KABOCHA/BUTTERCUP SQUASH CULTIVAR EVALUATION

Personnel: by Elsa Sánchez, Mike Orzolek, Tim Elkner, Tom Butzler, Steve Bogash, Lee Stivers and Eric Oesterling, Penn State Extension

Introduction

In 2010-11 we evaluated kabocha and buttercup types of squash cultivars in a conventional system in three locations across the state: in central PA at the Russell E. Larson Research and Education Center in Rock Springs, in eastern PA at the Southeast Research and Extension Center in Landisville and in western PA at Beinlich Farms in 2010 and Harvest Valley Farms in 2011.

This evaluation was funded by the Pennsylvania Vegetable Research and Marketing Board.

Cultivars

The cultivars evaluated along with the company from which seed were acquired are listed below. The standard ‘Sunshine’ was grown for comparison.

*included in the evaluation because it is similar in size to the other cultivars evaluated

Methods

At all locations cultivars were grown in a plasticulture system using raised beds, drip irrigation and black plastic. Three foot in row spacing and 8 foot center-to-center rows were used. At the central Pennsylvania site 4-week-old transplants were planted on June 17, 2010 and 3-week-old transplants were planted on June 14, 2011 in the conventional system. Direct seeding was used in the western and south eastern sites.

Fruit were harvested when all plants of an individual cultivar reached maturity. Fruit was categorized as marketable or unmarketable, counted and weighed. Yield data was analyzed using analysis of variance. When P values were less than or equal to 0.05, means were separated using Duncan’s LSD test.

Results and Recommendations by location

Rock Springs, PA - In 2010, ‘Sweet Lightening’ and ‘Sun Spot’ produced a larger number of marketable fruit than ‘Sunshine’. The number of fruit per plant produced by the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, no differences in number of fruit per plant were observed.

In 2010, fruit weight per plant from ‘Bon Bon’ and ‘Cha-cha’ was lower than ‘Sunshine’. Fruit weight from the remaining cultivars was not different from ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, ‘Geisha’ had higher and ‘Space Station’ lower fruit weight per plant than ‘Sunshine’.

In 2010, individual fruit from ‘Space Station’, ‘Sun Spot’ and ‘Sweet Lightening’ weighed less than from ‘Sunshine’. Individual fruit weight from the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, individual fruit from ‘Geisha’, ‘Sweet Mama’ and ‘Red Kuri’ weighed more and from ‘Space Station’ weighed less than ‘Sunshine’. The remaining cultivars were not different from ‘Sunshine’.

Very few fruit were unmarketable. In 2010, ‘Bon Bon’ and ‘Cha-cha’ produced a larger number of unmarketable fruit than ‘Sunshine’. The number of unmarketable fruit produced by the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’. ‘Bon Bon’, ‘Cha-cha’, ‘Thunder’, ‘Space Station’ and ‘Sweet Mama’ produced higher unmarketable fruit weight per plant than ‘Sunshine’. Fruit weight per plant was not different than ‘Sunshine’ for the remaining cultivars. In 2011, no differences were observed for unmarketable yield.

‘Red Kuri’, ‘Sweet Mama’ and ‘Thunder’ are recommended. In terms of number and weight of fruit per plant they performed equally or better than ‘Sunshine’.

Landisville, PA - In 2010, ‘Sweet Lightening’, ‘Sun Spot’ and ‘Bon Bon’ produced a larger number of marketable fruit than ‘Sunshine’. The number of fruit produced by the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, ‘Sun Spot’ produced a higher and ‘Thunder’ and ‘Space Station’ a lower number of marketable fruit than ‘Sunshine’. The number of fruit produced by the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’.

In 2010, fruit weight per plant from ‘Sweet Lightening’ was lower than ‘Sunshine’. Fruit weight per plant from the remaining cultivars was not different than from ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, marketable fruit weight was higher from ‘Bob Bon’ and lower from ‘Space Station’ and ‘Thunder’ than ‘Sunshine’. Fruit weight per plant from the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’.

In 2010, ‘Thunder’, ‘Bon Bon’, ‘Sun Spot’, ‘Cha-Cha’ and ‘Sweet Lightening’ produced a lower individual fruit weight than ‘Sunshine’. The remaining cultivar produced an individual fruit weight not different than ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, ‘Red Kuri’ and ‘Sun Spot’ produced a lower individual fruit weight than ‘Sunshine’. Individual fruit weight of the remaining cultivars was not different than ‘Sunshine’.

In 2010, differences in unmarketable yields in terms of fruit number per plant were not detected. All cultivars did not produce a different unmarketable fruit weight per plant than ‘Sunshine’. In 2011, differences in unmarketable yield were not detected.

‘Sun Spot’, ‘Bon Bon’, ‘Red Kuri’ and ‘Sweet Mama’ are recommended as they performed equally or better than ‘Sunshine’ in terms of number and weight of fruit per plant. When markets demand a smaller individual fruit, ‘Sun Spot’ is recommended.

Valencia, PA – 2011 only – Only two replications of ‘Sunshine’ plants were harvestable; therefor it was not used as a standard. Differences were not detected in marketable or unmarketable yields in terms of number or weight of fruit per plant. ‘Sweet Mama’ produced a higher individual fruit weight than ‘Bon Bon’ followed by ‘Sun Spot’. ‘Thunder’ and ‘Space Station’ produced intermediate individual fruit weight.

Statewide recommendations

The cultivars evaluated were beautiful and largely unique from each other. It is difficult to make recommendations because ornamental value and flavor may be a larger consideration in selecting these types. However, ‘Red Kuri’, ‘Sweet Mama’ and ‘Sun Spot’ are recommended based equal or higher yield than ‘Sunshine’.