Annual/Termination Reports:

[12/15/2005] [01/09/2006]

Report Information

Participants

Administrative Advisor: Steve Goodwin
Chair: Rob Crassweller
Secretary: Renae Moran
Host: Peter Hirst

In attendance:
Elena Garcia, Univ. of Arkansas
Steve Goodwin, Univ. of Mass.
Duane Greene, Univ. of Mass.
Jon Clements, Univ. of Mass.
Steve Miller, Appalachian Fruit Research Station, USDA, Virginia
Rob Crassweller, Penn. State Univ.
Thor Lindstrom, Utah State Univ.
Peter Hirst, Purdue Univ.
Bruce Barritt, Wash. State Univ.
Win Cowgill, Rutgers Univ.
Charlie Embree, AgCanada, Nova Scotia
Cheryl Hampson, AgCanada, British Columbia
Renae Moran, Univ. of Maine
Greg Lang, Michigan State University
Dave Rosenberger, Cornell University
Kieth Yoder, Virginia Tech.
Diane Miller, Ohio State University
Kathy Taylor, University of Georgia
Jules Janick, Purdue University

Brief Summary of Minutes

Status of the publications from 1999 Planting. No referred publications have been written for the first five years. This planting had 22 locations, 18 of which submitted data, with Ohio terminated due to fire blight and one location being unable to verify its data. Sixteen sites have data that can be used for publication, and these have been preliminarly checked. Ron McNew has assembled the data and may have questions about how to analyze it. The data sets for the disease plantings have been compiled and will be set to Ron McNew, as well. Following analysis, papers can be written for publication in an issue of the Journal of American Pomological Society.

Steve Goodwin, administrative advisor, went over the rules of operation for a coordinating committee and stated how it differed from a Multistate Project. A one-page description was also given to each member. Funding is available for travel to a Coordinating Committee meeting. Additional funds are available, but they are more limited than with a Multistate Project and activities of a coordinating committee must meet the same criteria as multistate projects to obtain funding. Funding of salaries is not allowed, but costs such as tree planting could be considered for funding if the coordinating committees activities are similar to a Multistate Project.

R. Crassweller drafted objectives for cultivar evaluation, and sent these to each member via email, but no one responded. However, he wants to expand the research beyond apples to pears and stone fruit. R. Crasswellers statements were followed by a long discussion on the current problems facing cultivar evaluation. C. Hampson suggested that the US switch from plant patenting to Plant Breeders Rights. D. Rosenberger led a discussion on the ethics of publicly funded experiment station personnel evaluating club varieties. There was no clear resolution to the problem of disclosure of cultivars that will be patented or evaluating club varieties.

S. Goodwin asked the group what we hoped to learn from variety trials. Two overall objectives were mentioned:
1) Adaptability to different regions
2) Factors that contribute to adaptability
R. Crassweller asked the members which species of fruit they were interested in evaluating. Each member indicated which species and this was recorded on paper. A coordinator for each fruit species was named and others not in attendance were also suggested based on their expertise and current interest in this topic. The coordinator is asked to identify research needs, contact all interested members, select possible cultivars and selections, and write a proposal by the next meeting.

Apples for a retail market: AFRS, AR, MA, ME, MI, NS, MI with NJ as the coordinator.
Apples for a wholesale market: BC, MI, PA, WA.
Apples for processing: AFRS, MI, NS, with PA as the coordinator.
Apples with disease resistance / pathology: AFRS, AR, MA, ME, MI, NS, VT with NY-HV and VA as coordinators.
Apples for cider or juice: BC, MA, MI, NS, PA, with D. Rosenberger and possibly I. Merwin (NY) as coordinators.
Heirloom apples: AFRS, OH, NY and PA with I. Merwin (NY) as a possible coordinator.
Peach: AR, MA, ME, PA with NJ and GA as coordinators.
Sweet cherry: AFRS, MA, NY-HV, OR, UT, WA, with MI as coordinator.
Tart cherry: MA, PA, UT with MI as coordinator.
European pear: AR, IN, MA, NS, WA and possibly CA (Rachel Elkins) with AFRS (Bell) as possible coordinator.
Asian pear: AR, GA, NJ, VA with Walsh as possible coordinator.
Apricots: ME, MI, NY-HV, PA with NJ (Joe Goffreda) as possible coordinator.
Plums: AR, ME and NY-HV.


Greg Lang has previously tried to organize a multistate cherry evaluation and breeding project, NCT-197, and would like to continue this effort with the NECC-1099. He has been named the coordinator for the cherry section and will contact all members who are interested in future sweet and tart cherry trials.


J. Clements and W. Cowgill gave a summary of website activities. There were few updates. Published papers will be available as PDF files directly from the website. The future of the website was discussed. S. Goodwin agreed to provide funding to maintain it, but also requested that members provide NIMSS with information for its website. Minutes of the meeting should be posted on the NIMSS website. J. Clements suggested the group consider compiling a database on tree fruit characteristics by region and by season.

An apple tasting of five varieties was conducted to measure how much we agreed on descriptive traits such as tartness, sweetness, firmness, crispness and juiciness. Each of these traits was rated on a scale of 1-5. There was close agreement, with the exception of sweetness.

R. Crassweller was nominated as the chair for next years meeting and R. Moran as chair elect. The secretary will be elected at the meeting next year.

Next years meeting will be held prior to the NC-140 meeting in New Jersey.

On the second day, the NECC 1099 met with members of the Mid American Apple Improvement Association (MAIA), growers from Ohio, Indiana and Illinois who are developing new cultivars adapted to the climate and markets of the midwest. Jim Eckert gave a summary of MAIA history and goals. R. Crassweller and D. Greene did the same for the NECC-1099.

Jules Janick gave a presentation on the joint apple breeding program at Purdue Univ., Rutgers Univ. and the University of Illinois. The presentation also included the recent apple breeding cooperation between Purdue Univ., the MAIA and Dawes Arboretum.

Diane Miller gave a presentation on collaborative breeding efforts of Ohio State Univ. and MAIA. She gave a second presentation on new and promising germplasm from Central Asia.

Members of the MAIA discussed future activities with members of the NECC-1099. Questions about methods of evaluation, selection and propagation arose. C. Hampson, D. Miller and B. Barritt summarized how these processes are conducted in their respective breeding programs.

Accomplishments

This is the initiation meeting of this group as a coordinating committee, accomplishments will be put in next year.

Publications

Impact Statements

1. Impacts will be reported next year, this is the initial meeting.

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Richard Bell, ARS
Brent Black, USU
Steve Castagnoli, Oregon State
Jon Clements,UMass
Win Cowgill, Rutgers
Rob Crassweller, PSU
Charles Embree
Jerry Frecon, Rutgers
Joe Goffreda, Rutgers
Steve Goodwin, UMass
Duane Greene, UMass
Thor Lindstrom, USU
Ian Merwin, Cornell
Dianne Miller, OSU
Stephen Miller, ARS
Renae Moran, Maine
Rafael Parra-Quezada
David Rosenberger, Cornell
Bill Shane, MSU
Neil Vincent
Dan Ward, Rutgers
Keith Yoder, VT

Brief Summary of Minutes

S.G. spoke with the group, mostly about whether the group wished to remain a coordinating committee or become a regional research project. He felt that we had enough substance to make the NECC-1009 a multi-state research project. As a coordinating committee there is only the requirement to report that the committee met.

R.C. called for a motion to report only minutes and a publications list. I.M. made motion. B.B. seconded.

There was a general discussion of the benefits of and means for assembling standardized, centralized cultivar information. The consensus was that decisions for standardization would be left to the separate subgroups.

D.G. led discussion of the differing needs of the retail grower and the wholesale grower and the importance of objectives being aligned with changing needs. Unique apples for niche markets require that we be flexible in what we use as criteria. Non-patentable apple cultivars, antiques, disease-resistant cultivars bear further consideration. D.G. distributed a list from Cheryl Hampson with some selections listed that may have limited appeal. I.M. commented that multiple harvests of many rare/antique apples are a requirement. D.M. commented that the evolution of eastern apples is ongoing and that this is an opportunity. Propagation was cited as a limitation for some cultivars. Creation of a database with marketing characteristics or a very limited set of characteristics was suggested. D.G. volunteered to help prepare a list of rare or heirloom cultivars with potential for a future planting to evaluate them. The list should indicate the unique or differentiating character(s) of each cultivar. People other than members of the NECC-1009 should be consulted in preparing the list. The list makers will be: D.G., I.M., D.M., D.R., and K.Y.

R.B. led discussion of pear breeding indicating that there was still active breeding in many parts of the world as well as selections and cultivars that need testing. He gave as examples of sources of selections the Harrow program, the Cornell program, France, Germany, Italy, and Hungary. Among the cultivars needing further testing are Sunrise, Blakes Pride, Shenandoah, and 71655-014. The consensus was that a protocol and list of potential cultivars and selections to evaluate should be prepared and then cooperators solicited. OHxF87 could be the rootstock. Considerable interest in Asian was pears was voiced as well. R.B. volunteered to put together a list.

B.S., J.G. and J.F. paneled a discussion about sharing of variety information. The confounding effects of climatic variability were agreed to create difficulty and that therefore expert evaluation was needed. B.S. suggested that evaluations include more interpretive summaries. Anyone doing variety evaluation was encouraged to send web links to their reports.

J.C. gave a presentation demonstrating a database for online collaboration. The database was created using FileMaker and had a web interface.

W.C. led a discussion about the need for the NECC-1009 to have its own website. He also brought up the question of whether the web site should be limited to the one hosted by NIMMS.

Susan Brown spoke with the group (via teleconference) about club varieties and alternative licensing. She pointed out that any public presentation of pictures or data can jeopardize patentability of a selection. Susan indicated that NY428 will probably be named and trademarked but, not patented.

I.M led discussion about hard cider apples. The industry is growing and has very little land-grant support. I.M suggested that we grapple with the fruit growing part of the process. He pointed out that many of the hard cider cultivars have characteristics that have been selected against in fresh market apples (i.e. Small-fruitedness, propensity to preharvest drop). Issues to be addressed are adaptability of cultivars, harvesting, preharvest drop, thinning, and fermentation. Washington has a website (http://mtvernon.wsu.edu/frt_hort/ciderapples.htm). I.M. will prepare a list of cultivars with descriptions.

D.R. and Y.Y led discussion about quality of disease-resistant apples. They put forth a call for future meetings to have reports from people working on disease-resistant apples. R.C. will assemble his information on disease-resistant cultivars.

R.M. discussed her plans for establishing a plum cultivar evaluation project. She is assembling a planting for evaluation under Maine growing conditions and welcomed other interested parties to sign up and make it into a multi-state project.

J.G. led discussion of apricot breeding and cultivars. New Jersey has released Sugar Pearl; it is available through Gardens Alive. It was suggested that producing unified information on apricot survival would be a useful objective for the group. B.S. says Curtis is a good survivor in Michigan. J.G. will put together a list describing the apricot releases from his breeding program.

Plans for a meeting in 2007 were discussed. The chair will be R.C. again. Meeting will be scheduled to avoid conflict with the Cumberland-Shenandoah, Great Lakes, and NC-140 meetings.

Meeting Adjourned 4:15 pm

Accomplishments

Publications

Impact Statements

Back to top