American Journal of Potato Research

, Volume 94, Issue 4, pp 437–448

Fresh Market Evaluation of Six Russet-Type Potato Varieties and Four Russet Norkotah Strains

Article

Abstract

In 2016, Russet Norkotah was the second most widely grown potato variety in the US; however, recent research has identified alternatives with excellent production economics. During 2011–2013, fresh market variety research was conducted in the Columbia Basin of central Washington, a long-season production region. Russet Norkotah was compared to five varieties–Classic Russet, Mountain Gem Russet, Russet Burbank, Targhee Russet, and Teton Russet–and four sub-clonal strains–CO-3, CO-8, TX-278, and TX-296–derived from Russet Norkotah. Each variety was evaluated for early- (104 days between planting and vine kill) and late- (150 days between planting and vine kill) harvest tuber size profile, grade, and yield, grower economic value, susceptibility to blackspot bruise and shatter bruise, emergence, stem and at-harvest tuber numbers, tuber length-to-width ratios, and quality. When harvested early, Classic Russet and Mountain Gem Russet produced 30% and 15% more gross revenue than Russet Norkotah, respectively. All other varieties and Russet Norkotah strains except CO-3 produced as much early-harvest gross revenue as Russet Norkotah. CO-3 early-harvest revenue was close to 50% lower than that of Russet Norkotah. All varieties and Russet Norkotah strains produced significantly greater late-harvest yields and gross returns than Russet Norkotah. Late-harvest gross revenue for Targhee Russet and Mountain Gem Russet was 38% and 34% higher than Russet Norkotah, respectively. Classic Russet, Mountain Gem Russet, Targhee Russet, and Teton Russet had significantly more shatter bruise following the late harvest than Russet Norkotah and all Russet Norkotah strains. Russet Burbank was among the most susceptible to blackspot and Targhee Russet the least, with 32% and 2.1%, respectively. If bruising is mitigated, Mountain Gem Russet, Classic Russet, and Teton Russet may be suitable alternatives to Russet Norkotah and Russet Norkotah strains for both early and late harvests.

Keywords

Yield Economics Size profile Shatter bruise Blackspot bruise Length to width 

Resumen

En el 2016, la variedad de papa Russet Norkotah fue la segunda más cultivada en los EUA; no obstante, investigaciones recientes han identificado alternativas con excelente producción económica. Durante 2011–2013, se condujo una investigación de variedades para el mercado fresco en la rivera del Columbia en el centro de Washington, una región de producción de ciclo largo. Se comparó a Russet Norkotah con cinco variedades: Classic Russet, Mountain Gem Russet, Russet Burbank, Targhee Russet, y Teton Russet, y cuatro variantes subclonales: CO-3, CO-8, TX-278, y TX-296-derivada de Russet Norkotah. Cada variedad se evaluó por precocidad (104 días entre la siembra y la quema de follaje) y por tardías (150 días entre la siembra y la quema de follaje), por perfil del tamaño de tubérculo a la cosecha, clasificación y rendimiento, por valor económico al productor, susceptibilidad a la mancha negra y cuarteaduras por daño mecánico, emergencia, número de tubérculos por tallo a la cosecha, relación largo-ancho de tubérculo, y calidad. En cosecha temprana, Classic Russet y Mountain Gem Russet produjeron 30% y 15% más ingreso bruto que Russet Norkotah, respectivamente. Las otras variedades y las variantes de Russet Norkotah, excepto CO-3, produjeron tanto ingreso bruto en cosecha temprana como Russet Norkotah. El ingreso de CO-3 en cosecha temprana fue cercano al 50% más bajo que el de Russet Norkotah. Todas las variedades y las variantes de Russet Norkotah produjeron significativamente mayores rendimientos e ingresos brutos que Russet Norkotah en cosecha tardía. El ingreso bruto en cosecha tardía de Targhee Russet y Mountain Gem Russet fue 38% y 34% más alto que el de Russet Norkotah, respectrivamente. Classic Russet, Mountain Gem Russet, Targhee Russet, y Teton Russet tuvieron significativamente más daño mecánico después de la cosecha tardía que Russet Norkotah y que todas las variantes de Russet Norkotah. Russet Burbank estuvo entre las más susceptibles a la mancha negra y Targhee Russet la menos, con 32% y 2.1%, respectivamente. Si se mitiga el daño mecánico, Mountain Gem Russet, Classic Russet, y Teton Russet pudieran ser alternativas deseables a Russet Norkotah y sus variantes tanto para cosecha temprana como tardía.

References

  1. Adams, M.J., and D.H. Lapwood. 1978. Studies on the lenticel development, surface microflora and infection by common scab (Streptomyces scabies) of potato tubers growing in wet and dry soils. Annals of Applied Biology 90: 335–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, D., B. Geary, J. Stark, S. Love, and J. Windes. 2003. Potato varietal responses to nitrogen rate and timing. Presented at the Idaho Potato Conference on January 2, 1003, 22: 59-68.Google Scholar
  3. Hane, D.C., and P.B. Hamm. 1999. Effects of seedborne potato virus Y infection in two potato cultivars expressing mild disease symptoms. Plant Disease 83: 43–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hane, D.C., A.R. Mosley, S.R. James, K.A. Rykbost, C.C. Shock, S.L. Love, D.L. Corsini, J.J. Pavek, R.E. Thornton, B.A. Charlton, E.P. Eldredge, and S. Yllma. 2003. Wallowa russet: A full season long russet for processing and fresh market. American Journal of Potato Research 80: 289–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. James, S., F. Crowe, D. Hane, A. Mosley, K. Rykbost, and C. Stanger. 1989. New potato varieties for Oregon. 1988 Progress report, Central Oregon Experiment Station. Redmond: Oregon State University.Google Scholar
  6. Jansky, S.H., and J.C. Miller Jr. 2010. Evaluation of Verticillium wilt resistance in russet Norkotah and six strain selections. American Journal of Potato Research 87: 492–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johansen, R.H., B. Farnsworth, N. Gudmestad, G.A. Secor, D.C. Nelson, A. Thomson, A.A. Boe, and P.H. Orr. 1988. Russet Norkotah: A new russet-skinned potato cultivar with wide adaptation. American Potato Journal. 65: 597–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Johnson, G. 2013. Excess water problems in potato. Weekly Crop Update 21(17): 2–3. Delaware Cooperative Extension, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
  9. King, B.A., D.D. Tarkalson, D.L. Bjorneberg, and J.P. Taberna. 2010. Planting system effect on yield response of russet Norkotah to irrigation and nitrogen under high intensity sprinkler irrigation. American Journal of Potato Research 88: 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kunkel, R., W.H. Gardner, and N.M. Holstad. 1986. Improvement of techniques for potato blackspot evaluation and some errors associated with measurements. American Potato Journal 63: 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lang, N.S., R.G. Stevens, R.E. Thornton, W.L. Pan, and S. Victory. 1999. Nutrient Management Guide: Central Washington Irrigated Potatoes. Washington State University cooperative extension EB 1882 [Pullman, WA].Google Scholar
  12. Mikitzel, L. 2014. Tuber physiological disorders. PP. 237–254 in R. Navarre and M. Pavek, eds. The potato: Botany, Production and Uses. CAD International, US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
  13. Mondjana, A.M., D.I. Rouse, and T.L German. 1993. The impact of PVY on potato yield and severity of early rying. Abstract presented at 77th annual meeting of the Potato Association of America, Madison, WI. American Potato Journal 70: 829.Google Scholar
  14. Novy, R.G., J.L. Whitworth, J.C. Stark, B.A. Charlton, S. Yilma, N.R. Knowles, M.J. Pavek, et al. 2014. Teton russet: An early-maturing, dual-purpose potato cultivar having higher protein and vitamin C content, low asparagine, and resistances to common scab and Fusarium dry rot. American Journal of Potato Research 91: 380–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rykbost, K.A., D.C. Hane, P.B. Hamm, R. Voss, and D. Kirby. 1999. Effects of seedborne potato virus Y on russet Norkotah performance. American Journal of Potato Research 76(XX): 91–96.Google Scholar
  16. Stark, J.C., R.G. Novy, J.L. Whitworth, N.R. Knowles, M.J. Pavek, S.L. Love, M.I. Vales, et al. 2010. Classic russet: A potato cultivar with excellent fresh market characteristics and high yields of US no. 1 tubers suitable for early harvest or full-season production. American Journal of Potato Research 87: 360–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stark, J.C., R.G. Novy, J.L. Whitworth, N.R. Knowles, M.J. Pavek, M. Thornton, R. Spear, C.R. Brown, B.A. Charlton, V. Sathuvalli, S. Yilma, N. Olsen, and T.L. Brandt. 2016. Mountain gem russet: A potato variety with high early and full season yield potential and excellent fresh market and early processing characteristics. American Journal of Potato Research 93: 158–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thornton, M.K., and W.H. Bohl. 1998. Preventing potato bruise damage. Extension Bulletin 725. University of Idaho.Google Scholar
  19. Thornton, R.E., D.A. Smittle, and C.L. Peterson. 1974. Reducing potato damage during harvest. Extension bulletin 0646 cooperative extension service. Pullman: Washington State University.Google Scholar
  20. Timm, H., and W.J. Flocker. 1966. Responses of potato plants to fertilization and soil moisture tension under induced soil compaction. Agronomy Journal 58: 153–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. USDA 1978. Market Diseases of Potatoes. 1978. Agriculture handbook 479. U.S. government printing office, 0-2I2-827: United States Department of Agriculture, agricultural Research Station. Hyattsville, MDGoogle Scholar
  22. USDA Federal-State Market News Service 2007-2010. Available at https://www.marketnews.usda.gov/. Accessed December 2016.
  23. USDA-NASS. 2016. Crop production 2015 summary. US department of agriculture national agricultural statistics service. Available at http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/CropProdSu/CropProdSu-01-12-2016.pdf. Accessed on 10 Feb 2017.
  24. USDA-NASS. 2017. Crop production 2016 summary. US department of agriculture national agricultural statistics service. Available at http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/CropProdSu/CropProdSu-01-12-2017.pdf. Accessed on 10 Feb 2017.
  25. Whitworth, J.L., R.G. Novy, J.C. Stark, M. Thornton, N.R. Knowles, M.J. Pavek, R.R. Spear, C.R. Brown, B.A. Charlton, V. Sathuvalli, S. Yilma, T.L. Brandt, and N. Olsen. 2016. Targhee russet: A high yielding, dual purpose potato variety with high protein and vitamin C content and resistance to tuber soft rot. American Journal of Potato Research 93: 189–201. doi:10.1007/s12230-016-9495-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Potato Association of America 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rulon R. Spear
    • 1
  • Zach J. Holden
    • 2
  • Mark J. Pavek
    • 2
  1. 1.McCain FoodsBurleyUSA
  2. 2.Department of HorticultureWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA

Personalised recommendations