Potato Breeding and Selection - Colorado State Universitypotatoes.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/...Potato Breeding and Selection Submitted by David G. Holm, Caroline Gray,

2015 Research Progress Report

Potato Breeding and Selection

Submitted by

David G. Holm, Caroline Gray, and Katrina Zavislan

San Luis Valley Research Center

to the

Colorado Potato Administrative Committee (Area II)

Research Committee

and the

Colorado Potato Administrative Committee (Area III)

Mission Statement

“The mission of the Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection

Program is to develop cultivars that will help assure that the

Colorado potato industry remains productive, competitive, and

sustainable and that provide the consumer with improved

nutrition and quality.”

ii

Table of Contents

Mission Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Preface.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Potato Breeding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Germplasm Accession and Introgression. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Carotenoid Enhancement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Crossing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Seedling Selection and Clonal Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Collaborative Studies.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Graduate Students. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Potato Breeding Program Advisory Committee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Colorado State University Potato Program Website. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

San Luis Valley Research Center Facebook Page. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Tables 1. Generalized potato breeding and selection scheme used at the San Luis Valley

Research Center. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2A-B. Preliminary Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3A-B. San Luis Valley Chipping Study.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4A-E. Intermediate Yield Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5A-E. Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6A-E. Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 7A-E. Advanced Yield Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 8A-E. Southwest Regional Russet Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 9A-E. Southwest Regional Red Trial.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 10A-E. Southwest Regional Specialty Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 11A-E. Southwest Regional Chip Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 12A-E. Western Regional Main Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 13A-E. Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 14A-E. Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

iii

15A-E. Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 16. Summary comparison of advanced selections and named cultivars for yield, grade, maturity, specific gravity, and grade defects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7317A-17AB. Detailed data summaries for advanced selections and named cultivars:

RussetsAC00395-2RU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79CO05068-1RU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80CO05175-1RU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

AC05039-2RU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Canela Russet.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Centennial Russet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Fortress Russet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Rio Grande Russet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Russet Norkotah.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

SpecialtiesCO04056-3P/PW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88CO04067-8R/Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89CO04099-3W/Y.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90AC05175-3P/Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91CO05037-2R/Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92CO05037-3W/Y.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93CO05028-4P/PY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94CO05028-11P/RWP.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95CO05035-1PW/Y.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96AC99330-1P/Y (Midnight Moon). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Mountain Rose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98Purple Majesty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99Yukon Gold. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

ChippersAC01151-5W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101CO02024-9W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102CO02033-1W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103CO02321-4W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104AC03433-1W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105CO03243-3W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106AC00206-2W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107AC03452-2W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108AC05153-1W.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109Atlantic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110Chipeta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Figures1. Photographs of advanced selections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Appendices1. Cultural management information for the Potato Breeding and Selection Program’s trials at the San Luis Valley Research Center - 2015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132. General procedures used for postharvest evaluations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

iv

Preface

We are pleased to provide this copy of the 2015 Potato Breeding and Selection Research ProgressReport. This report includes research funded by the Colorado potato industry (Area II and Area III),Colorado State University (Agricultural Experiment Station and the Department of Horticulture andLandscape Architecture), the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), the US Potato Board,and PVP royalties. These funds collectively continue to allow us to strengthen our overall collaborativeresearch efforts with colleagues at CSU and other universities and agencies. All of these efforts areaimed at developing improved potato cultivars for Colorado.

Ongoing support by the Colorado potato industry is key to maintaining funds received from NIFA andother sources. NIFA and PVP funding have allowed us to significantly expand our breeding efforts overthe years to include resistance to the following: PVY, late blight (foliar and tuber), nematodes, pink rot,storage rots [dry rot (Fusarium and early blight) and bacterial soft rot], corky ringspot, and powderyscab, as well as other special initiatives including graduate student support.

The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program relies on the invaluable cooperation of severalgrowers, shippers, and research personnel to assess the production, adaptability, marketability, and othercharacteristics of advanced selections.

Collaborators and areas of collaboration are:

• Andrew J. Houser - Disease Screening and Evaluation• Samuel Y. C. Essah - Cultivar Specific Production Management• Sastry S. Jayanty - Cultivar Specific Postharvest Management and Physiology• Adam Heuberger - Nutritional Characteristics and Health Attributes• Kent P. Sather and Andrew J. Houser - Potato Certification Service• Colorado Potato Growers• Southwest Regional Potato Breeding and Cultivar Development Cooperators (Colorado, Texas, and

California). The overall objective of this research group is to develop and evaluate improved potatocultivars to meet the production, marketing, and producer/consumer needs of the Southwest U.S.

• Other cooperating research/extension programs - several cooperators throughout the United States andCanada provide breeding material and opportunities to screen our germplasm under various growingconditions and disease pressures.

Best wishes for the 2016 production season!

Sincerely,

Dave Holm, Caroline Gray, and Trina Zavislan

v

Acknowledgments

We would like to express appreciation to the following individuals, groups, and organizations for theirefforts on behalf of the Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program in 2015.

U Financial and In-kind Support from the following is gratefully acknowledged:• Colorado Potato Industry - Area II and III• Colorado State University - Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station & the Department of

Horticulture and Landscape Architecture• USDA - National Institute of Food and Agriculture - Potato Research Award Number

2012-34141-20309• United States Potato Board - National Chip Processing Trial (NCPT) and National Fry Processing

Trial (NFPT)• Stone’s Farm Supply - in-kind support

U Colorado Potato Administration Committee, Area II - Research Committee (Members and At-largeMembers) and Area III

U Technical Support/Graduate Students*Mitzi Cisneros Helen Duran Wendy Waldrop Taylor BondKegan Leckler Zach Leckler Lexi Shawcroft Leandro SalaDerek Sala Raven Bough* Sarah Shawcroft Greg Hess*

Numerous other temporary support personnel assisted the project, particularly during seedcutting, planting, and harvest.

U Research Collaborators - Colorado State UniversitySamuel Essah Sastry Jayanty Adam Heuberger Andrew HouserJorge Vivanco

U Staff - San Luis Valley Research CenterMichelle Leckler Tim Poe Ron Price Stan PriceTyler Thompson Sharon Yust

U Potato Certification Service

Kent Sather Rick Haslar (retired) Andrew Houser Carolyn KellerSteve Keller Teresa Almeida Greg Hess

U Southwest Regional Potato Breeding and Cultivar Development Cooperators (Colorado, Texas, andCalifornia).

U The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program relies on the cooperation of several growers,

shippers, processors, and research personnel to assess the production, adaptability, marketability,and other characteristics of advanced selections from our program. We sincerely appreciate theirsupport and the valuable feedback they provide. We thank the many cooperating breeding andselection programs throughout the United States and Canada who have provided breeding materialand opportunities to screen our germplasm under various growing conditions and disease pressuresnot usually available in Colorado.

vi

2015 Research Progress Report

Potato Breeding and Selection

Submitted by

David G. Holm, Caroline Gray, and Katrina Zavislan

San Luis Valley Research Center

Introduction

The major objectives of the Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program are: (1) to develop newpotato cultivars with increased yield, improved quality, improved nutritional and health characteristics,resistance to diseases and pests, and tolerance to environmental stresses; (2) to collaborate with growers,shippers, processors, and research/extension personnel to assess the production, adaptability,marketability, and other characteristics of advanced selections from the Colorado program; (3) to providea basic seed source of selections to growers for seed increase and commercial testing; (4) to evaluatepromising selections for possible interstate and international export.

The primary emphasis is placed on the development of russet cultivars. The balance of the breedingeffort is devoted to developing red, specialty, and chipping cultivars. This broad approach recognizes thediverse markets accessed by potato growers throughout Colorado.

Besides the major objectives, specific breeding emphasis is being placed on identifying germplasm anddeveloping cultivars that have: (1) early vine maturity and early tuber bulking; (2) immunity to PVY;resistance to (3) late blight (foliar and tuber); (4) storage rots [dry rot (Fusarium and early blight) andbacterial soft rot]; (5) pink rot; (6) nematodes; (7) powdery scab; (8) corky ringspot, and (9) improvednutritional quality, health attributes, and other "consumer" characteristics such as improved red skincolor retention and shelf life. Continued emphasis has been placed on breeding/selecting for "low input"cultivars, primarily for reduced nitrogen and fungicide input, and for improved postharvest andprocessing qualities such as lengthened dormancy. Cultivars with these characteristics will help assurethat the potato industry in Colorado remains productive and competitive.

Cultivar development is a five-step process. The first step is the generation of segregating populationsfollowed by evaluation of visual agronomic traits. This involves identifying parents with desiredcharacteristics for crossing to produce true (botanical) potato seed (TPS). TPS is planted to produceseedling tubers for field planting. Second, superior progeny are identified and these selections undergoadditional evaluation for economically important characteristics. Third, a profile of cultivar specificmanagement criteria - production and postharvest - are developed. A grower, shipper, processor, and/ormarketer may fine tune for his/her operation. Fourth, a basic seed source of the selections is developed

1

to facilitate further seed increase and commercial testing of advanced selections. Finally, marketdevelopment takes place to determine consumer acceptance and recognition in the intended market. Eachof these integrated steps is critical in the development and commercialization of new cultivars andprovides the base for a successful cultivar release.

The process of cultivar development takes 14 or more years. Years 1 and 2 are the potato breeding phaseof the development process. Parents are selected and crossed to produce true potato seed. Seedlingtubers are then produced from the true seed in year 2. Year 3 and later years represent the selectionphase of the development process. Each year represents another cycle of field selection. As each cycleis completed, fewer and fewer clones remain and the amount of seed per selection is increased. Clonesremaining after eight cycles of field selection are released to growers for evaluations prior to officialrelease as a named cultivar. Table 1 presents a detailed description of the steps involved in developingnew potato cultivars.

The long-term process of cultivar development fosters collaborations among growers, shippers,processors, researchers, and extension personnel. The network must provide for a grower evaluationprocess to assist in the development of management guidelines, detect unforeseen problems, anddetermine the predictability of performance of each new cultivar.

Because the timeline for cultivar development is lengthy, improved methods to speed up the breeding andselection process are continually evaluated. Technologies such as marker assisted selection provideopportunities, in concert with existing and new collaborators, to facilitate accelerated and focusedbreeding for high priority characteristics.

A priority of the potato cultivar development process is to provide a solid foundation for the developmentand commercialization of new potato cultivars prior to the “formal” naming and release process. Assuch, potato cultivar development is a long-term process and is difficult to shorten significantly.

Potato Breeding

Germplasm Accession and Introgression. Germplasm with late blight resistance, virus resistance (PVX,PVY, and PLRV), nematode resistance, and other characteristics of importance is continually beingacquired from various sources. Primary sources are the USDA-ARS in Aberdeen, Idaho; Prosser,Washington; Madison, Wisconsin; and Oregon State University. Other sources are Asia, Europe, andSouth America. All of these materials are incorporated into our germplasm in the breeding program.

Carotenoid Enhancement. Carotenoids are phytonutrients produced in the tuber flesh of potatoes thatcontain various health benefits such as reduction of cardiovascular diseases, some cancers, and maculardegeneration.

We initiated an effort to enhance the carotenoid content of our yellow fleshedselections in 2007 by hybridizing two high carotenoid selections obtained fromDr. Chuck Brown, USDA-ARS, Prosser Washington. The first product to comefrom this work was selection CO07131-1W/Y (PA4X137-12 x 4X91E22). Thisselection (shown to the right) produces small tubers with very dark yellowflesh. It is currently being used as a parent. A small planting by a grower isplanned for 2016.

2015 Research Progress Report - Potato Breeding and Selection February 28, 2016 (Version 2016.0228)

2

In 2009 we initiated another effort to enhance the tuber cartenoid content. Dr. Kathy Haynes, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, Maryland, developed a diploid hybrid population of Solanum phureja x Solanumstenotomum adapted to long-day growing conditions. This was accomplished by recurrent selection. TPS of several families was initially planted in 2009 in the greenhouse. Resulting seedling tubers wereplanted in the field in 2010 with initial field selection for dark yellow flesh occurring in the fall. Currently 10 selections remain and we have started to utilize a subset of them as parents. Seedlingstubers of five crosses were produced in 2015 and will be planted in the field in 2016. TPS of two morecrosses are currently being grown in the greenhouse. These seedling tubers will be planting in the fieldin 2017.

We also acquired 4 diploid Solanum phureja cultivars from The James HuttonInstitute (formerly the Scottish Crop Research Institute) via MyInefieldResearch Services in 2012. The cultivars and release year are Mayan Gold(2001), Inca Dawn (2003), Mayan Queen (2008), and Mayan Twilight (2008). We have produced seedling tubers from Inca Dawn and Mayan Gold crosses. They were planted as single hills in 2014 and 2015. Fifty-eight selectionsremain (51 Inca Dawn crosses and 7 Mayan Gold crosses). While some of theprogeny had more of a “wild’ appearance (shown on the right), others had goodtuber type. TPS of seven more crosses of this type are growing in the greenhouse now and resultingtubers will be planted in the field in 2017.

The United States Potato Genebank (NRSP-6) has also been working with Colombian sources ofSolanum phureja. These materials are commonly referred to papa criolla. We received TPS of threecriolla families from NRSP-6. Seedling tubers are currently being produced for field planting in 2017.

Crossing. The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Program intercrossed 93 parental clones in 2015in two separate crossing blocks. The emphasis of the first crossing block was russet and red cultivardevelopment and general disease resistance, primarily PVY resistance. The second crossing blockemphasized russet and yellow flesh cultivar development, and resistance to PVY and nematodes. Seedfrom 549 combinations was obtained. A subset of these crosses will be planted in the greenhouse in2016 to produce seedling tubers.

Approximately 35,579 first-size seedling tubers representing 168 families were produced from 2014greenhouse crosses for initial field selection in 2016. These seedlings represented crosses segregatingprimarily for russets, yellows, reds, specialty types, and resistance to late blight, PVY, corky ringspot,and nematodes. Second through fourth size seedling tubers will be distributed to Idaho (USDA-ARS),Maine, Oregon, Texas, and Alberta, Canada (Agriculture Canada).

Seedling Selection and Clonal Development

Colorado grew 86,349 first-year seedlings representing 456 families in 2015, with 742 selected forsubsequent planting, evaluation, and increase in future years. A portion of these seedlings were obtainedfrom the USDA-ARS (Aberdeen, Idaho), Agriculture Canada, Texas A&M University, North DakotaState University, and the University of Maine. Another 865 clones were in 12-hill, preliminary, andintermediate stages of selection. At harvest, 242 were saved for further increase and evaluation in 2016. Sixty-two advanced selections were saved and will be increased in 2016 pending further evaluation. Another 271 selections and cultivars were maintained for germplasm development, breeding, and otherexperimental purposes including seed increase/maintenance.


3

Field trials conducted in 2015 included: Preliminary Trial, Intermediate Yield Trial, IntermediateSpecialty Yield Trial, Advanced Yield Trial, Southwestern Regional Russet Trial, SouthwesternRegional Red Trial, Southwestern Regional Specialty Trial, Western Regional Russet/Processing Trial,Western Regional Red Trial, Western Regional Specialty Trial, San Luis Valley Chipping Trial, andWestern Regional Chipping Trial. All trials are grown under "low input" conditions, primarily forreduced nitrogen and fungicide. Tables 2-15 present the data for the various trials. Appendix 1summarizes the cultural information for the trials planted at the San Luis Valley Research Center in2015.

A total of 170 samples are in the process of being evaluated for two or more of the following postharvestcharacteristics: blackspot susceptibility, storage weight loss, dormancy, enzymatic browning, specificgravity, french fry color, french fry texture, and chip color. Appendix 2 lists the procedures used for thepostharvest evaluations for the trials.

Advanced selections evaluated in the Southwest Regional Trials, Western Regional Trials, or by potatogrowers in 2015, included 9 russets (AC00395-2RU, AC05039-2RU, CO03276-5RU, CO05068-1RU,CO05110-6RU, CO05175-1RU, CO06057-3RU, CO07015-4RU, and CO07049-1RU), 1 red(CO07102-1R), 11 chippers (AC00206-2W, AC01151-5W, AC03433-1W, AC03452-2W, AC05153-1W,CO02024-9W, CO02033-1W, CO02321-4W, CO03243-3W, CO07070-10W, and CO07070-13W), and10 specialties (AC05175-3P/Y, CO04021-2R/Y, CO04056-3P/PW, CO04067-8R/Y, CO04099-3W/Y,CO05035-1PW/Y, CO05037-2R/Y, CO05037-3W/Y, CO07131-1W/Y, and CO07370-1W/Y). The PlantVariety Protection Office recently completed reviewing the applications and will be issuing certificatesof plant variety protection for AC99330-1P/Y, Red Luna (CO97233-3R/Y), and Fortress Russet(AC99375-1RU). A Plant Variety Protection application is in preparation for CO97222-1R/R, ared-skinned, red-fleshed selection.

Several selections are available for exclusive release. Data summaries for all clones are available onrequest. Anyone interested in further information about how exclusive releases are developed maycontact David Holm for further information. Included are russets - AC96052-1RU, CO97087-2RU,CO98067-7RU, CO99053-4RU, and CO03276-5RU; reds - CO98012-5R, CO99076-6R, CO99256-2R,CO00277-2R, and CO00291-5R; chippers - CO95051-7W, CO00188-4W, CO00197-3W, andCO00270-7W; and specialties (including yellows) - AC97521-1R/Y, ATC00293-1W/Y, CO97215-2P/P,CO97222-1R/R, CO97226-2R/R, CO97227-2P/PW, CO97232-1R/Y, CO97232-2R/Y, CO99045-1W/Y,CO00405-1RF, CO00412-5W/Y, CO00415-1RF, VC0967-2R/Y, VC1002-3W/Y, and VC1009-1W/Y.

The Plant Variety Protection Office recently completed reviewing the applications and will be issuingcertificates of plant variety protection for AC99330-1P/Y, Red Luna (CO97233-3R/Y), and FortressRusset (AC99375-1RU). A Plant Variety Protection application is in preparation for CO97222-1R/R(Crimson King), a red-skinned, red-fleshed selection.

Table 14 summarizes the performance of advanced selections that are available for growers to evaluate in2016. Detailed data summaries for each of the advanced selections are presented in Tables 17A-17AG. Figure 1 includes photographs of these selections. Data summaries for additional selections that areavailable for exclusive release are available upon request.


4

Collaborative Studies

The following collaborative studies were conducted in 2015:

• Several advanced selections were evaluated for disease symptom expression screening trials inColorado. These trials were conducted in cooperation with Andrew Houser and Kent Sather. Diseasesincluded were bacterial ring rot (21 selections), PVY (17 selections), and powdery scab (18 selections)in Colorado. Additionally we provided six selections to Sastry Jayanty for powdery scab evaluations.

• Several advanced selections were distributed to state/USDA-ARS collaborators in Idaho, Michigan,Oregon, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin for additional disease evaluations. These selections werescreened for one or more of the following diseases: late blight, early blight, scab (common andpowdery), PVY, Verticillim wilt, and zebra chip.

• Twelve advanced selections were evaluated in cultural management trials in collaboration with SamuelEssah.

• Several selections were evaluated for various postharvest characteristics in collaboration with SastryJayanty.

• Three selections were entered in the National Fry Processing Trials conducted in Washington, Idaho,North Dakota, Maine, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota (screening for common scab and PVY). Afocus of these trials is to identify selections with low acrylamide potential and that have suitable QSRattributes.

• Five selections were entered in the National Chip Processing Trials. These trials were planted in up to11 locations in northern and southern production areas of the US. Trials were conducted in California,Florida, North Carolina, Oregon, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Texas, North Dakota, and Wisconsin(plus a scab trial).

• Four selections were entered in the USPB/Snack Food Association Trials. These trials were planted inup to 11 locations in northern and sourthern production areas of the US. Trials were conducted inCalifornia, Florida, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, NorthDakota, and Wisconsin.

• Several selections were provided to Adam Heuberger. His research program focuses on usingmetabolomics to evaluate nutrition and health traits in advanced selections in our breeding program.

Graduate Students

Sara Kammlade, MS student. Thesis Title: Potato Tuber Yield, Quality, Mineral NutrientConcentration, Soil Health and Soil Food Web in Conventional and Organic Potato Systems. Co-advised by David Holm and Samuel Essah. Sara completed her thesis in 2015.

Raven Bough, MS student. Thesis Title: Screening Potato Germplasm for Flavor Utilizing HS-SPME/GC-MS and Sensory Panel Analyses. Co-advised by David Holm and Sastry Jayanty. Raven’sthesis completion date will be in 2016.


5

The development of potato cultivars with improved flavor in the San Luis Valley has the potential toexpand the region’s fresh potato market by focusing on consumer appeal. Through analysis of existingcultivars, the objective of this project is to establish a flavor rating methodology for potato selectionsbased on correlation of HS-SPME/GC-MS quantification of major flavor compounds and sensory paneltests. Flavor ratings will guide germplasm screening in the breeding process, which will enable thedevelopment of new cultivars with improved flavor.

Greg Hess. Greg is coadvised by Sastry Jayanty, Adam Heuberger, and David Holm. His thesis isfocused on screening select progeny for genetic markers associated with PVY resistance. Multiple PVYresistant lines of Solanum tuberosum will be crossed to develop segregating populations. Up to 300progeny of a selected cross will be molecularly screened using primers targeting the Ryadg (andigena)and Rysto (stoloniferum) genes.

Potato Breeding Program Advisory Committee

The Potato Breeding Advisory Committee had its’ inaugural meeting on November 12, 2015 with 11 inattendance. Several topics were discussed including current and future goals for breeding (marketclasses) and trait improvement, increasing grower involvement, feedback forms for production andstorage of advanced selections, tours of the breeding program and related programs, and venues forreporting.

Colorado State University Potato Program Website

The overall address for the website is http://potatoes.colostate.edu. To go to the potato breeding programsection of the website the address is http://potatoes.colostate.edu/potato-breeding/. Since the website waslaunched in 2014 it has been a valuable resource to refer people with inquiries to for detailedinformation. We invite you to browse our website. Please let us know if you have any suggestions orrecommendations for improving our website or if you would like us to include additional information.

San Luis Valley Research Center Facebook Page

A Facebook page for the San Luis Valley Research Center (www.facebook.com/SLVRC.potatoes/) wasstarted this past summer. The focus of this page is to inform the public about various activities at theSLV Research Center including the potato breeding program. We encourage you to ‘Like’ our page toreceive posts.


6

http://potatoes.colostate.edu

http://potatoes.colostate.edu/potato-breeding/

Table 1. Generalized potato breeding and selection scheme used at the SLV Research Center.

Year Comments

1 Select parents for crossing and true seed production in the greenhouse.

2 Produce seedling tubers from true seed in the greenhouse.

3 70,000-80,000 seedling tubers planted in the field as single hills. Several thousand tubers areobtained from other breeding programs. Initial selection of this material takes place at harvest. Firstcycle of field selection.

4 Twelve-hills of each single-hill selection are planted. Second cycle of field selection.

5 Preliminary Selections Tier 1 (PT1). Third cycle of field selection (48 plant tuber-unit seedincrease). Initial evaluations for chipping qualities (chip color after various storage regimes andspecific gravity) are conducted this year and subsequently.

6 Preliminary Selections Tier 2 (PT2). Fourth cycle of field selection (96 plant tuber-unit seedincrease). Initial evaluations to characterize selections for blackspot bruise potential, storage weightloss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning. Initial evaluations for french fry potential (french fry colorand specific gravity) are conducted this year and subsequently. Evaluations for chipping qualities arecontinued.

7 Intermediate Selections. Fifth cycle of field selection. Initial data collected on yield, grade, andgrowth characteristics. Plant a 144 plant tuber-unit seed increase and a 2 rep x 25 plantsintermediate yield trial (IYT).

8-14+ Advanced Selections: Includes selections that have advanced from the IYT. Additional selectionsare included that have graduated from the Southwest Regional and Western Regional Trials. Theadvanced yield trials for reds, specialty types, and chippers are planted with entries in the WesternRegional Red, Specialty and Chip Trials. Selections are in the 6th-12th+ cycles of field selection. All advanced yield trials (AYT) have 4 reps x 25 plants. Sixth and seventh cycle field selectionsrespectively have a 400/1,200 plant tuber-unit seed increase. All 8th year selections have up to a 1/3acre tuber-unit seed increase planted. All 9th year and older selections generally have up to a ½ acreor more of seed increase depending on grower demand.

Selections in the sixth cycle of selection are indexed for viruses and cleanup/micropropagation isinitiated. Testing for ring rot and PLRV reaction is also initiated at this stage and continues asneeded. Selections in the 7th cycle of field selection are entered into cultural management trials andpostharvest disease reaction (dry rot and soft rot) evaluations.

10 All 8th year selections are entered in the Southwest Regional Trials (4 locations - CO, TX, two inCA). Cultural management trials and postharvest disease reaction evaluations continue as needed.

11-13 All 9th-11th year selections are entered in the Western Regional Trials (4 trials): main (russets andlong whites), reds, specialties, and chippers. The Western Coordinating Committee (WERA027)directs these trials at 10+ locations in the Western United States each year. Cultural managementtrials and postharvest disease reaction evaluations continue as needed.

11+ Grower/industry evaluations. The Colorado Potato Breeding and Selection Project relies on thecooperation of several growers, shippers, and processors to evaluate advanced selections foradaptability and marketability.

14+ Release as a named cultivar.

Table 2A. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Preliminary Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1

Weight Dormancy Enzymatic

Clone Bud End Stem End Average Loss2

(Days)3

Browning4

AC08152-3W/Y 3.9 3.6 3.8 2.4 82 4.2AC10376-1W/Y 4.7 4.7 4.7 2.2 145 3.2CO10003-3W/Y 5.0 3.9 4.5 3.3 47 4.2CO10010-5RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 2.4 96 3.8CO10015-8W/Y 4.8 4.6 4.7 1.7 124 4.8CO10015-18W/Y 4.9 4.9 4.9 1.6 124 4.0CO10018-6W/Y 5.0 4.8 4.9 3.9 47 5.0CO10018-11W/Y 4.4 4.5 4.5 2.4 103 5.0CO10064-1W/Y 4.8 4.6 4.7 1.7 124 4.8CO10087-4RU 5.0 4.7 4.9 3.2 110 4.2CO10090-9RU 5.0 4.4 4.7 1.9 110 3.8CO10091-1RU 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.1 103 5.0CO10097-2W/Y 4.3 4.4 4.4 1.6 96 5.0CO10098-2W/Y 5.0 4.2 4.6 2.0 89 5.0CO10098-4W/Y 3.5 2.6 3.1 1.9 82 4.8CO10098-5W/Y 4.9 3.9 4.4 2.3 103 3.8NDC102908-2R/R -- -- -- 6.3 89 --Canela Russet 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.3 144 4.6Centennial Russet 4.9 4.9 4.9 3.0 94 4.6Rio Grande Russet 5.0 4.8 4.9 2.7 82 3.4Russet Burbank 5.0 5.0 5.0 1.7 150 3.6Russet Norkotah-S3 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.2 98 2.6Russet Nugget 5.0 4.5 4.8 2.1 98 4.2Sangre-S10 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 101 4.8Shepody 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.1 101 4.8Yukon Gold 5.0 4.9 5.0 1.8 110 4.6

1Blackspot was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration.

2Tubers were stored at 45F for 92 days.

3Days from harvest to first visible growth. Tubers were stored at 45F.

4Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5

scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration.


8

Table 2B. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Preliminary Trial clones - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2

Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+

Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F

AC08152-3W/Y 1.078 3 3 3 3AC10376-1W/Y 1.074 3 4 3 4CO10003-3W/Y 1.088 3 4 3 3CO10010-5RU 1.094 1 3 4 4CO10015-8W/Y 1.074 2 2 2 2CO10015-18W/Y 1.062 1 2 2 1CO10018-6W/Y 1.078 1 2 3 2CO10018-11W/Y 1.078 1 2 3 3CO10064-1W/Y 1.084 0 0 4 3CO10087-4RU 1.088 3 1 4 4CO10090-9RU 1.088 0 2 3 4CO10091-1RU 1.083 1 1 2 4CO10097-2W/Y 1.080 1 0 3 2CO10098-2W/Y 1.084 1 1 3 3CO10098-4W/Y 1.092 1 0 2 3CO10098-5W/Y 1.097 1 1 3 3NDC102908-2R/R 1.070 - - 1 2Canela Russet 1.091 2 3 2 3Centennial Russet 1.079 3 3 3 2Rio Grande Russet 1.083 2 3 3 3Russet Burbank 1.074 2 2 3 3Russet Norkotah-S3 1.075 2 3 4 2Russet Nugget 1.094 1 1 4 4Sangre-S10 1.069 4 4 2 2Shepody 1.081 2 3 3 3Yukon Gold 1.086 2 4 4 3

1Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color

ratings of <2 are acceptable.

2Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and

mealy and 1 representing a soggy, wet texture.


9

Table 3A. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for San Luis Valley Chipping study entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

AC00206-2W 3.7 2.8 3.3 2.7 96 3.6AC01144-1W 4.8 4.6 4.7 1.4 108 4.2AC01151-5W 4.4 1.3 2.9 4.4 81 1.4AC03433-1W 4.9 4.4 4.7 2.4 83 4.4AC03452-2W 5.0 4.7 4.9 2.8 52 4.8AC05153-1W 3.9 2.1 3.0 5.4 80 2.4AC08094-2W 5.0 4.9 5.0 2.1 154 3.6AC10239-7W 5.0 4.6 4.8 3.5 103 5.0AFC5534-1W 4.9 4.5 4.7 1.6 117 4.0AFC5551-4W 4.7 4.0 4.4 1.6 138 5.0AFC5563-5W 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.0 68 4.4CO00188-4W 4.8 3.5 4.2 3.4 95 4.4CO02024-9W 4.4 3.2 3.8 3.7 89 3.4CO02033-1W 3.5 3.5 3.5 2.6 102 2.6CO02321-4W 5.0 4.0 4.5 2.9 87 4.6CO03243-3W 4.2 3.9 4.1 2.6 90 3.0CO07070-10W 3.7 2.0 2.9 2.5 112 4.8CO07070-13W 4.9 3.6 4.3 3.4 77 4.2CO10030-3W 4.9 3.9 4.4 2.7 103 3.6CO10032-4W 4.4 2.4 3.4 2.0 117 1.6CO10032-8W 4.9 3.1 4.0 2.5 103 2.6CO10060-23W 4.9 2.9 3.9 1.9 89 4.6CO10071-1W 4.9 4.6 4.7 3.0 89 4.4CO10073-7W 5.0 4.1 4.6 2.4 89 4.4CO10076-4W 3.7 3.8 3.8 2.4 96 5.0TC09403-4W 5.0 4.3 4.7 1.9 89 5.0Atlantic 3.3 3.7 3.5 2.7 101 5.0Chipeta 4.7 3.4 4.1 2.0 98 3.2Snowden 3.6 2.8 3.2 2.4 115 4.0




4Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a

1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration.


10

Table 3B. Chip color1 after various storage regimes, and specific gravity of San Luis

Valley Chipping study entries - 2015.

Specific 5 wks 5 wks/40F 5 wks 5 wks/50F

Clone Gravity 40F +3 wks/60F 50F +3 wks/60F

AC00206-2W 1.089 2.0 2.5 2.5 1.0AC01144-1W 1.075 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0AC01151-5W 1.092 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.0AC03433-1W 1.087 2.5 2.5 1.5 2.0AC03452-2W 1.075 4.0 3.5 1.5 1.0AC05153-1W 1.092 4.5 4.0 2.5 2.5AC08094-2W 1.077 4.5 4.5 2.5 3.0AC10239-7W 1.089 4.5 4.0 1.0 1.0AC11463-2W 1.080 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.5AFC5534-1W 1.069 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0AFC5551-4W 1.085 3.0 2.5 2.0 2.0AFC5563-5W 1.082 4.5 4.0 2.0 3.0AFC5687-2W 1.077 4.5 4.0 1.5 1.0CO00188-4W 1.087 3.0 3.5 1.5 1.5CO02024-9W 1.087 4.5 2.5 3.0 1.5CO02033-1W 1.104 3.5 3.0 3.0 2.0CO02321-4W 1.094 4.0 2.5 2.0 2.5CO03243-3W 1.087 4.0 2.5 1.0 2.5CO07070-10W 1.100 4.0 3.5 2.0 2.5CO07070-13W 1.094 2.5 3.0 3.0 2.5CO10030-3W 1.083 3.5 3.5 1.5 1.5CO10032-4W 1.092 4.5 4.0 3.0 2.5CO10032-8W 1.090 2.5 1.5 2.0 1.5CO10060-23W 1.090 2.5 3.5 2.0 3.0CO10061-4W 1.083 4.5 2.5 1.5 1.5CO10071-1W 1.091 5.0 4.5 3.0 3.0CO10073-7W 1.088 4.0 2.5 2.5 1.0CO10075-3W 1.082 4.0 3.5 2.5 2.0CO10076-4W 1.081 4.0 3.0 1.0 1.5CO11023-2W 1.085 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.5CO11023-6W 1.080 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0CO11023-9W 1.081 2.5 1.5 2.0 2.5CO11037-1W 1.084 3.0 3.5 1.0 1.5CO11037-5W 1.086 3.5 3.5 2.0 2.5CO11037-13W 1.082 5.0 4.5 3.5 3.0

Table 3B continued on next page

1Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0

are acceptable.


11

Table 3B (cont’d). Chip color1 after various storage regimes, and specific gravity of

San Luis Valley Chipping study entries - 2015.



CO11037-18W 1.084 4.0 3.5 2.0 2.5CO11044-1W 1.083 4.5 4.0 2.0 3.0CO11045-2W 1.090 4.5 4.0 3.0 2.5CO11048-3W 1.076 5.0 4.0 1.0 1.5CO11048-6W 1.091 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0CO11048-8W 1.082 3.0 2.5 1.5 2.5CO11074-1W 1.079 3.0 2.0 1.5 3.0CO11087-1W 1.086 3.5 4.0 1.5 2.0CO11087-2W 1.088 2.0 3.0 1.5 1.0CV97065-1 1.084 3.5 3.5 1.5 2.5TC09403-4W 1.075 4.0 4.0 2.5 2.5Atlantic 1.096 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.5Chipeta 1.091 5.0 4.5 3.0 3.0Snowden 1.098 4.5 3.5 2.0 1.0


are acceptable.


12

Table 4A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1

Clone Total Total % 4-10 oz >10 oz <4 oz L:W/W:T

CO09036-2RU 366 241 66 202 39 119 1.95/1.12CO09076-3RU 462 373 80 226 147 61 1.94/1.15CO09139-7RU 347 228 66 212 16 113 1.86/1.16CO09205-2RU 342 272 79 232 39 57 1.78/1.16CO09278-2RU 311 154 49 140 14 154 1.74/1.22CO09337-1RU 295 249 84 197 52 46 1.64/1.24Canela Russet 292 264 90 200 63 28 1.74/1.19Russet Norkotah 285 220 77 149 72 48 1.92/1.19

Mean 338 250 74 195 55 78 1.83/1.18

LSD2 (0.05) 94 104 11 53 93 34 0.08/0.05

1L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round;

1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber.

2LSD=least significant difference.


13

Table 4B. Grade defects for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015.

% %

External External Hollow

Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO09036-2RU 1.7 MS, GR* 0.0CO09076-3RU 6.7 MS, GC, GR* 0.0CO09139-7RU 1.7 GR* 0.0CO09205-2RU 3.9 GC*, GR 0.0CO09278-2RU 1.1 MS*, GC, GR 0.0CO09337-1RU 0.0 0.0Canela Russet 0.4 GR 0.0Russet Norkotah 6.0 MS*, GR 1.4

1Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample

weight with significant defects.

2MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack; GR=green.

Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked.

3Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10

ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100.


14

Table 4C. Growth characteristics of Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015.

% Emergence Vine Stems/ Vine Vine Vine

Clone Stand Uniformity1

Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO09036-2RU 96 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.5 3.0 3.0CO09076-3RU 100 4.0 3.5 3.0 4.5 3.0 3.0CO09139-7RU 96 4.0 3.0 4.2 4.0 3.0 2.5CO09205-2RU 100 3.0 3.0 3.7 2.5 2.0 1.5CO09278-2RU 100 3.0 2.0 4.5 4.0 3.0 3.0CO09337-1RU 94 2.0 2.5 2.9 2.5 2.0 1.5Canela Russet 94 1.5 2.5 2.6 3.5 3.0 3.0Russet Norkotah 96 3.0 3.0 3.1 2.0 2.0 1.0

Mean 97 3.0 2.8 3.5 3.4 3.0 2.3

LSD6 (0.05) 8 0.6 0.9 1.6 1.4 NS 1.1

1Emergence uniformity is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very uniform emergence.

2Vine vigor is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very vigorous vines.

3Vine size is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very large vines.

4Vine type is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating very upright vines.

5Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late;

and 5=very late.

6LSD=least significant difference; NS=not significant.


15

Table 4D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO09036-2RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 2.5 84 4.8CO09076-3RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 4.8 77 4.0CO09139-7RU 4.7 4.6 4.7 2.8 77 3.2CO09205-2RU 5.0 4.2 4.6 1.7 56 4.6CO09278-2RU 4.9 3.8 4.4 6.7 77 4.0CO09337-1RU 4.9 4.4 4.7 1.7 63 3.2Canela Russet 4.9 3.9 4.4 3.1 140 4.4Russet Norkotah 5.0 3.3 4.2 2.7 91 2.4







16

Table 4E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Intermediate Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



CO09036-2RU 1.089 1 2 5 5CO09076-3RU 1.085 1 3 3 3CO09139-7RU 1.102 1 3 5 5CO09205-2RU 1.075 1 1 3 4CO09278-2RU 1.093 3 3 3 3CO09337-1RU 1.074 2 3 3 3Canela Russet 1.097 2 3 5 5Russet Norkotah 1.085 2 3 4 4

1Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color.

Color ratings of <2 are acceptable.




17

Table 5A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


CO08037-2P/P 349 185 50 167 18 165 1.31/1.12CO08049-1R/RW 410 256 63 250 6 152 1.09/1.13CO09079-5PW/Y 313 84 25 78 6 229 1.32/1.12CO09124-1W/Y 401 142 36 142 0 259 1.18/1.21CO09127-3W/Y 356 131 37 131 0 225 1.05/1.25CO09128-3W/Y 221 26 12 26 0 195 1.34/1.21CO09128-5W/Y 350 54 15 54 0 296 0.99/1.21CO09218-4W/Y 371 172 46 168 0 193 1.17/1.30Purple Majesty 444 164 37 143 21 278 1.47/1.20Yukon Gold 398 351 88 201 150 27 1.33/1.18

Mean 362 157 41 136 21 202 1.23/1.20

LSD2 (0.05) 87 88 19 86 55 89 0.08/0.06





18

Table 5B. Grade defects for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO08037-2P/P 0.0 0.0CO08049-1R/RW 0.4 MS* 0.0CO09079-5PW/Y 0.0 0.0CO09124-1W/Y 0.0 0.0CO09127-3W/Y 0.0 0.0CO09128-3W/Y 0.5 MS* 0.0CO09128-5W/Y 0.0 0.0CO09218-4W/Y 1.3 GR* 0.0Purple Majesty 0.4 MS* 0.0Yukon Gold 5.1 GC, GR* 0.0








19

Table 5C. Growth characteristics of Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO08037-2P/P 92 1.5 2.5 4.3 3.5 4.0 3.0CO08049-1R/RW 98 3.5 3.0 4.9 4.0 3.0 2.5CO09079-5PW/Y 96 2.5 3.5 3.3 2.5 2.5 1.5CO09124-1W/Y 96 3.5 3.5 6.3 3.0 2.5 3.0CO09127-3W/Y 96 4.0 3.5 5.2 2.0 2.5 1.5CO09128-3W/Y 96 2.5 2.5 4.6 2.0 2.0 1.5CO09128-5W/Y 98 4.5 3.5 6.5 3.0 2.5 1.5CO09218-4W/Y 100 1.5 2.0 3.9 3.5 2.5 3.5Purple Majesty 98 5.0 3.5 4.5 3.5 2.5 1.0Yukon Gold 94 4.5 3.5 2.2 4.5 3.0 1.0

Mean 96 3.3 3.1 4.6 3.2 2.7 2.0

LSD6 (0.05) 8 1.1 1.5 2.2 1.1 0.8 1.1






and 5=very late.



20

Table 5D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO08037-2P/P -- -- -- 3.8 84 --CO08049-1R/RW -- -- -- 5.6 91 --CO09079-5PW/Y 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.6 112 4.8CO09124-1W/Y 4.7 2.8 3.8 3.5 49 2.0CO09127-3W/Y 4.1 3.9 4.0 5.1 49 5.0CO09128-3W/Y 5.0 4.9 5.0 3.0 70 4.4CO09128-5W/Y 3.8 3.1 3.5 3.8 35 3.6CO09218-4W/Y 4.6 3.5 4.1 3.3 84 4.4Purple Majesty -- -- -- 3.6 49 --Yukon Gold 4.6 4.5 4.6 1.5 91 4.4







21

Table 5E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Intermediate Specialty Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



CO08037-2P/P 1.081 - - 4 2CO08049-1R/RW 1.076 - - 3 3CO09079-5PW/Y 1.070 3 4 2 2CO09124-1W/Y 1.087 2 3 3 3CO09127-3W/Y 1.075 1 3 2 3CO09128-3W/Y 1.069 3 3 2 2CO09128-5W/Y 1.085 1 1 4 3CO09218-4W/Y 1.070 3 3 2 3Purple Majesty 1.085 - - 3 4Yukon Gold 1.090 1 3 4 5






22

Table 6A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Total Tuber Length Tuber Shape1

Clone (Cwt/A) <2" <2-4" >4-6" >6" L:W/W:T

CO08029-1RF/R 268 8 143 96 12 2.95/1.04CO08051-3RF/R 235 18 179 34 0 2.62/1.04CO08062-3PF/P 278 8 150 71 25 3.07/0.99Banana 200 2 72 77 20 3.71/1.01

Mean 245 9 136 70 14 3.11/1.02

LSD2 (0.05) NS 14 NS NS NS 0.22/0.07


1.11-1.70=oval; 1.71-2.20=oblong, 2.21-2.50=long; >2.50=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber.



23

Table 6B. Grade defects for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO08029-1RF/R 3.5 MS, GR* 0.0CO08051-3RF/R 0.8 MS* 0.0CO08062-3PF/P 8.0 MS* 0.0Banana 13.8 MS, GR* 0.0

1Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total

sample weight with significant defects.

2MS=misshapen; SG=second growth; GC=growth crack;

GR=green. Most prevalent defects for each clone are asterisked.

3Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers

>10 ounces with defects/total sample weight) x 100.


24

Table 6C. Growth characteristics of Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2014.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO08029-1RF/R 95 2.8 2.5 4.2 3.8 3.0 3.0CO08051-3RF/R 100 1.0 3.0 3.6 4.0 3.0 2.5CO08062-3PF/P 96 2.5 2.0 4.5 3.0 2.0 3.0Banana 94 2.5 3.0 4.9 4.0 3.0 2.5

Mean 96 2.2 2.6 4.3 3.0 2.8 2.8

LSD6 (0.05) NS NS NS NS 0.6 NS NS






and 5=very late.



25

Table 6D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO08029-1RF/R -- -- -- 2.9 91 --CO08051-3RF/R -- -- -- 2.3 126 --CO08062-3PF/P -- -- -- 2.9 56 --Banana 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.8 77 4.4




4Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing fresh lengthwise. Rated on a



26

Table 6E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Intermediate Fingerling Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



CO08029-1RF/R 1.083 - - 3 3CO08051-3RF/R 1.070 - - 3 3CO08062-3PF/P 1.072 - - 3 3Banana 1.080 1 2 5 5






27

Table 7A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


CO03202-1RU 434 362 83 265 98 61 2.08/1.21CO08065-2RU 343 271 79 236 35 61 1.79/1.11CO08155-2RU/Y 306 228 74 200 28 72 1.96/1.20CO08231-1RU 411 316 77 260 57 89 1.62/1.20Canela Russet 347 320 92 219 101 22 1.79/1.25Russet Norkotah 340 295 87 194 101 31 1.98/1.22

Mean 363 299 82 229 70 56 1.87/1.20

LSD2 (0.05) 34 45 6 48 51 17 0.12/0.06

1

L=length, W=width, T=thickness. For L:W <1.00=compressed; 1.00-1.15=round; 1.16-1.55=oval; 1.56-1.95=oblong; 1.96-2.35=long; >2.35=very long. For W:T, the larger the value, the flatter the tuber.



28

Table 7B. Grade defects for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO03202-1RU 2.4 MS, GR* 0.0CO08065-2RU 3.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.3CO08155-2RU/Y 1.7 MS*, GR* 0.0CO08231-1RU 1.5 MS*, GC, GR 0.0Canela Russet 1.2 MS, GR* 0.0Russet Norkotah 4.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.0








29

Table 7C. Growth characteristics of Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO03202-1RU 98 3.5 2.8 3.0 4.3 3.0 3.3CO08065-2RU 99 4.3 4.0 3.1 3.5 3.0 3.3CO08155-2RU/Y 82 3.8 2.8 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0CO08231-1RU 96 3.3 3.0 3.2 5.0 3.0 3.0Canela Russet 95 1.8 2.8 2.2 3.8 3.0 3.3Russet Norkotah 97 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.0 2.8 1.3

Mean 95 3.3 3.0 2.8 3.6 3.0 2.8

LSD6 (0.05) 6 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.5 NS 0.6






and 5=very late.



30

Table 7D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO03202-1RU 5.0 4.2 4.6 3.2 91 5.0CO08065-2RU 4.4 3.8 4.1 4.7 84 4.4CO08155-2RU/Y 5.0 4.1 4.6 2.6 56 4.6CO08231-1RU 4.8 4.1 4.5 3.7 70 4.6Canela Russet 5.0 3.8 4.4 3.1 133 4.8Russet Norkotah 4.8 4.2 4.5 2.9 91 3.2







31

Table 7E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Advanced Yield Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



CO03202-1RU 1.090 2 3 3 5CO08065-2RU 1.099 0 0 5 3CO08155-2RU/Y 1.091 1 1 4 4CO08231-1RU 1.088 2 3 3 3Canela Russet 1.096 2 3 4 4Russet Norkotah 1.081 1 3 3 5






32

Table 8A . Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


CO07015-4RU 316 273 86 203 70 32 1.69/1.19CO07049-1RU 337 272 81 196 76 60 1.80/1.28Canela Russet 278 248 89 183 65 25 1.72/1.19Russet Norkotah 293 226 76 144 83 39 1.92/1.18

Mean 306 255 83 182 74 39 1.78/1.22

LSD2 (0.05) 46 NS 11 35 NS 16 0.10/0.06





33

Table 8B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO07015-4RU 3.6 MS, GC, GR* 0.5CO07049-1RU 1.5 MS, GC, GR* 0.0Canela Russet 1.9 MS*, GR* 0.0Russet Norkotah 9.6 MS, GC, GR* 0.0








34

Table 8C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO07015-4RU 97 3.0 3.0 3.1 2.5 3.0 1.3CO07049-1RU 94 2.0 3.0 2.8 3.0 3.0 2.3Canela Russet 95 1.0 3.3 1.8 3.5 4.0 3.3Russet Norkotah 93 2.5 2.8 2.9 2.3 2.8 1.0

Mean 95 2.1 3.0 2.6 2.8 3.2 1.9

LSD6 (0.05) NS 0.5 NS 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7






and 5=very late.



35

Table 8D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO07015-4RU 5.0 4.1 4.6 2.6 56 3.6CO07049-1RU 5.0 4.8 4.9 3.4 84 4.0Canela Russet 5.0 3.9 4.5 3.1 140 5.0Russet Norkotah 5.0 4.0 4.5 2.9 91 4.2







36

Table 8E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Russet Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



CO07015-4RU 1.083 1 3 3 3CO07049-1RU 1.082 1 2 4 3Canela Russet 1.095 1 3 5 4Russet Norkotah 1.079 1 2 2 3






37

Table 9A . Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


CO07102-1R 274 173 63 170 3 99 1.15/1.16Chieftain 466 402 87 256 147 46 1.29/1.25Red LaSoda 393 321 82 262 59 49 1.13/1.23Sangre-S10 471 417 89 292 124 44 1.19/1.19

Mean 401 328 80 245 83 60 1.19/1.21

LSD2 (0.05) 72 53 7 54 47 34 0.07/0.05





38

Table 9B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

% %External External Hollow

Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO07102-1R 0.7 MS, GR* 0.3Chieftain 3.7 MS, SG, GR* 1.3Red LaSoda 5.8 MS, SG, GC* 2.9Sangre-S10 2.2 GC*, GR 0.6








39

Table 9C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO07102-1R 92 3.8 3.3 4.0 3.0 3.0 1.0Chieftain 98 4.3 3.3 3.2 3.8 3.3 2.8Red LaSoda 95 4.3 3.3 2.9 3.0 3.0 1.5Sangre-S10 97 3.3 3.3 4.0 5.0 3.5 3.3

Mean 96 3.9 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.2 2.1

LSD6 (0.05) NS 1.0 NS 1.3 0.8 NS 0.6






and 5=very late.



40

Table 9D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO07102-1R 4.8 2.7 3.8 7.5 56 1.4Chieftain 4.6 3.7 4.2 3.0 105 3.6Red LaSoda 4.5 4.2 4.4 3.3 77 1.6Sangre-S10 3.7 3.7 3.7 1.9 84 2.6







41

Table 9E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2

Specific At 3 wks 55F+ At 3 wks 55F+Clone Gravity Harvest 8 wks 45F Harvest 8 wks 45F

CO07102-1R 1.083 1 3 4 3Chieftain 1.079 2 2 3 3Red LaSoda 1.079 3 3 3 4Sangre-S10 1.083 4 4 3 4






42

Table 10A . Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


CO07131-1W/Y 134 1 1 1 0 133 1.10/1.07CO07370-1W/Y 334 221 66 197 24 105 1.10/1.15Yukon Gold 388 348 90 197 152 36 1.27/1.22

Mean 285 190 52 132 59 91 1.16/1.15

LSD2 (0.05) 68 62 5 45 34 24 0.08/0.05





43

Table 10B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO07131-1W/Y 0.0 0.0CO07370-1W/Y 2.3 MS*, GR* 0.0Yukon Gold 0.9 MS*, GC*, GR* 0.6








44

Table 10C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO07131-1W/Y 96 1.3 2.3 4.4 1.8 2.3 1.0CO07370-1W/Y 93 3.8 2.8 3.4 5.0 3.5 4.8Yukon Gold 90 4.8 3.5 2.6 3.3 2.8 2.0

Mean 93 3.3 2.8 3.5 3.4 2.8 2.6

LSD6 (0.05) NS 1.0 1.0 NS NS 0.9 0.5






and 5=very late.



45

Table 10D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO07131-1W/Y 5.0 4.6 4.8 8.8 21 3.4CO07370-1W/Y 4.3 3.3 3.8 5.4 70 1.6Yukon Gold 5.0 4.0 4.5 1.9 84 4.6







46

Table 10E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2


CO07131-1W/Y 1.063 1 3 1 1CO07370-1W/Y 1.080 1 1 3 3Yukon Gold 1.089 1 3 4 3






47

Table 11A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


CO07070-10W 367 293 79 224 68 65 1.15/1.22CO07070-13W 299 177 58 144 33 116 1.00/1.15Atlantic 400 325 81 196 130 61 1.12/1.25Chipeta 355 249 70 173 76 86 1.27/1.24

Mean 355 261 72 184 77 82 1.14/1.22

LSD2 (0.05) 80 104 14 37 84 33 0.09/0.06





48

Table 11B. Grade defects for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015.


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

CO07070-10W 2.8 GC, GR* 0.9CO07070-13W 2.0 MS, GC*, GR 2.1Atlantic 3.4 MS, GC*, GR* 1.8Chipeta 5.5 MS, GC*, GR 0.0








49

Table 11C. Growth characteristics of Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

CO07070-10W 94 4.5 3.3 3.7 4.0 3.0 3.0CO07070-13W 87 3.5 3.3 3.7 2.5 2.5 1.5Atlantic 92 4.8 4.0 3.1 4.0 3.0 3.0Chipeta 96 5.0 3.8 3.2 4.3 3.0 3.0

Mean 92 4.4 3.6 3.4 3.7 2.9 2.6

LSD6 (0.05) NS 0.5 0.7 NS 0.9 0.5 0.5






and 5=very late.



50

Table 11D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

CO07070-10W 3.9 2.1 3.0 3.2 84 3.6CO07070-13W 4.7 2.6 3.7 6.2 49 3.4Atlantic 3.7 1.7 2.7 4.2 77 4.4Chipeta 4.4 3.3 3.9 2.8 91 4.4







51

Table 11E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Southwest Regional Chip Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2


CO07070-10W 1.107 3.5 3.0 4.5 3.0CO07070-13W 1.096 3.5 2.5 3.0 2.5Atlantic 1.109 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.0Chipeta 1.095 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.0


are acceptable.


52

Table 12A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


A03141-6 523 464 89 254 210 29 1.68/1.19A03921-2 430 351 81 251 101 58 1.79/1.25A06021-1T 383 344 90 274 70 33 1.74/1.17A06914-3CR 441 345 79 318 27 72 1.62/1.18AC05039-2RU 271 243 89 169 74 19 1.80/1.16AO01114-4 327 267 82 219 48 27 1.71/1.15AO03123-2 420 323 77 287 36 86 1.81/1.11AOR06070-1KF 479 386 81 273 113 69 1.82/1.16CO05068-1RU 430 357 83 270 87 42 1.75/1.20CO05110-6RU 353 310 88 246 64 32 1.74/1.20CO05175-1RU 451 370 82 216 153 46 2.05/1.12COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 157 114 73 107 7 42 1.30/1.28OR05039-4 403 363 90 251 112 25 2.02/1.15POR06V12-3 382 298 78 228 70 67 1.91/1.11TX08352-5Ru 49 26 36 22 4 22 1.76/1.17Canela Russet 329 295 89 200 94 29 1.76/1.20Ranger Russet 434 363 84 204 158 37 1.81/1.21Russet Burbank 440 289 65 245 43 118 1.81/1.23Russet Norkotah 334 282 83 184 98 39 1.91/1.18Shepody 375 247 66 183 64 66 1.92/1.31

Mean 371 302 79 220 82 48 1.79/1.19

LSD2 (0.05) 57 60 12 42 44 20 0.20/0.05





53

Table 12B. Grade defects for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015.


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

A03141-6 5.8 MS*, GC, GR* 0.4A03921-2 5.0 MS, GR* 0.0A06021-1T 1.5 GR* 0.0A06914-3CR 5.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.0AC05039-2RU 3.8 MS*, GR* 0.0AO01114-4 10.0 GC*, GR 0.0AO03123-2 2.4 MS, GC, GR* 0.0AOR06070-1KF 4.8 MS, GC, GR* 0.0CO05068-1RU 7.2 MS, GR* 0.6CO05110-6RU 3.3 MS*, GR* 0.0CO05175-1RU 7.8 MS*, GC, GR 6.0COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 0.2 GR* 0.0OR05039-4 3.7 MS*, GR 0.0POR06V12-3 4.3 MS*, SG, GR 0.0TX08352-5Ru 1.3 GR* 0.0Canela Russet 1.8 GR* 0.0Ranger Russet 7.7 MS, SG, GC, GR* 0.0Russet Burbank 7.8 MS, SG*, GR 1.8Russet Norkotah 3.9 MS*, SG, GR 0.0Shepody 16.2 MS, SG*, GC, GR* 0.0








54

Table 12C. Growth characteristics of Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

A03141-6 100 4.5 3.0 3.5 5.0 3.0 3.0A03921-2 95 3.8 2.8 3.6 5.0 3.0 3.3A06021-1T 97 3.3 4.0 3.1 3.3 2.5 2.5A06914-3CR 100 4.3 3.5 3.2 4.3 3.3 2.8AC05039-2RU 98 3.0 3.5 2.6 2.3 2.3 1.5AO01114-4 98 3.0 3.0 3.1 4.0 3.3 3.0AO03123-2 99 3.5 3.0 3.4 4.0 3.0 3.3AOR06070-1KF 96 4.8 3.5 3.9 4.3 3.0 3.3CO05068-1RU 100 3.8 3.8 3.7 4.0 3.0 3.3CO05110-6RU 99 3.3 4.0 2.4 3.0 2.3 1.8CO05175-1RU 99 4.0 3.3 3.6 3.5 2.8 3.0COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 87 1.0 2.5 1.2 2.5 2.8 3.8OR05039-4 100 4.0 3.3 2.8 3.8 3.0 3.0POR06V12-3 97 3.8 2.5 2.9 5.0 3.0 3.0TX08352-5Ru 77 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.0 4.0 5.0Canela Russet 95 2.5 2.0 2.7 3.5 3.0 3.0Ranger Russet 98 3.3 2.5 3.4 4.0 3.0 3.0Russet Burbank 99 4.5 3.8 3.3 4.0 3.0 3.0Russet Norkotah 95 3.5 2.5 3.4 2.8 2.0 1.0Shepody 99 4.3 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.8

Mean 96 3.4 3.0 3.0 3.6 2.9 2.9

LSD6 (0.05) 5 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.5






and 5=very late.



55

Table 12D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

A03141-6 5.0 3.7 4.4 2.9 98 3.8A03921-2 4.6 2.9 3.8 3.5 84 3.4A06021-1T 4.9 4.0 4.4 2.3 140 3.0A06914-3CR 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.2 91 4.0AC05039-2RU 5.0 4.8 4.9 2.2 77 4.2AO01114-4 4.9 4.2 4.6 2.5 112 4.2AO03123-2 4.7 4.4 4.6 2.9 91 4.8AOR06070-1KF 4.9 4.2 4.6 3.6 70 3.2CO05068-1RU 5.0 4.0 4.5 3.1 49 2.2CO05110-6RU 4.2 3.4 3.8 2.2 119 2.2CO05175-1RU 5.0 4.6 4.8 2.7 56 3.6COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 4.8 4.5 4.7 2.6 49 3.6OR05039-4 5.0 4.2 4.6 3.2 91 2.2POR06V12-3 5.0 4.4 4.7 2.2 63 4.6TX08352-5Ru 4.8 4.3 4.3 1.4 112 4.0Canela Russet 5.0 4.3 4.7 2.9 140 4.6Ranger Russet 5.0 3.5 4.3 2.3 70 2.6Russet Burbank 4.9 4.4 4.7 1.9 133 2.8Russet Norkotah 4.9 4.8 4.9 3.1 84 3.6Shepody 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.5 84 3.4







56

Table 12E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Western Regional Main Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



A03141-6 1.099 1 1 4 4A03921-2 1.101 1 1 3 3A06021-1T 1.087 2 2 4 3A06914-3CR 1.088 2 3 4 4AC05039-2RU 1.084 0 2 3 3AO01114-4 1.096 2 3 4 4AO03123-2 1.083 1 2 3 4AOR06070-1KF 1.098 1 1 4 4CO05068-1RU 1.093 1 0 3 4CO05110-6RU 1.087 1 3 3 4CO05175-1RU 1.089 1 2 4 4COTX09022-3RuRE/Y 1.085 1 2 4 3OR05039-4 1.095 0 0 4 3POR06V12-3 1.098 1 1 4 4TX08352-5Ru 1.067 3 4 2 2Canela Russet 1.098 2 3 4 3Ranger Russet 1.089 1 3 2 3Russet Burbank 1.091 0 2 3 2Russet Norkotah 1.080 1 2 3 2Shepody 1.077 1 3 3 3






57

Table 13A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


NDA050237B-1R 487 334 68 308 26 147 1.18/1.21NDC081655-1R 322 154 48 148 6 167 1.09/1.15NDC092298C-1R 305 185 60 178 7 111 1.18/1.15Chieftain 425 369 87 275 94 42 1.32/1.26Red LaSoda 360 303 84 249 55 47 1.14/1.23Sangre-S10 499 443 89 307 136 41 1.19/1.18

Mean 400 298 73 244 54 93 1.18/1.20

LSD2 (0.05) 65 63 5 55 22 19 0.06/0.04





58

Table 13B. Grade defects for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

NDA050237B-1R 1.1 MS, GC, GR* 0.1NDC081655-1R 0.4 MS* 0.0NDC092298C-1R 2.9 MS*, GC, GR 0.0Chieftain 3.6 MS, SG, GC, GR* 1.1Red LaSoda 2.5 MS, GC*, GR 2.7Sangre-S10 3.1 MS, SG, GC*, GR 0.0








59

Table 13C. Growth characteristics of Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

NDA050237B-1R 91 2.5 3.0 4.1 4.0 3.0 3.0NDC081655-1R 97 2.5 3.3 3.2 2.3 2.5 1.5NDC092298C-1R 87 2.3 2.5 3.6 3.3 3.8 2.5Chieftain 96 3.0 3.0 3.1 4.0 3.0 2.8Red LaSoda 96 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.8 1.5Sangre-S10 96 2.5 2.8 3.5 4.8 3.5 3.5

Mean 94 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.5 3.1 2.5

LSD6 (0.05) 6 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.6





5Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and

5=very late.



60

Table 13D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

NDA050237B-1R 5.0 4.9 5.0 3.3 63 4.4NDC081655-1R 5.0 4.7 4.9 3.7 77 2.4NDC092298C-1R 4.8 4.5 4.7 3.4 91 3.2Chieftain 4.6 4.0 4.3 2.6 105 4.4Red LaSoda 4.8 4.6 4.7 2.6 77 1.6Sangre-S10 4.3 4.1 4.2 2.2 84 3.2







61

Table 13E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Advanced and Western Regional Red Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



NDA050237B-1R 1.069 4 4 2 2NDC081655-1R 1.081 1 2 3 3NDC092298C-1R 1.081 2 3 2 3Chieftain 1.078 3 4 2 2Red LaSoda 1.076 2 2 2 3Sangre-S10 1.080 3 4 1 2






62

Table 14A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


A05180-3PY 446 319 72 288 32 124 1.03/1.22A05182-7Y 440 177 40 174 3 261 1.14/1.18AC05175-3P/Y 286 206 72 187 18 79 1.08/1.19ATTX98514-1R/Y 315 193 61 154 40 63 1.42/1.29ATX05202S-3W/Y 521 361 69 317 44 151 1.30/1.22CO04021-2R/Y 500 399 80 248 151 47 1.52/1.27CO05028-4P/PY 418 315 75 272 44 100 1.35/1.27CO05028-11P/RWP 342 187 54 184 3 152 1.24/1.25CO05035-1PW/Y 446 393 88 254 139 45 1.32/1.19CO05037-2R/Y 234 55 24 55 0 179 1.78/1.19CO05037-3W/Y 349 182 52 176 6 163 1.17/1.33CO08352-2P/P 235 93 39 90 3 142 1.35/1.12COA07365-4RY 323 181 56 177 3 132 1.09/1.12NDA081451CB-1CY 480 271 57 266 4 202 1.24/1.14Yukon Gold 312 264 85 183 81 30 1.30/1.22

Mean 376 240 62 202 38 125 1.29/1.22

LSD2 (0.05) 56 55 8 45 26 25 0.08/0.05





63

Table 14B. Grade defects for Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

A05180-3PY 0.7 MS*, GR* 0.0A05182-7Y 0.4 MS*, GR* 0.0AC05175-3P/Y 0.5 MS*, GR* 0.0ATTX98514-1R/Y 18.5 MS, SG, GC*, GR 0.0ATX05202S-3W/Y 1.9 MS*, SG, GC, GR 0.0CO04021-2R/Y 4.5 MS*, GR 0.3CO05028-4P/PY 0.6 MS*, GC*, GR* 0.0CO05028-11P/RWP 0.7 GC*, GR 0.2CO05035-1PW/Y 2.1 MS, GC, GR* 0.0CO05037-2R/Y 0.2 MS* 0.0CO05037-3W/Y 1.2 MS, GC, GR* 0.0CO08352-2P/P 0.2 GC* 0.0COA07365-4RY 2.9 MS*, GC, GR* 0.0NDA081451CB-1CY 1.4 MS, GC*, GR 0.0Yukon Gold 5.6 MS, GC, GR* 0.0








64

Table 14C. Growth characteristics of Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

A05180-3PY 100 3.3 3.0 3.5 4.5 3.0 3.0A05182-7Y 99 3.8 3.5 3.4 4.5 3.0 3.5AC05175-3P/Y 95 3.3 3.0 2.8 2.3 3.0 1.0ATTX98514-1R/Y 93 2.8 2.5 2.2 3.0 3.0 1.8ATX05202S-3W/Y 95 4.8 3.3 3.5 4.3 3.0 3.0CO04021-2R/Y 93 4.5 2.8 3.8 4.5 3.0 3.0CO05028-4P/PY 93 4.0 3.5 3.1 4.0 3.0 2.8CO05028-11P/RWP 96 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.5 3.0 1.8CO05035-1PW/Y 98 4.0 3.0 3.9 4.3 3.3 3.0CO05037-2R/Y 98 3.0 3.3 3.8 3.0 3.0 2.3CO05037-3W/Y 93 4.5 3.5 5.2 3.0 2.5 1.3CO08352-2P/P 94 3.3 2.3 3.1 2.5 2.8 1.0COA07365-4RY 96 2.8 2.5 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.0NDA081451CB-1CY 95 5.0 3.8 4.3 4.5 3.0 3.0Yukon Gold 90 3.8 3.3 2.8 3.3 3.3 1.0

Mean 95 3.8 3.1 3.5 3.6 3.0 2.2

LSD6 (0.05) 6 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.4





5Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and

5=very late.



65

Table 14D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced and Western Regional Specialty Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

A05180-3PY 4.7 4.2 4.5 3.1 70 1.6A05182-7Y 4.9 2.9 3.9 1.8 105 2.6AC05175-3P/Y 4.9 4.8 4.9 3.0 77 3.4ATTX98514-1R/Y 4.8 4.2 4.5 2.4 63 2.6ATX05202S-3W/Y 5.0 4.2 4.6 2.5 84 5.0CO04021-2R/Y 5.0 4.5 4.8 3.6 77 2.0CO05028-4P/PY 4.9 4.9 4.9 3.1 49 2.3CO05028-11P/RWP -- -- -- 1.8 77 3.5CO05035-1PW/Y 4.8 4.5 4.7 2.3 49 4.0CO05037-2R/Y 4.8 4.7 4.8 2.6 49 3.8CO05037-3W/Y 5.0 4.4 4.7 2.4 77 3.2CO08352-2P/P -- -- -- 4.6 70 --COA07365-4RY 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.2 84 4.2NDA081451CB-1CY 5.0 4.3 4.7 2.3 42 4.4Yukon Gold 5.0 4.8 4.9 1.4 98 4.2







66

Table 14E. Specific gravity, french fry color, and texture for Advanced and Western Regional Speciality Trial entries - 2015.

Fry Color1

Fry Texture2



A05180-3PY 1.081 3 3 1 3A05182-7Y 1.084 3 4 1 2AC05175-3P/Y 1.068 1 1 1 1ATTX98514-1R/Y 1.071 4 4 1 2ATX05202S-3W/Y 1.085 1 2 3 4CO04021-2R/Y 1.091 2 3 3 3CO05028-4P/PY 1.088 1 1 3 4CO05028-11P/RWP 1.086 2 2 3 3CO05035-1PW/Y 1.085 3 3 4 3CO05037-2R/Y 1.089 1 1 4 4CO05037-3W/Y 1.077 2 3 2 3CO08352-2P/P 1.073 - - 3 3COA07365-4RY 1.081 2 2 3 3NDA081451CB-1CY 1.097 2 2 4 4Yukon Gold 1.093 3 3 4 4






67

Table 15A. Yield, grade, and tuber shape for Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015.

Yield (Cwt/A)

US #1 Tuber Shape1


AC00206-2W 296 237 80 168 69 49 1.03/1.13AC01144-1W 470 265 56 241 24 200 1.02/1.27AC03433-1W 309 242 79 169 73 41 0.98/1.23AC03452-2W 388 321 83 264 57 60 1.03/1.19AC05153-1W 301 161 51 151 10 137 1.15/1.26AC08094-2W 417 354 85 251 103 56 0.91/1.18CO09165-6W 367 248 68 206 42 114 1.94/1.19TC09403-4W 312 224 71 193 31 82 1.05/1.19Atlantic 441 383 86 218 164 30 1.09/1.27Chipeta 452 338 74 209 129 78 1.33/1.19Snowden 396 236 60 214 22 155 0.97/1.30

Mean 377 274 72 208 66 91 1.13/0.22

LSD2 (0.05) 59 62 11 50 36 36 0.06/0.05





68

Table 15B. Grade defects for Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015.

% %


Clone Defects1

Defects Observed2

Heart3

AC00206-2W 3.4 GC*, GR 0.0AC01144-1W 0.9 MS*, GR* 0.0AC03433-1W 8.3 MS, GC*, GR 0.4AC03452-2W 1.9 MS*, GR* 0.0AC05153-1W 1.0 GC, GR* 0.0AC08094-2W 1.7 GC*, GR* 0.0CO09165-6W 1.6 SG, GC, GR* 0.0TC09403-4W 1.6 MS, GC*, GR 0.0Atlantic 6.8 MS, GC, GR* 1.5Chipeta 7.9 MS, SG, GC*, GR* 0.0Snowden 1.2 MS*, GC*, GR* 0.0








69

Table 15C. Growth characteristics of Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015.



Vigor2

Plant Size3

Type4

Maturity5

AC00206-2W 89 2.3 2.8 2.4 1.8 2.3 2.5AC01144-1W 99 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.0 2.8 2.8AC03433-1W 89 2.8 2.5 4.1 3.8 3.0 4.0AC03452-2W 97 4.0 3.3 2.9 3.5 3.0 3.0AC05153-1W 96 3.5 3.3 4.1 2.8 3.0 1.3AC08094-2W 92 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.5 2.8 2.8CO09165-6W 100 3.3 3.3 3.4 2.8 2.5 1.3TC09403-4W 91 2.3 3.0 2.9 2.5 3.0 1.8Atlantic 90 4.5 3.3 3.4 4.0 3.0 3.0Chipeta 99 5.0 3.8 3.1 4.5 3.0 3.3Snowden 100 4.0 3.0 4.9 4.3 3.5 2.3

Mean 95 3.5 3.2 3.5 3.3 2.9 2.5

LSD6 (0.05) 8 0.5 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.6






and 5=very late.



70

Table 15D. Blackspot, storage weight loss, dormancy, and enzymatic browning evaluations for Advanced and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015.

%

Blackspot Index1



(Days)3

Browning4

AC00206-2W 4.3 3.6 4.0 3.1 77 4.2AC01144-1W 4.9 3.9 4.4 2.1 77 3.6AC03433-1W 4.5 4.1 4.3 3.2 70 4.6AC03452-2W 5.0 4.7 4.9 1.5 63 5.0AC05153-1W 4.8 3.9 4.4 3.8 77 2.2AC08094-2W 5.0 4.0 4.5 2.7 133 3.0CO09165-6W 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.3 56 4.6TC09403-4W 4.9 4.1 4.5 3.2 63 4.6Atlantic 2.9 2.3 2.6 3.5 77 4.8Chipeta 4.4 4.0 4.2 2.2 91 4.4Snowden 3.5 2.9 3.2 2.7 91 2.2




4Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a



71

Table 15E. Chip color1 after various storage regimes, and specific gravity of Advanced

and Western Regional Chipping Trial entries - 2015.



AC00206-2W 1.092 2.0 2.0 2.5 1.0AC01144-1W 1.081 3.5 2.0 3.5 2.5AC03433-1W 1.084 2.5 1.5 4.0 3.0AC03452-2W 1.081 3.5 1.5 4.0 1.0AC05153-1W 1.088 3.0 2.0 4.0 2.5AC08094-2W 1.080 5.0 3.5 4.5 3.0CO09165-6W 1.083 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0TC09403-4W 1.082 3.5 2.5 4.0 2.5Atlantic 1.104 4.0 2.5 4.5 3.0Chipeta 1.088 4.5 3.0 5.0 3.0Snowden 1.095 5.0 3.0 4.0 1.5


are acceptable.


72

Table 16. Summary comparison of advanced selections and named cultivars for yield, grade, maturity, specific gravity, and grade defects.

Total % %# Yield % Vine Specific External Hollow

Clone Usage1

Trials (Cwt/A) US #1 Maturity2

Gravity Defects3

Heart4

Russets AC00395-2RU Dual 6 478 87 3.9 1.101 1.5 0.6

CO05068-1RU Dual 5 447 88 3.7 1.098 3.8 1.3 CO05175-1RU Dual 5 426 89 3.3 1.087 3.5 4.1

AC05039-2RU Dual 4 299 91 1.8 1.086 1.8 0.2

Canela Russet FM 35 349 90 3.3 1.096 1.2 0.1 Centennial Russet FM 35 294 77 3.0 1.079 0.8 0.3 Fortress Russet Dual 7 500 83 3.1 1.099 1.7 0.0 Rio Grande Russet FM 22 533 80 3.0 1.086 2.8 0.4 Russet Norkotah FM 102 369 84 1.7 1.079 2.4 0.4

Specialties CO04056-3P/PW Spec 5 353 32 2.8 1.086 0.2 0.0

CO04067-8R/Y Spec 5 431 65 2.7 1.082 2.6 0.0

CO04099-3W/Y Spec 5 394 52 2.8 1.091 1.1 0.5

AC05175-3P/Y Spec 5 329 64 1.0 1.072 0.1 0.0

CO05037-2R/Y Spec 5 314 32 2.9 1.089 0.0 0.0

CO05037-3W/Y Spec 5 435 55 2.2 1.079 1.0 0.0

CO05028-4P/PY Spec 4 457 69 3.0 1.083 0.5 0.0

CO05028-11P/RWP Spec 4 416 63 2.7 1.084 2.4 1.1

CO05035-1PW/Y Spec 4 472 91 3.3 1.081 1.3 0.7 AC99330-1P/Y Spec 7 495 58 2.9 1.082 0.0 0.2 Mountain Rose Spec 8 383 68 2.2 1.081 1.1 0.0 Purple Majesty Spec 26 463 53 2.2 1.085 0.6 1.0 Yukon Gold Spec 43 400 87 1.9 1.087 2.0 0.5

Table 14 continued on next page


73

Table 16 (cont’d). Summary comparison of advanced selections and named cultivars for yield, grade, maturity, specific gravity, and grade defects.

Total % %

# Yield % Vine Specific External Hollow

Clone Usage1

Trials (Cwt/A) US #1 Maturity2

Gravity Defects3

Heart4

Chippers AC01151-5W Chip 6 465 79 3.1 1.089 2.6 0.2 CO02024-9W Chip 6 416 79 3.0 1.088 1.5 0.2 CO02033-1W Chip 6 426 85 2.7 1.098 0.8 1.6 CO02321-4W Chip 6 423 80 2.8 1.100 3.6 0.0

AC03433-1W Chip 6 396 80 3.6 1.086 7.1 0.2 CO03243-3W Chip 6 465 86 3.3 1.088 2.0 0.5

AC00206-2W Chip 6 321 79 2.8 1.087 2.2 1.1 AC03452-2W Chip 6 446 85 3.1 1.078 1.6 0.5

AC05153-1W Chip 5 342 65 1.7 1.091 1.4 0.1

Atlantic Chip 48 458 86 3.2 1.098 2.8 4.9 Chipeta Chip 45 531 84 3.3 1.090 5.4 0.5

1FM=fresh market; Dual= fresh market and processing potential; SPEC=specialty.

2Vine maturity: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; 5=very late.

3Includes defects such as second growth, growth crack, misshapen, and green.

4Based on tubers greater than 10 ounces.

Several selections that have been discontinued from grower evaluations are available for exclusive releasethrough CSU. Data summaries for all clones are available on request. Please contact David Holm for furtherinformation. Included are russets - AC96052-1RU, CO97087-2RU, CO98067-7RU, CO99053-4RU, andCO03276-5RU; reds - CO98012-5R, CO99076-6R, CO99256-2R, CO00277-2R, and CO00291-5R; chippers -CO95051-7W, CO00188-4W, CO00197-3W, and CO00270-7W; and specialties (including yellows) -AC97521-1R/Y, ATC00293-1W/Y, CO97215-2P/P, CO97222-1R/R, CO97226-2R/R, CO97227-2P/PW,CO97232-1R/Y, CO97232-2R/Y, CO99045-1W/Y, CO00405-1RF, CO00412-5W/Y, CO00415-1RF, VC0967-2R/Y, VC1002-3W/Y, and VC1009-1W/Y.


74

Figure 1. Photographs of advanced selections.


75

Figure 1 (cont’d). Photographs of advanced selections.


76



77



78

Table 17A. Detailed data summary for AC00395-2RU.

Variable # Trials Mean Range

Total Yield (Cwt/A) 6 478 393-574

Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 412 344-478

% US #1 6 87 80-91

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 110 73-129

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 59 28-97

% External Defects1

6 1.5 0.0-3.0

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.6 0.0-2.0

% Stand 6 99 98-100

Emergence Uniformity 6 3.4 2.8-3.8

Vine Vigor3

6 3.3 2.3-4.3

Stems/Plant 6 2.8 1.9-3.4

Vine Size4

6 4.7 4.3-5.0

Vine Type5

6 3.2 3.0-4.0

Vine Maturity6

6 3.9 3.8-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

777

4.94.94.9

4.64.7

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

7 2.3 2.0-2.8

Dormancy9

7 100 70-155

Enzymatic Browning10

7 4.7 4.6-4.8

Specific Gravity 7 1.101 1.092-1.108

Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

77

1.72.6

1.02.0

--3.03.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

77

4.04.0

3.03.0

--5.05.0

Refer to footnotes on page 112.


79

Table 17B. Detailed data summary for CO05068-1RU.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 393 357-423

% US #1 5 88 83-92

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 133 87-188

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 37 28-54

% External Defects1

5 3.8 1.4-7.2

% Hollow Heart2

5 1.3 0.3-3.4

% Stand 5 99 96-100


Vine Vigor3

5 3.2 2.5-3.8


Vine Size4

5 4.4 4.0-5.0

Vine Type5

5 3.1 3.0-3.5

Vine Maturity6

5 3.7 3.0-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

4.84.34.6

4.53.7

--5.04.8

Weight Loss8

6 3.0 2.5-3.7

Dormancy9

6 65 42-84


6 2.2 2.0-2.8


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

0.30.7

0.00.0

--1.01.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

3.53.8

3.03.0

--4.04.0



80

Table 17C. Detailed data summary for CO05175-1RU.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 378 360-406

% US #1 5 89 82-92

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 195 153-264

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 34 17-49

% External Defects1

5 3.5 1.7-7.8

% Hollow Heart2

5 4.1 0.8-6.0

% Stand 5 96 92-99


Vine Vigor3

5 3.2 2.5-3.5


Vine Size4

5 4.1 3.5-4.5

Vine Type5

5 2.9 2.8-3.0

Vine Maturity6

5 3.3 3.0-3.5

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

5.04.94.9

4.94.6

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

6 3.3 2.7-4.3

Dormancy9

6 69 56-77


6 3.2 2.0-4.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

1.01.3

0.00.0

--2.02.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

3.84.2

3.04.0

--5.05.0



81

Table 17D. Detailed data summary for AC05039-2RU.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 273 243-341

% US #1 4 91 89-93

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 71 52-97

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 22 19-27

% External Defects1

4 1.8 0.5-3.8

% Hollow Heart2

4 0.2 0.0-0.6

% Stand 4 98 92-100


Vine Vigor3

4 3.1 3.0-3.5


Vine Size4

4 2.2 1.0-3.0

Vine Type5

4 2.4 2.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

4 1.8 1.5-2.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

555

5.04.95.0

5.04.7

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

5 2.3 1.8-3.0

Dormancy9

5 82 55-101


5 4.4 4.2-4.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

55

1.02.2

0.01.0

--2.03.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

55

3.43.2

3.03.0

--4.04.0



82

Table 17E. Detailed data summary for Canela Russet.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 35 313 182-421

% US #1 35 90 77-96

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 35 100 28-203

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 35 31 14-61

% External Defects1

35 1.2 0.0-6.0

% Hollow Heart2

35 0.1 0.0-0.9

% Stand 34 95 82-100


Vine Vigor3

34 2.3 1.0-3.0

Stems/Plant 34 2.0 1.1-4.2

Vine Size4

34 3.8 3.0-5.0

Vine Type5

34 3.5 3.0 4.3

Vine Maturity6

34 3.3 2.8-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

444444

4.84.44.6

3.72.5

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

44 3.5 1.3-7.0

Dormancy9

44 141 83-195


44 4.5 3.4-5.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

4444

1.92.3

0.00.0

--3.04.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

4444

3.93.9

3.03.0

--5.05.0



83

Table 17F. Detailed data summary for Centennial Russet.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 35 229 129-320

% US #1 35 77 62-89

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 35 26 4-72

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 35 62 32-102

% External Defects1

35 0.8 0.0-3.3

% Hollow Heart2

35 0.3 0.0-3.3

% Stand 35 97 90-99


Vine Vigor3

15 2.2 1.0-3.0

Stems/Plant 27 3.0 2.2-3.6

Vine Size4

15 2.6 2.0-3.0

Vine Type5

15 3.2 2.8-3.8

Vine Maturity6

35 3.0 2.5-3.5

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

484851

4.94.84.8

3.74.2

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

51 6.0 1.6-9.2

Dormancy9

44 88 57-123


46 4.1 3.2-5.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

5050

3.73.9

3.03.0

--4.05.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

5050

2.42.3

1.01.0

--4.03.0



84

Table 17G. Detailed data summary for Fortress Russet.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 7 415 377-457

% US #1 7 83 77-91

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 7 105 74-148

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 7 75 32-118

% External Defects1

7 1.7 0.3-3.5

% Hollow Heart2

7 0.0 0.0-0.2

% Stand 7 97 94-100


Vine Vigor3

7 3.7 2.5-4.3


Vine Size4

7 4.4 3.0-5.0

Vine Type5

7 3.1 3.0-3.5

Vine Maturity6

7 3.1 3.0-3.5

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

888

4.64.44.5

3.83.7

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

8 2.3 1.4-2.8

Dormancy9

8 94 82-132


8 2.8 1.4-4.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

88

0.81.1

0.00.0

--2.02.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

88

3.94.0

3.03.0

--5.05.0



85

Table 17H. Detailed data summary for Rio Grande Russet.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 22 426 255-603

% US #1 22 80 65-91

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 22 123 14-275

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 22 92 33-202

% External Defects1

22 2.8 0.1-8.7

% Hollow Heart2

22 0.4 0.0-4.1

% Stand 22 99 96-100


Vine Vigor3

22 3.6 2.0-4.5

Stems/Plant 22 3.4 2.0-4.8

Vine Size4

22 4.1 3.5-5.0

Vine Type5

22 3.1 3.0-3.5

Vine Maturity6

22 3.0 2.5 -3.5

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

333333

4.84.64.7

4.13.0

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

33 3.7 1.5-7.1

Dormancy9

33 93 68-123


33 3.9 3.0-5.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

3333

2.32.8

1.02.0

--4.04.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

3333

3.13.0

2.02.0

--4.04.0



86

Table 17I. Detailed data summary for Russet Norkotah.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 102 311 101-480

% US #1 102 84 59-94

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 102 105 10-247

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 102 50 13-131

% External Defects1

102 2.4 0.0-9.6

% Hollow Heart2

102 0.4 0.0-2.8

% Stand 101 98 88-100


Vine Vigor3

92 2.9 1.0-4.0

Stems/Plant 97 3.6 2.3-5.7

Vine Size4

92 2.4 1.0-4.0

Vine Type5

92 2.6 2.0-3.5

Vine Maturity6

101 1.7 1.0-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

102102103

4.74.44.6

2.92.6

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

103 3.5 1.0-7.1

Dormancy9

102 97 70-140


102 3.4 2.2-4.8


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

103103

2.02.4

1.01.0

--4.04.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

103103

2.72.8

1.01.0

--4.05.0



87

Table 17J. Detailed data summary for CO04056-3P/PW.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 123 61-234

% US #1 5 32 20-52

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 2 0-5

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 230 211-249

% External Defects1

5 0.2 0.0-0.3

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 5 98 97-99


Vine Vigor3

5 2.4 1.8-3.0


Vine Size4

5 3.5 3.0-4.0

Vine Type5

5 3.0 3.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

5 2.8 2.0-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

---------

---------

—---

------

Weight Loss8

6 3.0 1.7-6.6

Dormancy9

6 85 70-102


--- --- --- ---


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

------

------

------

------

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

2.73.0

2.02.0

--3.04.0



88

Table 17K. Detailed data summary for CO04067-8R/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 283 221-372

% US #1 5 65 60-74

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 19 10-46

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 137 121-158

% External Defects1

5 2.6 1.5-3.9

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 5 95 92-96


Vine Vigor3

5 3.1 3.0-3.3


Vine Size4

5 3.9 3.3-4.3

Vine Type5

5 3.1 3.0-3.5

Vine Maturity6

5 2.7 2.3-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

4.73.03.8

4.32.6

--4.83.9

Weight Loss8

6 3.5 1.5-5.1

Dormancy9

6 57 49-74


6 3.8 2.8-4.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

1.31.2

1.01.0

--2.02.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

2.32.3

2.02.0

--3.03.0



89

Table 17L. Detailed data summary for CO04099-3W/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 207 168-274

% US #1 5 52 44-60

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 7 2-11

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 182 160-214

% External Defects1

5 1.1 0.0-3.4

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.5 0.0-1.3

% Stand 5 98 96-100


Vine Vigor3

5 3.5 3.3-4.0


Vine Size4

5 3.7 3.0-4.0

Vine Type5

5 2.9 2.8-3.0

Vine Maturity6

5 2.8 1.8-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

4.23.74.0

3.62.3

--4.74.6

Weight Loss8

6 2.2 1.7-3.1

Dormancy9

6 81 63-116


6 3.8 2.8-4.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

1.00.7

0.00.0

--2.01.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

3.83.8

3.03.0

--4.05.0



90

Table 17M. Detailed data summary for AC05175-3P/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 214 135-299

% US #1 5 64 48-81

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 15 4-43

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 115 69-171

% External Defects1

5 0.1 0.0-0.5

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 5 96 93-98


Vine Vigor3

5 2.8 2.5-3.0


Vine Size4

5 2.1 1.5-2.5

Vine Type5

5 2.8 2.5-3.0

Vine Maturity6

5 1.0 1.0-1.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

4.94.64.8

4.64.1

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

6 3.8 2.6-5.3

Dormancy9

6 81 71-95


6 3.3 2.6-4.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

1.00.8

0.00.0

--2.01.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

2.32.3

1.01.0

--5.04.0



91

Table 17N. Detailed data summary for CO05037-2R/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 111 55-187

% US #1 5 32 22-47

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 6 0-28

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 202 179-226

% External Defects1

5 0.0 0.0-0.2

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 5 99 97-100


Vine Vigor3

5 2.6 1.8-3.3


Vine Size4

5 3.1 2.5-3.5

Vine Type5

5 3.2 3.0-3.8

Vine Maturity6

5 2.9 2.3-3.3

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

4.84.64.7

4.64.2

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

6 2.7 2.0-3.1

Dormancy9

6 60 42-81


6 4.2 3.8-4.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

1.21.3

1.01.0

--2.03.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

3.83.8

3.03.0

--4.04.0



92

Table 17O. Detailed data summary for CO05037-3W/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 240 182-313

% US #1 5 55 51-60

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 9 2-19

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 190 163-211

% External Defects1

5 1.0 0.4-1.4

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 5 93 88-96


Vine Vigor3

5 3.8 3.3-5.0


Vine Size4

5 3.3 3.0-3.5

Vine Type5

5 3.0 2.8-3.0

Vine Maturity6

5 2.2 1.3-2.8

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666

4.94.74.8

4.74.5

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

6 2.7 2.4-3.2

Dormancy9

6 82 77-88


6 3.6 3.2-4.2


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

66

1.52.5

1.01.0

--2.03.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

2.53.0

2.02.0

--3.04.0



93

Table 17P. Detailed data summary for CO05028-4P/PY.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 322 202-452

% US #1 4 69 52-80

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 51 30-89

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 132 100-188

% External Defects1

4 0.5 0.3-0.7

% Hollow Heart2

4 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 4 96 93-99


Vine Vigor3

4 3.4 2.5-4.0


Vine Size4

4 3.9 3.5-4.0

Vine Type5

4 3.0 3.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

4 3.0 2.8-3.3

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

---------

---------

------

------

Weight Loss8

5 3.4 2.7-4.5

Dormancy9

5 60 49-91


4 4.0 3.2-4.8


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

44

1.31.5

1.00.0

--2.03.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

55

2.63.4

2.03.0

--3.04.0



94

Table 17Q. Detailed data summary for CO05028-11P/RWP.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 269 187-422

% US #1 4 63 54-78

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 9 2-25

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 137 109-176

% External Defects1

4 2.4 0.7-3.8

% Hollow Heart2

4 1.1 0.2-2.4

% Stand 4 97 94-100


Vine Vigor3

4 3.1 2.0-4.0


Vine Size4

4 3.8 3.5-4.0

Vine Type5

4 3.0 3.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

4 2.7 1.8-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

---------

---------

------

------

Weight Loss8

5 2.2 1.6-3.1

Dormancy9

5 85 76-103


4 4.2 3.5-5.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

44

2.02.5

1.02.0

--3.03.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

55

2.82.6

2.02.0

--3.03.0



95

Table 17R. Detailed data summary for CO05035-1PW/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 4 429 379-525

% US #1 4 91 88-94

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 4 181 139-221

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 4 38 31-45

% External Defects1

4 1.3 0.0-2.1

% Hollow Heart2

4 0.7 0.0-2.1

% Stand 4 93 84-98


Vine Vigor3

4 3.3 2.8-4.0


Vine Size4

4 4.0 3.5-4.3

Vine Type5

4 2.7 2.0-3.3

Vine Maturity6

4 3.3 3.0-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

555

4.94.74.8

4.84.5

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

5 2.8 2.3-4.1

Dormancy9

5 47 34-70


5 4.2 3.2-4.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

55

2.43.0

2.02.0

--3.04.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

55

2.83.0

2.03.0

--3.03.0



96

Table 17S. Detailed data summary for AC99330-1P/Y.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 7 288 208-376

% US #1 7 58 43-74

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 7 24 3-69

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 7 207 129-271

% External Defects1

7 0.0 0.0-0.2

% Hollow Heart2

7 0.2 0.0-0.6

% Stand 7 98 96-99


Vine Vigor3

7 3.7 3.0-4.5


Vine Size4

7 3.4 2.8-4.0

Vine Type5

7 2.5 2.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

7 2.9 2.0-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

888

4.74.44.6

4.03.7

--5.04.8

Weight Loss8

8 3.3 1.4-5.0

Dormancy9

8 60 49-66


8 2.9 2.2-3.6


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

88

1.93.1

1.03.0

--4.04.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

88

2.93.1

2.03.0

--4.04.0



97

Table 17T. Detailed data summary for Mountain Rose.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 8 262 150-354

% US #1 8 68 52-79

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 8 23 4-63

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 8 116 91-148

% External Defects1

8 1.1 0.0-2.4

% Hollow Heart2

8 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 8 98 94-100


Vine Vigor3

8 2.7 2.0-3.0


Vine Size4

8 2.7 2.3-3.0

Vine Type5

8 2.9 2.5-3.0

Vine Maturity6

8 2.2 1.5-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

---------

------

------

------

Weight Loss8

11 4.1 1.3-6.3

Dormancy9

11 102 77-153


--- --- --- ---


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

------

------

------

------

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

66

2.52.7

1.02.0

--3.03.0



98

Table 17U. Detailed data summary for Purple Majesty.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 26 250 57-401

% US #1 26 53 23-72

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 26 27 0-61

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 26 210 118-326

% External Defects1

26 0.6 0.0-1.7

% Hollow Heart2

26 1.0 0.0-3.4

% Stand 26 97 92-100


Vine Vigor3

26 3.5 2.3-4.5

Stems/Plant 26 4.4 3.2-6.1

Vine Size4

26 3.1 2.3-4.0

Vine Type5

26 2.7 2.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

26 2.2 1.5-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

---------

---------

------

------

Weight Loss8

36 3.6 1.1-6.8

Dormancy9

36 61 41-85


--- --- --- ---


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

------

------

------

------

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

3131

2.72.8

1.01.0

--4.04.0



99

Table 17V. Detailed data summary for Yukon Gold.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 43 355 257-444

% US #1 43 89 78-94

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 43 150 55-248

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 43 37 22-66

% External Defects1

43 2.0 0.0-5.6

% Hollow Heart2

43 0.5 0.0-2.2

% Stand 43 96 90-100


Vine Vigor3

43 3.7 3.0-5.0

Stems/Plant 43 2.5 1.6-3.8

Vine Size4

43 3.2 2.5-4.5

Vine Type5

43 2.7 2.0-3.5

Vine Maturity6

43 1.9 1.0-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

555555

4.44.24.3

2.02.4

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

55 2.1 1.0-4.3

Dormancy9

55 90 63-132


55 4.4 3.4-5.0


Fry Color11

HarvestStorage

5555

1.72.7

1.01.0

--4.04.0

Fry Texture12

HarvestStorage

5555

3.23.1

1.01.0

--4.05.0



100

Table 17W. Detailed data summary for AC01151-5W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 368 303-430

% US #1 6 79 67-90

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 68 53-115

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 85 45-134

% External Defects1

6 2.6 0.6-7.4

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.2 0.0-0.6

% Stand 6 97 96-99


Vine Vigor3

6 3.0 2.8-3.5


Vine Size4

6 3.4 3.0-3.8

Vine Type5

6 3.0 3.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 3.1 3.0-3.3

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

151515

4.53.23.9

3.21.3

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

15 2.5 1.6-4.4

Dormancy9

15 96 70-127


15 1.9 1.2-3.6


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

16161616

4.43.62.52.4

3.02.51.01.0

----

5.04.54.03.5



101

Table 17X. Detailed data summary for CO02024-9W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 327 295-369

% US #1 6 79 69-89

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 50 25-71

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 83 39-146

% External Defects1

6 1.5 0.3-3.7

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.2 0.0-0.8

% Stand 6 97 96-98


Vine Vigor3

6 3.5 3.3-4.0


Vine Size4

6 3.2 2.8-3.8

Vine Type5

6 3.0 2.8-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 3.0 3.0-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

151515

4.43.03.7

3.81.6

--5.04.7

Weight Loss8

15 3.1 2.1-3.9

Dormancy9

15 100 84-134


15 3.5 1.8-4.6


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

16161616

3.82.61.61.5

2.51.51.01.0

----

4.54.02.52.5



102

Table 17Y. Detailed data summary for CO02033-1W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 361 317-399

% US #1 6 85 79-89

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 50 15-75

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 61 36-92

% External Defects1

6 0.8 0.2-1.6

% Hollow Heart2

6 1.6 0.0-2.6

% Stand 6 98 96-100


Vine Vigor3

6 3.7 3.0-4.0


Vine Size4

6 3.3 3.0-3.8

Vine Type5

6 3.0 2.8-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 2.7 2.0-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

151515

3.73.33.5

2.72.0

--5.04.7

Weight Loss8

15 3.4 2.3-5.2

Dormancy9

15 111 70-167


15 3.6 2.4-4.6


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

16161616

3.42.71.92.0

2.51.01.01.0

----

4.03.53.03.5



103

Table 17Z. Detailed data summary for CO02321-4W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 340 250-397

% US #1 6 80 71-85

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 76 54-105

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 66 43-95

% External Defects1

6 3.6 2.5-5.6

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.0 0.0-0.0

% Stand 6 96 91-99


Vine Vigor3

6 4.1 3.5-4.8


Vine Size4

6 3.3 3.0-3.5

Vine Type5

6 2.9 2.8-3.3

Vine Maturity6

6 2.8 2.5-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

151515

4.73.94.3

4.03.0

--5.04.5

Weight Loss8

15 3.5 2.5-4.5

Dormancy9

15 83 63-106


15 4.3 3.6-4.8


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

16161616

3.72.51.71.8

2.01.01.01.0

----

4.53.52.53.0



104

Table 17AA. Detailed data summary for AC03433-1W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 320 242-421

% US #1 6 80 74-86

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 69 22-95

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 50 41-64

% External Defects1

6 7.1 3.7-10.1

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.2 0.0-1.0

% Stand 6 94 89-98


Vine Vigor3

6 2.8 2.5-3.3


Vine Size4

6 3.8 3.5-4.0

Vine Type5

6 3.0 3.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 3.6 3.0-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

141414

4.84.24.5

4.32.5

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

14 3.4 2.2-5.5

Dormancy9

14 81 69-101


14 4.4 3.4-5.0


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

15151515

3.32.61.81.8

2.51.51.01.0

----

5.04.04.03.0



105

Table 17AB. Detailed data summary for CO03243-3W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 401 357-438

% US #1 6 86 81-88

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 93 76-113

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 55 46-71

% External Defects1

6 2.0 0.6-2.8

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.5 0.0-0.9

% Stand 6 97 92-99


Vine Vigor3

6 3.6 3.3-4.3


Vine Size4

6 4.0 3.8-4.3

Vine Type5

6 3.0 3.0-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 3.3 3.0-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

141414

4.43.74.1

3.42.9

--5.04.5

Weight Loss8

14 3.3 2.3-4.9

Dormancy9

14 82 63-101


14 3.2 2.4-4.2


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

15151515

3.82.72.01.9

2.51.01.01.0

----

5.04.03.03.0



106

Table 17AC. Detailed data summary for AC00206-2W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 255 210-299

% US #1 6 79 75-83

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 38 16-69

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 60 49-70

% External Defects1

6 2.2 0.5-3.4

% Hollow Heart2

6 1.1 0.0-2.5

% Stand 6 96 89-98


Vine Vigor3

6 2.6 2.0-3.0


Vine Size4

6 2.1 1.3-2.8

Vine Type5

6 2.7 2.5-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 2.8 2.3-3.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

131313

4.53.84.2

3.72.0

--5.04.9

Weight Loss8

13 3.4 2.5-5.0

Dormancy9

13 85 63-103


13 4.4 3.4-5.0


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

14141414

2.62.01.81.7

1.51.01.01.0

----

3.53.03.02.5



107

Table 17AD. Detailed data summary for AC03452-2W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 6 377 321-428

% US #1 6 85 81-88

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 6 63 34-91

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 6 62 46-74

% External Defects1

6 1.6 1.2-2.2

% Hollow Heart2

6 0.5 0.0-1.5

% Stand 6 98 97-99


Vine Vigor3

6 3.8 3.3-4.3


Vine Size4

6 3.4 3.0-3.8

Vine Type5

6 2.8 2.3-3.0

Vine Maturity6

6 3.1 3.0-3.3

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

131313

4.94.84.9

4.63.6

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

13 1.9 1.4-2.8

Dormancy9

13 72 52-95


13 4.8 4.4-5.0


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

14141414

3.42.71.81.8

2.51.01.01.0

----

4.54.04.03.5



108

Table 17AE. Detailed data summary for AC05153-1W.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 5 228 161-277

% US #1 5 65 51-74

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 5 15 10-22

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 5 110 75-137

% External Defects1

5 1.4 0.1-3.5

% Hollow Heart2

5 0.1 0.0-0.3

% Stand 5 97 96-99


Vine Vigor3

5 3.5 3.0-4.0


Vine Size4

5 2.5 2.0-3.0

Vine Type5

5 2.8 2.3-3.0

Vine Maturity6

5 1.7 1.0-2.8

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

111111

4.63.94.3

3.92.1

--4.94.7

Weight Loss8

11 4.6 3.5-6.7

Dormancy9

11 88 77-113


11 3.2 2.0-4.4


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

12121212

4.03.02.32.2

2.51.01.51.0

----

4.54.04.03.5



109

Table 17AF. Detailed data summary for Atlantic.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 48 394 265-512

% US #1 48 86 76-93

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 48 146 58-290

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 48 50 19-109

% External Defects1

48 2.8 0.1-9.1

% Hollow Heart2

48 4.9 0.2-16.4

% Stand 48 96 88-100


Vine Vigor3

42 3.6 2.8-4.3

Stems/Plant 48 3.2 2.2-4.9

Vine Size4

42 3.3 2.2-4.0

Vine Type5

42 3.0 2.8-3.8

Vine Maturity6

48 3.2 2.8-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

707071

3.32.83.1

1.81.4

--5.04.3

Weight Loss8

71 4.3 1.1-7.9

Dormancy9

68 85 56-119


69 4.5 3.8-5.0


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

72727272

4.13.62.82.6

2.01.51.01.0

----

5.05.04.55.0



110

Table 17AG. Detailed data summary for Chipeta.



Yield US #1 (Cwt/A) 45 447 249-606

% US #1 45 84 70-90

Yield >10 oz (Cwt/A) 45 166 52-388

Yield <4 oz (Cwt/A) 45 55 22-119

% External Defects1

45 5.4 1.1-13.0

% Hollow Heart2

45 0.5 0.0-4.0

% Stand 45 98 94-100


Vine Vigor3

38 4.1 3.2-5.0

Stems/Plant 44 3.4 2.0-4.9

Vine Size4

38 4.4 4.0-5.0

Vine Type5

38 3.1 2.5-4.0

Vine Maturity6

45 3.3 3.0-4.0

Blackspot7

Bud EndStem End

Average

666668

4.03.83.9

2.21.4

--5.05.0

Weight Loss8

68 3.0 1.0-8.0

Dormancy9

64 102 70-153


65 4.0 2.8-5.0


Chip Color11

4040R

5050R

68686868

4.63.82.72.4

3.01.51.01.0

----

5.05.05.04.5



111

Footnotes for Tables 17A-17AG:

1Percent external defects based on the proportion of the total sample weight with significant defects.

2Percent hollow heart calculated as follows: (Weight of tubers >10 ounces with defects/total sample

weight) x 100.




6Vine maturity is rated on the following basis: 1=very early; 2=early; 3=medium; 4=late; and 5=very

late.


8Tubers were stored at 45F for approximately 3 months.


10Degree of darkening rated at 60 minutes after slicing tubers lengthwise. Rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with

5 indicating no discoloration.

11Chip color was rated using the Snack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings of <2.0 are acceptable.

Reconditioned samples were stored at 60F for three weeks. Fry color was rated on a 0 to 4 scale, with 0 being the lightest or best color. Color ratings of <2.0 are acceptable.

12Fry texture was rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating the cooked flesh was dry and mealy and 1

representing a soggy, wet texture.


112

APPENDIX 1. Cultural management information for the Potato Breeding and Selection Program’s trials at the San Luis Valley Research Center - 2015.

LOCATION:San Luis Valley Research Center

SOIL TYPE: Sandy Loam (Dunul cobbly sandy loam)

DATE:Planted - 5/15/15Hilled - 6/3/15Vines Killed - 9/2/15 (sulfuric acid - 25gal/A) 110 days after plantingHarvested - 9/29/15

PLOT INFORMATION:Size of Plots - 1 row x 25'Spacing Between Hills - 12"Spacing Between Rows - 34"Hills Per Plot - 25Number of Reps - 4 except 2 for Intermediate Yield Trials

METHOD OF HARVEST:Machine (Grimme 1-row)

FERTILIZER:5/15/15 - 80 lbs N + 60 lbs P2O5 + 40 lbs K20 + 25 lbs S + 2.5 lb Zn/A (dual band in-row liquidapplication)7/18/15 - 10 lbs N (fertigated)7/23/15 - 15 lbs N (fertigated)7/27/15 - 15 lbs N (fertigated)Total fertilizer applied: 120 lbs N + 60 lbs P2O5 + 40 lbs K20 + 25 lb S + 2.5 lb Zn/A

IRRIGATION:Center Pivot -15.05" gross application (application frequency and amount based on ET)Rainfall - 4.74" (5/16/15 - 9/29/15)

INSECTICIDES APPLIED:7/15/15 - Leverage 360 (0.175 lb a.i./A imidacloprid and ß-cyfluthrin)8/4/15 - Belay (0.175 lb a.i./A clothianidin)

FUNGICIDES APPLIED:7/15/15 - Quadris Opti (0.202 lb a.i./A)8/4/15 - Luna Tranquility (0.7 lb a.i./A fluoryram and pyrimethanil)

HERBICIDES APPLIED:6/5/15 - Dual Magnum (1.432 lb a.i./A)6/5/15 - Boundary (0.984 lb a.i./A S-metolachlor and 0.234 lb a.i./A metribuzin)


113

APPENDIX 2. General procedures used for postharvest evaluations.

Blackspot. Ten randomly selected tubers for each clone tested are bruised on the stem and bud endswith a 150 g weight dropped from a height of 60 cm. Tubers are stored at 40F prior to bruising andwarmed up for 24 hours prior to bruising. After bruising, tubers are stored at room temperature for twodays prior to evaluation. Blackspot susceptibility is evaluated by cutting the tubers in half longitudinallyand rating the extent of damage. Blackspot is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating no discoloration.

Storage Weight Loss and Dormancy. Ten randomly selected tubers are weighed and stored at 45F forapproximately a three month period under low relative humidity conditions to evaluate storage weightloss potential. These tubers are also observed weekly for sprout growth. Dormancy is reported as daysafter harvest to first visible sprout growth.

Enzymatic Browning. Five tubers of each clone are cut in half lengthwise and rated for degree ofdarkening 60 minutes later. Degree of darkening is rated on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating nodiscoloration.

Specific Gravity. Specific gravity is determined using the air/water method.

Fry Color and Texture. Fry color and texture is determined at or shortly after harvest and after aminimum of eight weeks of storage at 45F. Fries are cooked for 3 ½ minutes at 375F. Fry color is ratedon a 0-4 scale using the USDA color standards. Color ratings <2 are acceptable. Fry texture is rated on a1 to 5 scale, with 5 indicating that the cooked flesh was dry and mealy, with 1 representing a soggy, wettexture.

Chip Color. Chip color is determined after an interval of storage at 40 and 50F and after reconditioningfor three weeks at 60F. Chips are cooked at 365F until bubbling slows. Chip color is rated using theSnack Food Association 1-5 scale. Ratings <2.0 are acceptable.


114

Notes

Documents

Potato Breeding and Selection - Colorado State Universitypotatoes.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/...Potato Breeding and Selection Submitted by David G. Holm, Caroline Gray,