Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation — 2012 Mark Koenig, Extension Educator Ohio State University Extension, Sandusky County Matt Hofelich, Station Manager OARDC/OSU North Central Agricultural Research Station Sweet corn is one of the most commonly grown fresh market crops in Northwest Ohio. Having two general genotypes and a wide array of different varieties within each genotype, it becomes difficult to choose what varieties to plant. To add to this confusion there is also the combination of the two genotypes referred to by triple sweets syn. The objectives of the Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation were (1) to test and evaluate sh 2 , se, and syn sweet corn varieties under northern Ohio growing conditions for plant, ear characteristics, and yield; and (2) to provide taste test results from the general public for several varieties. Each variety was judged using plot numbers and only at the end of the evaluation were variety names substituted for plot numbers. Plant evaluations were performed at regular intervals during the growing season and at harvest. An extremely wet and windy season did affect several varieties and forced us to abandon one full rep in the se trial due to water damage. Weather also limited our spray program and insects and worms were present in most varieties. Twenty se and or syn varieties and twenty-seven varieties of sh 2 were evaluated (Tables 1 and 2). Plots were established in a randomized complete block design with four replications per entry. Each rep was planted in four rows, harvesting only the middle two rows. Data collected on each entry included the following: Seedling vigor early and standability Suckering Tassel, silk, and harvest dates Snap rating (ease of ear removal from stalk) Ear height Final stand per 20 ft/row (2 ten ft/row harvest data rows) Marketable dozen per acre Flag appearance Husk cover Tip fill Rows of kernels/ear Kernel depth Ear color, length, and diameter Brix value at harvest, 5 days storage, 10 days storage (Tables 8 and 13) All values reported are based on the average of all useable replications. Plots were established on May 3 for sh2 varieties. The se varieties were planted in rows spaced 30 inches apart at a seeding rate of 3 seeds per foot of row. All cultural practices and field operations are listed in Table 3. Seedling vigor (emergence); standability; and tassel, silk, and harvest dates are provided in Tables 4 and 9. Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for 2012
17
Embed
Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation — 2012 Trial Reports/2012/09-04...Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation — 2012 Mark Koenig, Extension Educator Ohio State University Extension,
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Ohio State University Extension, Sandusky County Matt Hofelich, Station Manager
OARDC/OSU North Central Agricultural Research Station
Sweet corn is one of the most commonly grown fresh market crops in Northwest Ohio. Having two general genotypes and a wide array of different varieties within each genotype, it becomes difficult to choose what varieties to plant. To add to this confusion there is also the combination of the two genotypes referred to by triple sweets syn. The objectives of the Northern Ohio Sweet Corn Evaluation were (1) to test and evaluate sh2, se, and syn sweet corn varieties under northern Ohio growing conditions for plant, ear characteristics, and yield; and (2) to provide taste test results from the general public for several varieties. Each variety was judged using plot numbers and only at the end of the evaluation were variety names substituted for plot numbers.
Plant evaluations were performed at regular intervals during the growing season and at harvest. An extremely wet and windy season did affect several varieties and forced us to abandon one full rep in the se trial due to water damage. Weather also limited our spray program and insects and worms were present in most varieties.
Twenty se and or syn varieties and twenty-seven varieties of sh2 were evaluated (Tables 1 and 2). Plots were established in a randomized complete block design with four replications per entry. Each rep was planted in four rows, harvesting only the middle two rows. Data collected on each entry included the following:
Seedling vigor early and standability Suckering Tassel, silk, and harvest dates Snap rating (ease of ear removal from stalk) Ear height Final stand per 20 ft/row (2 ten ft/row harvest data rows) Marketable dozen per acre Flag appearance Husk cover Tip fill Rows of kernels/ear Kernel depth Ear color, length, and diameter Brix value at harvest, 5 days storage, 10 days storage (Tables 8 and 13)
All values reported are based on the average of all useable replications. Plots were established on May 3 for sh2 varieties. The se varieties were planted in rows spaced 30 inches apart at a seeding rate of 3 seeds per foot of row. All cultural practices and field operations are listed in Table 3. Seedling vigor (emergence); standability; and tassel, silk, and harvest dates are provided in Tables 4 and 9.
Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for 2012
At harvest, ease of harvesting ear (snap rating), ear height, stand per 10 ft./row for 2 row, marketable dozens per acre were recorded (Tables 5 and 10). At harvest, five ears per rep were evaluated for flags, husk cover, tip fill, number of kernel rows/ear, ear color, length, and diameter (Tables 6 and 11).
As part of this continuing project, several different varieties were distributed to a group of volunteer individuals for the purpose of rating varieties on appearance and taste. Individuals were given two different varieties and asked to judge each variety in two general areas. The first area was Appearance, defined as (1) husk color, (2) size of ear, and (3) kernel color. The second area was Taste, which included (1) tenderness, (2) sweetness, and (3) flavor. The evaluation form also asked about overall comments about each variety. Participants were encouraged to let each family member judge the corn individually. Varieties were only identified to participants as numbers. This year we also added a traceability code to each variety.
The goal of the consumer taste results was to get the public’s opinion on some of the sweet corn varieties tested in our trial this year. Sweet corn varieties chosen for public opinion were selected by harvest ratings done at the OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station. These ratings included appearance of rowing (how straight the rows of kernels were on the ears), tenderness and sweetness (raw taste test) (Tables 7 and 12). Volunteer participants were asked to taste cooked sweet corn for evaluation. Some general observations of the taste test panel were that everyone has a different idea of how sweet corn should taste and people prefer longer ears. All participants volunteered for future taste test panels.
Table 1. Varieties and seed suppliers for se and syn entries, 2012 north Ohio sweet corn evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station.
Table 3a. 2012 log of operations for Koenig SE sweet corn trial.
Date Project Description of Operation 4/5 SE Applied 300lbs/A 0-0-60, 150 lbs/A 10-52-0, 200 lbs/A 46-0-0, and
7 lbs/A of 14% Granular Boron 5/3 SE Planted trial with 4-row JD/Almaco cone seeder, in row plant
spacing of 9 inches 5/4 SE Herbicide application: Dual [email protected]/A 5/21 SE Sidedressed plot with 375 lbs/acre of 28-0-0 5/29 SE Cultivated trial 6/15 SE Irrigated trial with 1 inch of H2O 6/17& 6/21 SE Trial received 1.6 inches of rainfall (3 events) 6/21 SE Insecticide application: Asana @ 9 oz/A 6/28 SE Insecticide application: Mustang Max @ 4oz/A 7/1 SE Trial received 0.25 inch of rainfall 7/2 SE Irrigated trial with 0.75 inch of H2O 7/3 SE Set up electric fence around trial 7/3 SE Trial received 0.15 inch of rainfall 7/5 SE Insecticide application: Larvin @ 30oz/A 7/10 SE Insecticide application: Coragen @5 oz/A 7/12 SE Harvested and evaluated varieties 40 & 41 7/16 SE Harvested & evaluated varieties 47, 48, 53 7/16 SE Insecticide application: Coragen @5 oz/A 7/18 SE Harvested & evaluated varieties 43, 44, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55 7/20 SE Brix test on varieties 47, 48, 53 7/20 SE Picked all varieties that were ready for food pantries — jail,
youthworks here 7/23 SE Brix test on varieties 43, 44, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55 7/24 SE Brix test on varieties 40 & 41 7/24 SE Harvested and evaluated varieties 41, 45, 46, 56 7/26 SE Brix test on varieties 47, 48, 53 7/26 SE Picked all varieties that were ready for food pantries — jail,
youthworks here 7/31 SE Brix test on varieties 43, 44, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55, 7/31 SE Brix test on varieties 41, 45, 46, 56 8/2 SE Brix test on varieties 41, 45, 46, 56 8/2 SE Mowed trial off
Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for 2012
Table 4. Plant evaluation for se and syn sweet corn, 2012 northern Ohio sweet corn trial.
heavy rain two days later. 2Tassel Date=50% or more of the plants tasseling in all 4 reps. 3Sucker: 0=no suckers, 1=few, 2=moderate, 3=severe. 4Silk Date=50% or more of plants silking in all 4 reps.
Midwest Vegetable Trial Report for 2012
Table 5. Harvest data for se and syn sweet corn, 2012 northern Ohio sweet corn trial.
Table 14. Public evaluation of sweet corn varieties in the 2012 northern Ohio sweet corn evaluation, OARDC North Central Agricultural Research Station.
Variety Husk Color Size of Ear Kernel Color Tenderness Sweetness Flavor
P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E P A V E Number of ratings in each category