JOBNAME: horts 41#5 2006 PAGE: 1 OUTPUT: July 15 17:12:12 2006 tsp/horts/118440/01522 HORTSCIENCE 41(5):1364–1366. 2006. was arranged in a randomized complete- block design with a cultivar represented in three replicate plots of three plants each with ÔChemainusÕ Red Raspberry 0.9 m between plants and 3 m between rows. Chaim Kempler,1 Hugh A. Daubeny,2 and Lisa Frey3 Yield, fruit weight, fruit firmness, dates of harvest, and postharvest fruit rot (caused Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre, primarily by Botrytis cinerea Pers. ex. Fr.) P.O. Box 1000, Agassiz, B.C., Canada V0M 1A0 were measured each season from 1999 to 4 2004. Soluble solids concentration (SSC), Tom Walters firmness, titratable acidity, and postharvest Sakuma Bros. Farms, Inc., P.O. Box 427, Burlington, WA 98233 fruit rot tests were determined according to Additional index words. Rubus idaeus, fruit breeding, fruit quality, processing quality, Barritt et al. (1980) and Daubeny and Pepin (1974). Fruits were harvested from nine to 14 machine harvesting times a season depending on the duration of a cultivar’s harvest period and environmental ÔChemainusÕ (Fig. 1) is a new floricane- 5–84 was selected from a cross of ÔAlgon- conditions. The average fruit weight for the fruiting red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) cul- quinÕ and ÔChilliwackÕ. ÔAlgonquinÕ is rela- season was calculated from the weight of tivar from the breeding program at the Pacific tively cold hardy and is homozygous for gene a randomly selected 50-fruit sample from each plot at each harvest and adjusted for Agri-Food Research Center (PARC) of Agri- Ag1, which confers resistance to the common culture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), Agas- biotype of A. agathonica, the aphid vector of the yield of each harvest. The fruit-ripening siz, B.C. ÔChemainusÕ produces a high yield of RMV (Daubeny and Anderson, 1993). ÔChill- season was characterized by the dates at large, firm fruit suited to machine harvesting. iwackÕ was selected from a cross between BC which 5%, 50%, and 95% total harvest fruit It is adapted to both processing and fresh 64–10–198 and ÔSkeenaÕ. BC 64–10–198 was weight were reached (Table 2). Fruit firmness markets. It is resistant to the common biotype selected from a cross of ÔSumnerÕ and ÔCar- was measured as the force required to close of the North American raspberry aphid, Am- nivalÕ; ÔSumnerÕ has moderate resistance to the opening of the fruit with a push–pull phorophora agathonica Hottes, a vector of raspberry root rot and may be a source of root spring gauge (Hunter Spring Mechanical the raspberry mosaic virus (RMV) complex. rot resistance in ÔChemainusÕ. The other Force Gauge Series L; Ametek, Hatfield, It is recommended as a potential replacement parent, ÔTulameenÕ, was released from the Pa.) and was calculated on a randomly se- for ÔMeekerÕ because it has higher yields of PARC program in 1989 and was chosen as lected subsample of 10 fruit three to five larger fruit, is slower to show symptoms of a parent because of its large fruit size and times each harvest season. Fruit samples RBDV, machine harvests well, produces high fruit quality (Daubeny and Anderson, were frozen; a thawed subsample was used high-quality fruit suited for IQF, and may 1991). to determine pH and titratable acidity (as convey some resistance to raspberry root rot. a percentage of citric acid). ÔChemainusÕ was ÔChemainusÕ is the name of a popular tourist also evaluated at Mt. Vernon and Puyallup, town on Vancouver Island. The choice of the Performance and Description Wash., Aurora, Ore., and in grower fields in name follows the tradition of naming PARC British Columbia, Wash., and Ore. berry cultivars with B.C. First Nations Performance data for ÔChemainusÕ and Yield was the only variable in which there names. The name translates as ‘‘bitten several other Pacific Northwest (PNW) culti- was a significant interaction of cultivar · breast,’’ which describes the shape of the vars, including ÔMeekerÕ, which is widely planting year · harvest year (P = 0.001), and bay on which the town is situated. planted for processing, and ÔTulameenÕ, hence data are presented for each planting which is currently the world’s leading fresh year (Table 1). For the other variables, means market cultivar (Kempler and Daubeny, of all harvest years are presented for each Origin 2006), were obtained from replicated plant- cultivar (Tables 2 and 3). ÔChemainusÕ ings established in 1996, 1999, and 2000 at yielded significantly more than ÔMeekerÕ in ÔChemainusÕ, tested as BC 89–33–84, was PARC’s Substation in Abbotsford, B.C. five of nine planting · harvest year combi- selected by H.A. Daubeny from a 1989 cross (Tables 1 and 2). The plantings were nations, but yields were not significantly of BC 82–5–84 x ÔTulameenÕ (Fig. 2). BC 82– evaluated for 3 years each. Each planting different in the other four combinations Received for publication 21 Mar. 2006. Accepted for publication 4 May 2006. This research was partially funded by the Raspberry Industry De- velopment Council, Lower Mainland Horticultural Improvement Association and the Washington Red Raspberry Commission. We gratefully acknowl- edge the assistance of B. Harding, E. Hoey, G. Weeks, M. Gross, and M. Bodnar of Pacific Agri- Food Research Centre, Agassiz; M. Sweeney, British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture and Lands; T. Baumann, University Collage of the Fraser Valley; P. Moore, Washington State Uni- versity, Puyallup, Wash.; and C. Finn and R. Martin, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Corvallis, Ore. Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre Contribu- tion no. 729. 1Research Scientist. To whom reprint requests should be addressed; e-mail [email protected]. 2Research Scientist (retired). 3Research Assistant. 4Current address: Washington State University, WSU-NWREC, 16650 S.R. 536, Mount Vernon, WA 98273. Fig. 1. Fruit of ÔChemainusÕ. 1364 HORTSCIENCE VOL. 41(5) AUGUST 2006 Fig. 1 live 4/C JOBNAME: horts 41#5 2006 PAGE: 2 OUTPUT: July 15 17:12:30 2006 tsp/horts/118440/01522 ÔQualicumÕ, which is recognized as a high- cultivars (Table 3). ÔChemainusÕ fruit was yielding cultivar (Daubeny and Kempler, the firmest of the cultivars tested but only 1995). The average fruit weight of ÔChem- significantly firmer than fruit of ÔMeekerÕ and ainusÕ was significantly greater than that of ÔCowichanÕ (Table 3). Percent postharvest ÔMeekerÕ and less than that of ÔCowichanÕ, fruit rot of ÔChemainusÕ was similar to that ÔMalahatÕ, ÔQualicumÕ, and ÔTulameenÕ, which of ÔMalahatÕ, which is recognized for its good are recognized for their large fruit sizes postharvest fruit quality (Kempler and Dau- (Kempler and Daubeny, 2000, Kempler beny, 2000) but lower than that of the other et al., 2005). The harvest season of ÔChemainusÕ cultivars included in this trial. The pH of was between 1 and 3 d earlier than ÔMeekerÕ, ÔChemainusÕ fruit was very similar to that Fig. 2. Pedigree of ÔChemainusÕ. ÔQualicumÕÔCowichanÕ, and ÔTulameenÕ and of other cultivars. The titratable acidity of was 3 to 5 d later than that of ÔMalahatÕ ÔChemainusÕ fruit was the highest of all the (Table 2). tested cultivars, but only significantly differ- (Table 1). ÔChemainusÕ produced signifi- ÔChemainusÕ has excellent fruit appear- ent from that of ÔCowichanÕ, ÔMalahatÕ, and cantly lower yield than ÔQualicumÕ in five ance. It resembles ÔTulameenÕ but is smaller; ÔMeekerÕ. This suggests that ÔChemainusÕ planting · harvest year combinations, signif- the fruit is long and conical with fine drupe- fruit is suited to processing. icantly higher in one, and was not signifi- lets (Fig. 1). Fruit color is medium to dark In unreplicated machine harvest trials cantly different in three (Table 1). This red, and the fruit is shiny. Soluble solids planted in 2002 in Lynden, Wash., ÔChem- indicates that ÔChemainusÕ yielded more than concentration of ÔChemainusÕ was not signif- ainusÕ was rated the highest fruit quality the industry standard, ÔMeekerÕ, but less than icantly different from that of the tested (unpublished data). It was also the highest in suitability for machine harvesting, unlike ÔQualicumÕ and ÔTulameenÕ, which have com- Table 1. Yield (kg/hill) and fruit weight of ÔChemainusÕ and other Pacific Northwest raspberry cultivars in parable fruit yield but are not suitable for three plantings, Abbotsford, B.C. mechanical harvest (Kempler and Daubeny, Planting year 2006). In a trial planted in 2000 at the Oregon 1996 1999 2000 State University–North Willamette Research Harvest year and Extension Center in Aurora, Ore., Cultivar 1999 2000 2001 2001 2002 2003 2002 2003 2004 Fruit wtz (g) ÔChemainusÕ produced low yield with a har- Chemainus 4.4 4.5 3.8 6.0 3.7 4.2 3.2 4.1 3.4 3.7by vest season that was similar to that of Cowichan 3.9 4.3 4.0 3.7 3.3 4.1 3.4 3.4 4.3 4.2a ÔMeekerÕ (unpublished data). The relatively Malahat 5.0 3.7 4.0 5.0 2.9 3.8 3.9 4.2 3.7 4.2a poor performance of ÔChemainusÕ in Aurora Meeker 4.1 3.7 3.1 4.2 3.1 4.2 2.6 4.0 3.7 3.0c could be a result of the higher daytime Qualicum 4.4 4.4 4.6 7.2 4.2 5.4 4.5 3.2 3.1 4.3a temperatures during the harvest season at Tulameen 4.1 4.3 3.4 6.6 4.5 - 3.9 4.1 4.1 4.4a x that location. LSD 0.4 Ô Õ z Chemainus flowers are self-fertile, and Fruit weight is an overall mean for all planting and harvest years based on means of 50 fruit subsamples the percentage of drupelets set under field from each harvest.