 |
Delta |
D. Palmer Seed |
27,624 |
5,687 |
8.1 |
6.2 |
1.6 |
9.6 |
Southern Belle |
D. Palmer Seed |
25,253 |
6,776 |
6.5 |
5.9 |
1.4 |
8.2 |
Honey Max |
Seminis |
23,498 |
5,022 |
5.9 |
5.8 |
1.9 |
7.8 |
Abu |
D. Palmer Seed |
19,421 |
3,328 |
8.1 |
6.4 |
1.5 |
8.2 |
|
CV |
19% |
16% |
|
|
|
11% |
LSD (P≤0.05) |
7,684 |
1,341 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
 |
- |  |
| Royal Flush — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-04-61 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Wrigley — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Sentinel — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Plantation Pride — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-05-97 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-05-96 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WT-05-92 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-05-57 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Waddie — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WT-05-91 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Cooperstown — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-02-25 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-04-56 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WT-05-90 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Comiskey — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WT-04-41 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Petite Perfection — Rogers | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-02-45 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WD-02-23 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Promise — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Yellow Bird — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Summertime — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| WT-04-63 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Sensation 2 — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Butterball — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Sweet Eat'n — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Majestic — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Bambino — Seminis | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Bibo — Rogers | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| RWT 8149 — Rogers | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Mini Yellow — D. Palmer Seed | ||
| - | ||
 |
 |
|
| Precious Petite — Rogers | ||
Miscellaneous Publication 107-3/October, 2006
The University of Georgia and Ft. Valley State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and counties of the state cooperating. Cooperative Extension, the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, offers educational programs, assistance and materials to all people without regard to race, color, national origin, age, gender or disability.
An Equal Opportunity Employer/Affirmative Action Organization Committed to a Diverse Work Force
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, The University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences and the U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating.
J. Scott Angle, Dean and Director