Introduction

There has been a need to determine the best-adapted varieties and production practices for mechanically-harvested pickling cucumber production in the Willamette Valley. To do so, varieties with a good length:diameter ratio and processing quality should be grown in commercial-scale trials. Each variety should be harvested more than once to determine days or heat units to the optimum size distribution, and the rate at which size grade increases with time. Plant population, N fertilization, irrigation, and pollinator management are other production practices that affect variety performance.

Results of our 1990 trials indicated that nitrogen fertility is a major grower-controlled factor that may affect product quality and yield. Excessive vine growth caused by high rates of nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation appeared to be a major cause of poor fruit set and poor harvester recovery of fruit. Another factor in poor yields or harvester efficiency is weed control. High weed populations cause expensive downtime spent cleaning the harvester pickup head. Stocks of the herbicide chloramben (Amiben) are being rapidly exhausted and will not be replaced. Other herbicides have proven less effective, more expensive, or damaging to the crop. Testing of alternatives is needed to identify combinations of herbicides that are effective and non-phytotoxic to the crop.

Our 1990 trials focused on a number of varieties screened in earlier trials, nitrogen and harvest date variables, and plant population. The objective of the 1991 variety trial was to compare yields, size grades, and dollar return for five pickling cucumber varieties in commercial-size trials at two rates of fertilizer and over three harvest dates. The 1992 trial examined only varieties. The objectives of the herbicide trial were 1) to compare the weed control effectiveness of the currently registered herbicides naptalam and ethalfluralin, with that of clomazone, which has been registered for cucurbits in other states and 2) to determine whether the reported phytotoxicity of clomazone will reduce cucumber yields.

Methods

In 1991, the variety trial was established in a commercial planting just south of Woodburn, Oregon. The varieties Flurry-M, Napoleon, Cross Country, Sunseed 3509, and Calypso were direct-seeded on 5 June, following typical land preparation. The first four varieties were planted to an area of approximately 2.5 acres each, with Calypso planted to the remaining 10 acres in the field. The planter seeded six rows at a time on 30-inch centers. Planters were not adjusted for seed size, thus, the seeding rate varied with variety.

The fertilizer rate plots were located near the east end of the field, occupying an area 160 feet long and 62 feet wide (four planter beds) for each variety. The low fertilizer area received a banded application of 60 pounds N and 78 pounds P/acre. The high fertilizer area, as well as the rest of the field, received an additional broadcast pre-plant application of 40 pounds N and 42 pounds K/acre for a total N application of 100 pounds/acre. Irrigation, cultivation, and herbicide application (except in the weed control plots) was provided by the grower.

In the fertilizer portion of the trial, all varieties were hand-harvested on 1, 5, and 8 August using a once-over destructive harvest for each plot. The fruit was weighed and graded at NWREC on a mechanical grader provided by Nalley's Fine Foods. Harvest of each combination of harvest date, variety, and fertilizer rate was replicated three times. The commercial plots of all varieties were harvested by Nalley's personnel using a Byron harvester on 4 and 5 August.

The 1992 variety trial was established in the same field, immediately to the south of the 1991 trial. The previous crop was sugar beets. Methods were similar except as follows. The varieties Flurry-M, Lafayette, Regal, Quest, Vlaspik, and a mixture of equal weights of Flurry-M and Regal (blend) were direct-seeded on 3 June, following typical land preparation by the grower. Each variety was planted to an area of slightly less than 1.5 acres, except that the blend was planted to a total of three acres. The planted area for each variety was divided into two approximately equal replicates.

The entire area received a broadcast, pre-plant application of fertilizer equivalent to the high rate of 1991. The weed control plots were located near the northeast end of the field, in a replicate of Flurry-M. The herbicides Alanap, Prefar, Command, and Curbit were applied at various rates and combinations (Table 4).

Five treatments were preplant-incorporated with a hand-push rototiller on 27 May. Lorsban was incorporated into all treatments at the same time. Five other treatments were applied one day after planting and irrigated in. The Alanap-Curbit combination was lightly raked in following application.

An unreplicated observation trial which included Alanap (1.0 pound active/acre) and Prefar (2.5 pounds active/acre) preplant-incorporated, with Curbit surface-applied after planting at both 1.3 and 1.7 pounds active/acre, was located at one end of the replicated trial. These two plots were rated for weed control effectiveness and phytotoxicity but yield data were not collected.

The trial area was irrigated on the two days following planting and received approximately 0.5 to 0.75 inch of water. The cucumbers were fully emerged the week of 22 June. Weed control and phytotoxicity ratings were made on 30 June.

All varieties were hand-harvested by OSU personnel three to five times between 28 July and 3 August. Harvest of each combination of harvest date and variety was replicated three times in randomly chosen 150 square foot plots. The commercial plots of all varieties were harvested by Nalley's personnel using a Byron harvester on 29-31 July. Flurry-M, Quest, and Regal were machine-harvested once; Lafayette, Vlaspik, and the blend twice in the three-day period. The machine-harvested samples were weighed and graded at the Nalley receiving station. A 25-square foot section of each replicate of the weed control trial was hand-harvested once.

Results and Discussion

Commercial (Machine-harvested) Variety Trial, 1991

It is apparent that the field scouting efforts of Nalley's and OSU personnel were successful in scheduling the single once-over harvest at near optimal maturity (Table 1). The return per acre varied from $1,396 for Sunseed 3509 to $1,606 for CrossCountry, with mean grade between 2.40 and 2.59. The optimum date for harvest, either in terms of return to the grower or the desired size distribution, probably did not vary by more than a day from the actual harvest date.

In 1990 we concluded that the number of accumulated heat units (AHU; North Carolina State-Washington State formula; sum of Tmax-15.5oC with a 32oC cutoff) required to reach maturity for a given variety increased with later plantings, indicating that maturity is not a simple linear function of heat unit accumulation in the Willamette Valley. This year's results are consistent with this conclusion. It took only 583 AHU to surpass optimal maturity for the variety Calypso (Table 2, 5 Aug. harvest date) with a 5 June planting date. However, in 1990, 690 AHU were required for Calypso to reach a mean grade of 2.5 from a 3 July planting date. Of course, difference in site and grower cultural techniques may also play a role. A highly complex model giving different required AHU for each planting date through the season may offer better predictive ability, but the experimentation required to generate the model may not be worth the investment.

There was an inverse relationship between plant stand and the number of usable fruit per plant at harvest-the greater the plant stand, the fewer the number of developed fruit per vine (Table 1). It is not possible to determine if the differences in fruit per plant are true varietal differences or were an effect of competition between plants. The end result is that the yield per acre for the five varieties varied by only a few percent. Unlike in the previous variety trials with a different grower and harvester, the maximum return to the grower (dollars per acre) occurred at the lowest mean grade. Thus, based on this year's results, the present pay scale appears to have the potential to provide a fair return to the grower, while encouraging harvest at a low mean size grade commensurate with processor product needs.

In comparing the bulk of the field, as harvested by the Byron machine, with the small plots hand-harvested by OSU personnel, some surprises emerge. All varieties were hand-harvested on 5 August, comparable to the machine-harvest date for the same varieties. Almost without exception, the percentage of grade 1 fruit recovered in the hand-harvest was less than that with the Byron harvester. However, the percentage of oversize fruit recovered by hand-harvest was much greater than with the Byron. Apparently, most of the fruit dropped by the pickup device was in the oversize category. This is an advantage, as this fruit has no paid value to the grower, and is of little value to the processor. The lower percentage of grade 1 fruit in the hand-harvests may reflect the greatly increased recovery of large fruit with hand-harvesting. Alternatively, the ability of the harvester to recover small fruit may be greater than we expected.

The optimal maturity date for the varieties did not appear to vary by more than a day or two. A better estimate of the relative maturity of the varieties can be obtained from the hand-harvested plots (Table 2). Based on the relative size grade distribution at three harvests over a seven-day period, Flurry-M was the earliest maturing variety, Sunseed 3509 the latest, with the other three falling in between. This can be seen by comparing the percentage of grade 1 fruit obtained at the first harvest. The mean percentage 1s, averaged over fertilizer rates, was 7.2 for Flurry-M, 10.3 for Napoleon, 13.3 for CrossCountry, 16.9 for Calypso, and 23.0 for Sunseed 3509. Alternatively, one can compare the percentage of oversize fruit obtained on 5 August- 33.0 for Flurry-M, 20.8 for Calypso, 14.9 for Napoleon, 8.4 for CrossCountry, and 7.1 for Sunseed 3509. Again, the difference in optimal harvest date did not appear to vary by more than two days. Comparing the change in mean grade over the seven-day period (Table 2), it appears than Napoleon mean size grade changes a little less rapidly than that of the other varieties (about 0.15 per day rather than 0.18 to 0.20).

The presence of small differences in maturity dates between varieties, the subtle differences in rate of change of mean size grade between varieties, and the difficulty of scheduling harvest of a field on the optimal day, suggests the potential of mixed seeding of varieties of similar length:diameter ratio and processing quality, but slightly different maturity. Mixed seeding of varieties differing in maturity date by two to three days may allow the combination of satisfactory total tonnage and return to the grower, a good mix of size grades, insurance against the risk of poor performance of a seed lot, and slightly greater flexibility in harvest date.

Fertilizer Rate x Harvest Date (Hand-Picked) Trial, 1991

The five varieties were hand-harvested three times over an eight-day period. Mean grade varied over this period from a low of near 2.0 for all varieties at the 1 August harvest to a high of 3.2 to 3.7 at the 8 August harvest. The greatest return per acre occurred at the first harvest for Flurry-M and at the second harvest for the other varieties. Unlike the two previous years, the maximum return per acre occurred at a mean grade below 3.0. The greatest return per acre was with the variety Napoleon at the high rate of fertilizer (Table 2).

In every case, maturity was delayed slightly by the higher rate of fertilizer, perhaps because foliar growth was stimulated at the expense of flower formation. This can be seen in the higher percentage of grade 1 fruit at the first harvest for all five varieties. Also, the percentage of oversize fruit at the second harvest was always lower with the higher rate of fertilizer.

Both total yield and return per acre were higher with the high rate of fertilizer, except for Flurry-M. In contrast to our grower-cooperator trials in 1989 and 1990, application of about 100 pounds N per acre did not lead to excessive vine growth. Thus, the OSU recommendation for N application for machine-harvested pickling cucumbers should be about 100 pounds/acre, but the interaction of soil type, irrigation program, and other grower cultural practices cannot be ignored in making fertilizer recommendations.

 

  Table 1. Summary of mechanical harvest of Nalley's-OSU pickling cucumber  variety trial-1991z____________________________________________________________________________                                                Variety                                                 Flurry   Napoleon   CrossCountry   Sun3509    Calypso   Delivery date             8/4       8/5        8/6          8/5    8/4 & 8/5    Stand, seedlings/acrey  65300     94100      70600       108000       79300  No. paying fruit/plant    3.4       2.4        2.5          1.6         1.7  Gross wt. (lb)          51360     54760      50020        51860      103980    Acres harvestedx         2.17      2.13       2.03         2.07        4.20  Tons/acre               11.83     12.85      12.32        12.53       12.38  Percent 1sw              6.86      4.43       4.84         2.46        4.30  Percent 2s              41.57     33.39      51.79        41.98       51.08  Percent 3s              31.69     40.98      25.30        31.28       26.69  Percent 4s               7.45      6.93       7.20         8.13        6.97  Percent nubs & crooks    3.77      3.15       3.45         3.53        2.10  Percent rejects          8.66     11.12       7.78        12.62        8.87  Mean gradev              2.45      2.59       2.40         2.54        2.41  $/acre                   1495      1433       1606         1396        1600  $/ton                  126.30    111.50     130.33       111.42      129.20  $ gross               3243.41   3052.83    3259.53      2889.01     6718.15   zTrial located on Boone's Ferry Road, south of Woodburn, Oregon.    Harvester: Byron. Note:  data taken only from pure loads of each variety.  yEstimated from the mean of five random samples of 20 row feet each per  variety.  xAcres harvested calculating by subtracting N rate plot area and headlands  delivered in mixed loads from the total area planted for each variety.  wSize grades:  1=0.5-1 inch diameter, 2=1-1.5 inch, 3=1.5-2 inch, 4=over 2         inch.  vExcluding nubs and crooks.  For Calypso, assumes approx. 2.1 acres   harvested for each pure load.      Table 2. Interaction of fertilizer rate and harvest date on yield and mean grade of   five hand-harvested pickling cucumber varieties, Nalley's-OSU variety trial, 1991                                       Percent in grade by wt.    Mean   Tons/   $/   $/                                  1s    2s    3s    4s   N&C  grade   acre   ton  acre  Variety     Harvest  Fertilizer    Flurry M     Aug. 1z    1x      4.6  59.6  30.2   4.0  1.6   2.34    8.59  141  1216                          2x      9.8  77.5  11.0   0.4  1.2   2.02    8.63  181  1600                             Aug. 5     1x      1.3  20.8  39.3  38.2  0.4   3.15   14.82   76  1107                          2x      0.8  12.5  58.2  27.7  0.6   3.14   14.95   77  1126                             Aug. 8     1x      0.0   3.1  27.4  67.2  2.2   3.65   21.37   31   620                          2x      0.2   1.7  30.0  68.1  0.0   3.66   20.72   30   606    Napoleon     Aug. 1     1x      5.5  62.7  29.1   0.0  2.7   2.24    8.60  156  1335                          2x     16.0  60.7  22.1   0.0  1.2   2.06   10.10  182  1810                 Aug. 5     1x      1.9  33.8  46.3  17.0  1.0   2.79   15.99  107  1718                          2x      1.7  30.2  54.8  12.7  0.6   2.79   21.51  108  2327                                     Aug. 8     1x      0.9   7.0  47.4  43.5  1.2   3.35   21.70   58  1248                          2x      0.8   7.3  49.6  41.2  1.1   3.33   23.26   60  1441    CrossCountry Aug. 1     1x      8.0  82.9   4.7   1.9  2.5   2.00    6.78  179  1209                          2x     18.5  79.4   0.3   0.0  1.7   1.81    7.61  205  1559                 Aug. 5     1x      1.4  20.0  62.7  14.7  1.3   2.92   13.41   96  1279                          2x      2.0  50.1  44.0   2.0  1.8   2.47   16.36  135  2208                                      Aug. 8     1x      0.7   9.0  46.1  43.9  0.3   3.33   18.53   59  1102                          2x      1.1   7.6  53.9  37.3  0.2   3.28   22.60   65  1445    Sun 3509     Aug. 1     1x     11.5  77.2   8.7   0.0  2.6   1.97    6.94  184  1285                          2x     34.4  63.8   4.8   0.0  1.8   1.65    7.30  232  1692                 Aug. 5     1x      1.0  19.5  67.4  11.1  1.0   2.90   14.62   98  1442                          2x      3.4  35.5  55.8   3.0  2.2   2.60   15.57  124  1959                              Aug. 8     1x      0.0   3.8  52.9  41.0  2.3   3.38   15.39   54   831                          2x      0.3  11.7  56.6  26.4  5.0   3.15   18.55   73  1364    Calypso      Aug. 1     1x      8.7  80.7   8.9   0.6  1.2   2.01    6.93  180  1250                          2x     25.0  72.1   1.4   0.0  1.6   1.76    7.14  215  1534                 Aug. 5     1x      0.5  21.6  45.3  31.4  1.2   3.09   12.54   80   996                          2x      2.4  24.1  61.8  10.2  1.5   2.81   16.26  106  1718                                     Aug. 8     1x      0.0   2.9  34.3  59.0  3.8   3.58   14.17   37   518                          2x      1.6   5.3  52.4  39.3  1.4   3.31   19.75   62  1217  zAccumulated heat units were 523 on 1 Aug., 583 on 5 Aug., and 627 on 8 Aug.  

Weed Control Trial, 1992

Weeds present in the trial consisted primarily of pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), lambsquarter (Chenopodiaceae berlandieri), shepherdspurse (Capsella bursa-pastoris), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Shepherdspurse emerged first on the south side of the plots while pigweed and lambsquarter emerged on the north side.

Prefar-Alanap was effective initially in suppressing pigweed and lambsquarter in comparison to the untreated control, and phytotoxicity was not apparent (Table 3). However, without cultivation the weeds would have become a serious problem. When Command was included in the combination, weed control was improved and yield increased significantly. In the Prefar-Alanap-Curbit observation plot the soil surface remained weed-free throughout the trial period and phytotoxicity was not observed. The yields for Prefar-Command and Alanap-Command did not differ significantly, but Alanap-Command provided more effective weed control.

Both Curbit rates were ineffective on shepherdspurse, but were effective on both pigweed and lambsquarter. Weed control and yield were greater at the higher than at the lower rate. Cultivations would have been required to prevent late emerging weeds from becoming a problem. Yield from the Curbit and the Alanap-Prefar treatments did not differ. The Curbit-Alanap surface-raked treatment was the most phytotoxic and produced the lowest yield.

Treatments including Command showed a slight degree of phytotoxicity either as plant stunting or marginal leaf yellowing. However, the high yields of these treatments suggest that the phytotoxicity was inconsequential. Weed control for the treatments that included Command was consistently good. Of the treatments including Command, the poorest weed control and yields occurred with 0.25 pounds active/acre preplant-incorporated.

Although slightly phytotoxic, Command treatments do not reduce yield and are actually better than the standard Amiben treatment or the handweeded control. This is reassuring, but should be verified with further trials. Other concerns regarding the use of Command include its effect on the following crops and the potential for chemical drift or injury to neighboring crops. These concerns should be addressed before its widespread use in Oregon.

Growers currently can use Prefar, Alanap, Curbit, and remaining stocks of Amiben in cucumbers. The trial results indicate that a Prefar-Alanap combination would provide adequate weed control if combined with a cultivation. As shown in the observation plot, adding Curbit to the combination would extend the spectrum of weed control and its duration.

Curbit alone does not appear to provide a broad spectrum of weed control. In addition, injury under certain conditions, such as excess water, has been associated with Curbit. In the Curbit-Alanap treatment, disturbing the soil surface after application by raking lightly resulted in injury that was significant enough to reduce yields.

The cost of the various treatments is an important factor in choosing a control strategy. Table 3 lists the per acre costs based upon current product prices. The cost of Command is likely to increase following its registration in more crops. However, based upon the current cost and its effectiveness, it would be the primary choice. The Prefar-Alanap-Curbit combination, which performed well in the observation trial, would be the most expensive.

In addition to the concerns regarding the use of Command, future trials could help to refine the knowledge base for the use of these herbicides. More information on the conditions in which injury might occur with Curbit would help growers decide if the added control in combinations is worth the risk and cost. Determining if lower rates of Command in combination with Alanap or Prefar could still provide acceptable control might lessen the concern regarding drift and residue on subsequent crops.

Commercial (Machine-harvested) Variety Trial, 1992

All the data for the machine harvests are found in Table 4, including the two harvests each of Lafayette and the blend. Table 5 contains simplified yield data for the machine harvests, with data for Lafayette and the blend averaged over the two harvest dates.

The planting was seeded into dry soil and had to be irrigated up. The irrigation sets started at the north end of the field and it took two days to reach the south side. Thus, emergence was one to two days earlier on the north side. This difference in maturity appeared to carry through to harvest and influenced the dates of machine-harvest of the replicates of the varieties.

Hand-sampling by OSU personnel on 28 July indicated that the variety Lafayette was ready for harvest, about five days earlier than expected based on the number of days from planting. Nalley's and OSU personnel decided to mechanically harvest the first replicate of Lafayette, which seemed more mature (2.32 mean grade), on 29 July. Since the grower-cooperator was harvesting Flurry-M, and visual observation indicated that Flurry-M was maturing rapidly, we decided to mechanically harvest both replicates of Flurry-M on 29 July.

The machine-harvest data (Tables 4 and 5) indicated that the 29 July harvest was indeed optimal for both varieties. For the purpose of calculating mean grade and comparing results with the hand-picked trial, 90 percent of the reject grade material was assumed to be oversize (grade 4) cucumbers. This assumption was based on information provided by Nalley's grading personnel. One replicate of the blend was machine-harveted on 30 July and all other varieties were harvested on 31 July, including the second replicate of Lafayette.

Unfortunately, all varieties were somewhat past optimal maturity, ranging from a mean grade of 2.69 for Regal to 2.93 for the blend (Table 5). Two factors contributed to this. First, it is obvious from comparing the machine-harvest and hand-picked harvests of the same varieties on 29, 30, and 31 July, that machine-harvest led to higher mean grade, perhaps due to poorer recovery of small fruit. In six of eight cases, hand-picked samples led to lower mean grade for the same harvest date (Table 4). This is in contrast to 1991, when the hand-picked samples generally produced a higher mean grade than did the machine-harvested samples. Second, the extreme heat and high soil moisture produced very rapid fruit sizing for all varieties.

The return per acre varied from $421 for Flurry-M to $1,109 for the blend (Table 5). Yields were down compared to 1991. Averaged across all varieties and harvests, machine-harvested plots in 1991 yielded a gross of 10.4 tons/acre. In 1992, the average was 8.3 tons/acre, even with slightly greater maturity. The only variety in both trials was Flurry-M. In 1991 it yielded 11.8 tons/acre, in 1992 only 3.1 tons/acre at similar mean grade. The yields from the hand-picked plots were consistent with this trend. Average yield declined from 15.1 tons/acre in 1991 to 9.2 tons/acre in 1992. Hand-picked Flurry-M declined from 8.6 tons/acre to 5.7 tons/acre. Several factors may have contributed to the reduced yield. Stands were greater in 1991, ranging from 65,300 plants/acre for Flurry-M to 108,000/acre for Sun 3509, and averaging 83,500. In contrast, in 1992 stands ranged from 48,600/acre for the blend to 64,500 for Quest (Table 2), with an average of 56,700. The 1992 stand counts were made on 18 June, 15 days after seeding. This should have allowed more than ample time for all seedlings to emerge. Thus, the plant population was lower than the target of 80,000/acre. Heat stress may also have played a role, as it was difficult for the grower to irrigate optimally. Another factor may have been poor pollination. We considered the location and number of bee hives to be inadequate.

The blend of Regal and Flurry-M produced the greatest yield and dollar return at the 31 July harvest, even though it had the highest mean grade at this point.

Our observations of the machine-harvest operation indicated that an excessive number of cucumbers were being left on the ground. These were usually covered by the harvested vines. Since vines are normally deposited on the ground immediately after having been run through the pinch rollers, it was apparent that the harvester was failing to pick up this fruit, rather than it being lost in the pinch-roller mechanism or the conveyor system. We often observed that the pickup mechanism would roll vines ahead of the machine until there was a sufficiently large mass to be captured and pulled up the conveyor. This often resulted in excessive vine mass being carried into the holding tank but, more importantly, a loss of fruit from the vines that were rolling ahead of the pickup mechanism. Some of the variation in yield between the two replications of 'Lafayette' and the less-than-expected yield of Vlaspik (Table 4) may have been caused by harvester pickup problems.

Our previous conclusion concerning the North Carolina State-Washington State heat unit formula is supported by results in 1992. From 1991 and 1992 data on Flurry-M, it can be concluded that the formula is not consistent between seasons with differing late spring weather patterns. In 1991, with a relatively cool, wet June, it took about 540 AHU to bring Flurry-M to optimal maturity. In 1992, however, with unusually high temperatures in June, it took 600. It is becoming apparent that, even with the high temperature cutoff of 32oC, the model gives too much weight to above-normal temperatures at the pre-bloom stage of plant development. Furthermore, the model cannot anticipate any delay in fruit set that may result from inadequate bee activity at first bloom.

Hand-Picked Variety Trial, 1992

Lafayette was much slower to increase in size grade over the harvest period than were the other varieties (Table 4). The single greatest return per acre was $1,369 with Lafayette. Flurry-M produced the lowest return at the early harvest due to a low yield. The performance of the variety Quest was unusual in that the return per acre stayed almost constant over seven days (Table 4). Gross yield tripled and nearly offset the doubling of mean grade and consequent rapid decline in value per ton.

The blend looked less promising in the hand-picked harvest than in the machine harvests. Due to the poor performance of Flurry-M in 1992, it is difficult to judge the benefits of blending varieties of differing maturity.

 

  Table 3. Weed control and Flurry-M cucumber yield in response to herbicide   treatments, Woodburn, Oregon, 1992                                                                Rate       Cost            Weed controlz Phytotoxicityy Yield   Mean  Herbicide  lb active/A   $/A     Method     rating        rating     tons/A  grade  Alanap+      2.00        59.32   Preplant      8.1         <1         4.9 ax   2.6    Prefar+      4.00              incorporated  Command      0.25    Command      0.25         5.82   Postplant,    8.8         <1         4.6 ab   2.7                                   irrigated    Prefar+      4.00        40.82   Preplant      8.1         1.3        4.2 ab   2.6  Command      0.25              incorporated                                       Alanap+      3.00        33.57   Postplant,    9.7         1.0        3.6 abc  2.6  Command      0.25                irrigated                                        Command      0.25         5.82   Preplant      6.0         <1         3.5 abc  2.4                                 incorporated    Amiben       2.50          ?     Preplant      9.4         1.8        3.3 bc   2.5                                 incorporated      Hand-weed     --           ?       --          8.0         0.0        3.2 bcd  2.3    Curbit       1.70        32.48   Postplant,    7.3         0.0        3.2 bcd  2.7                                   irrigated    Alanap+      3.00        71.50   Preplant      4.0         0.0        2.4 cd   2.2  Prefar       5.00              incorporated                                       Alanap+      3.00        52.69   Postplant,    9.5         2.3        1.8 d    2.5  Curbit       1.30                raked in           Curbit       1.10        21.21   Postplant,    5.5          <1         --      --                                       irrigated                                          z0=no control, 10=complete control.  y0=no phytotoxicity,10=seedling death.  xMean separation by Duncan's MRT, 5% level.                                                Table 4. Yield, mean grade, and value of pickling cucumbers,   OSU-Nalley's variety trial, Woodburn, Oregon, 1992              Datez Variety    Percent in grade by wt.  Tons/  $/  $/  Sizey                  1s   2s   3s   4s  N&C  acre  ton acre grade  Hand-harvested  7/28  Flurry-M   18.1 51.4 22.2  6.3 2.0   5.3  175  935 2.16        Lafayette  13.4 33.4 11.7  8.8 1.4   8.3  146 1205 2.49        Quest      40.6 55.3  3.1  0.0 1.1   4.9  234 1180 1.62        Regal      38.0 47.6 11.4  0.8 2.2   4.5  229 1025 1.75        Vlaspik    25.4 61.6  9.6  1.6 1.8   5.5  207 1137 1.87        Blend      16.4 55.2 21.5  5.0 2.0   5.6  176  982 2.17    7/29  Flurry-M   10.2 50.4 25.2  7.0 7.2   5.7  151  855 2.30          Lafayette  17.9 35.9 35.7  7.1 3.2   8.5  160 1369 2.32         Blend      14.6 65.4 11.7  1.3 7.0   6.2  184 1131 1.99    7/30  Vlaspik     7.5 42.7 42.1  3.5 4.2   9.4  141 1324 2.44          Blend       5.7 28.8 50.1 12.1 3.3   9.2  118 1081 2.71     7/31  Lafayette   5.4 32.2 47.7  7.7 7.0  10.8  115 1247 2.63         Quest       6.4 25.2 52.6 11.9 3.8   9.5  117 1111 2.78           Regal       7.3 34.6 44.9  9.7 3.5  10.7  113  807 2.69        Vlaspik     3.4 27.0 56.5  9.5 3.6  11.6  112 1307 2.75        Blend       3.2 13.9 50.0 28.4 4.5  13.3   83 1106 3.07    8/03  Flurry-M    1.7  3.8 32.8 57.9 3.8  12.5   48  600 3.56        Lafayette   2.9  8.2 65.5 16.6 6.9  11.3   87  990 3.03        Quest       2.2  7.1 49.4 36.4 4.9  15.7   71 1110 3.26          Regal       2.7  7.0 43.5 41.7 5.1  12.1   66  801 3.31        Vlaspik     1.7  8.7 53.3 34.7 1.6  10.7   72  775 3.24        Blend       3.2  6.9 51.8 33.5 4.6   8.0   76  604 3.21    Machine-harvested  7/29  Flurry-M    7.3 47.2 29.4 11.8 4.3   3.1  157  421 2.47        Lafayette   8.1 37.3 38.9 13.4 2.3   9.2  130 1195 2.57    7/30  Blend       2.7 28.2 39.2 28.4 1.6  13.3   94 1264 2.92    7/31  Lafayette   1.6 28.8 58.9  4.4 6.3   6.7  112  742 2.70        Quest       1.6 23.5 62.8 10.6 1.6   8.7  104  902 2.83        Regal       1.7 31.0 56.1  5.9 5.4   7.2  113  807 2.69        Vlaspik     1.1 22.5 59.8 11.6 5.0   8.1   99  801 2.85        Blend       1.0 16.8 63.6 15.4 3.2  10.4   92  953 2.95    zAccumulated heat units for each date as follows:  7/28, 584;    7/29, 600; 7/30, 616; 7/31, 633; 8/03, 674.  yMean grade for machine-harvest calculated on the assumption    that 90% of the rejects were grade 4 cucumbers.           Table 5. Yield, mean grade, and value of machine-harvested cucumbers, averaged   over replicates, OSU-Nalley's trial, Woodburn, Oregon, 1992                         Variety                    Flurry   Lafayette   Regal    Quest   Vlaspik   Blend     Harvest date                7/29    7/29&7/31    7/31     7/31    7/31   7/30&7/31  Heat units                   600      616         633      633     633      624  Stand, seedlings/acrez     55,900   62,600      58,400   64,500  50,400   48,600  Gross weight (lb)           7,100   20,874      19,040   23,140  16,180   31,336  Acres harvested             1.15     1.33        1.33     1.33    1.00     1.33  Tons/acre                   3.1      8.0         7.2      8.7     8.1     11.9  Percent 1s                  7.3      4.8         1.7      1.6     1.1      1.8  Percent 2s                 47.2     33.1        30.0     23.5    22.5     22.5  Percent 3s                 29.4     48.9        56.1     62.8    59.8     51.4  Percent rejecty            11.8      8.9         5.9     10.6    11.6     21.7  Percent nubs and crooks     4.3      4.3         5.4      1.6     5.0      2.4  Mean gradex                 2.47     2.63        2.69     2.83    2.85     2.93  $/acre                      421      969         807      902     801     1109  $/ton                       157      121         113      104      99       93  $ gross                     484     1289        1073     1200     801     1475       zEvaluated 15 days after seeding on four 30-foot sections of row per replicate.  yFor purposes of calculating mean grade, 90 % of the rejects were assumed    to be oversize cucumbers.  xDoes not include nubs and crooks.