Circular 327
Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station
Mike Weiss,
Director
Auburn University
Auburn, Alabama
October 2004
| J. Raymond Kessler, Jr., Arnold Caylor, and Jon Coleman |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the substantial donations of plant material from Barton‘s Greenhouse and Nursery, Inc. in Albaster, Alabama, and Dixie Green, Alabama, as well as the time and effort of Arnold Caylor and his crew at the North Alabama Horticultural Substation in Cullman, Alabama.
Bedding plant growers frequently choose cultivars based on pack performance and adaptability to their production conditions. A limited number of cultivars may also be popular in the minds of consumers because of large flower size or unusual flower color. Garden performance of these selected cultivars within a marketing region is an important factor in customer satisfaction and repeat sales. However, information on garden performance of bedding plant cultivars for Alabama may be difficult to obtain.
Therefore, in the winter of 2003-2004, 64 cool-season, bedding plant cultivars were evaluated on the campus of Auburn University in Auburn, Alabama, and 76 were evaluated at the North Alabama Horticultural substation in Cullman, Alabama. The objective of this study was to determine overall garden performance of cool-season annual plant cultivars (bedding plants) at a northerly and southerly location in the state. Results generated from this study will assist Alabama horticultural professionals and consumers in bedding plant selection. However, landscape performance may vary from year to year as climatic conditions affect performance.
METHODS
Raised beds were prepared by tilling at both locations and the soil was amended and mulched with 3 inches of “amendment grade” (fine) aged pine bark. All beds were located in full sun. A commercially available fertilizer was pre-plant incorporated into the beds based on soil test recommendations. No additional fertilizer was applied during the season. A preemergent herbicide, Pendulum 2G, was applied at 2.3 pounds per 1,000 square feet. Rainfall was supplemented by drip irrigation to provide an equivalent of 1 inch of water per week. No deadheading of spent flowers or other maintenance was performed on any of the plants with the exception of hand weeding. No pesticides were applied during the trial. Transplants were planted on October 6 and 7, 2003.
|
Each bedding plant entry was randomly planted in three replications
of one to three plants (depending on expected plant size) in a
rectangle block
occupying half the bed width (2 feet). The beds were 4 feet wide
and each plant block occupied 2 linear feet of bed space. Therefore,
each
replication was 2 feet by 2 feet (Figure 1). Each of the replications for each plant entry was evaluated every two weeks from March 5, 2004 to April 16, 2005 at Auburn and November 10, 2004 to May 6, 2005 at Cullman. Plants were rated by the same individual at each locations using a 1 to 5 scale. Flowering plants were rated primarily on their floral displays, while size, shape, and freedom from insect or disease blemishes were also considered. A rating of 1 indicated a small display of foliage with no |
 |
RESULTS
Performance ratings averaged across all evaluation dates for each speces with cultivars grouped by flower color are shown in the Table. The top six best performing plant groups in the trial (those wih a rating of 3.5 or higher) at Auburn were pansy ‘Maxim Marin’, viola ‘Sorbet Purple Duet’, and viola ‘Sorbet Blackberry Cream’ in the first place with a rating of 4.1 Alone in the second place was viola ‘Penny Azure Wing’ with a rating of 3.9, and the third place went to viola ‘Sorbet Coconut’, viola ‘Sorbet Blue Heaven’, and pansy ‘Bingo Rose White’ with ratings of 3.7 and alone in the fifth place was viola ‘Sorbet Yellow Delight’ with a rating of 3.6. Sixth place was held by pansy ‘Crystal Bowl Purple’, pansy ‘Crystal Bowl True Blue’, pansy ‘Nature Blue’, pansy ‘Maxim Mix’, and pansy ‘Nature Ocean’ with a rating of 3.5.
The best performing pansies in the blue flower category were ‘Crystal Bowl True Blue’, ‘Nature Ocean’, and ‘Nature Blue’ with ratings of 3.5 while the best performers in the orange category were ‘Clear Sky Orange’ and ‘Crown Orange’ with ratings of 3.2. The best performing pansies in the mixed, purple, red, rose, white, and yellow categories were ‘Maxim Mix’ (3.5), ‘Crystal Bowl Purple’ (3.5), ‘Delta Fire’ (3.3), ‘Nature Rose w/Blotch’ (3.3), ‘Maxim Marina’ (4.1), and ‘Maxim Yellow’ (3.7), respectively. The best performing violas in the purple flower color category were ‘Sorbet Blackberry Cream’ and ‘Sorbet Purple Duet’ with ratings of 4.1. The best performers in the blue, mixed, white, and yellow categories were ‘Penny Azure Wings’ (3.9), ‘Penny Citrus Mix’ (3.4), ‘Sorbet Coconut’ (3.8), and ‘Sorbet Sunny Royale’ (3.7), respectively. Dianthus and snapdrgon did not perform as well as pansy and viola. However, Dianthus ‘Floral Lace Crimson’ (2.8) did receive a rating greater than 2.5.
The top six best-performing plant groups in the trial (those with a rating of 3.5 or higher) at Cullman were viola ‘Sorbet Yellow Delight’, pansy ‘Nature Blue’, and viola ‘Penny Azure Wing’ in the first place with performance ratings of 4.0. Second place was held by viola ‘Sorbet Blue Heaven’, viola ‘Babyface Yellow’, viola ‘Sorbet Blackberry Cream’, and viola ‘Sorbet Purple Duet’ with ratings of 3.9 while third place was occupied by pansy ‘Nature Yellow‘, sorbet ‘Blueberry Cream’, and pansy ‘Crystal Bowl Yellow’ with ratings of 3.8. Fourth place went to pansy ‘Nature Ocean’, viola ‘Sorbet Sunny Royale’, pansy ‘Maxim Yellow’, and pansy ‘Crystal Bowl Sky Blue’, pansy ‘Crystal Bowl Supreme Lavander’, pansy ‘Nature Rose w/Blotch’, and viola ‘Rebel Yellow’ with ratings of 3.7, and fifth place was taken by pansy ‘Crystal Bowl Purple’, pansy ‘Maxim Mix’, viola ‘Sorbet Coconut’, pansy ‘Crytal Bowl True Blue’, and pansy ‘Clear Sky Purple’ with ratings of 3.6. Sixth place was occupied by pansy ‘Bingo Blue w/Blotch’, viola ‘Sorbet Plum Velvet’, pansy ‘Nature White’, viola ‘Sorbet Mix’, pansy ‘Maxim White’, and pansy ‘Maxim Marina’ with ratings of 3.5.
The best performing pansies in the purple flower color category were ‘Crystal Bowl Purple’, ‘Clear Sky Purple’, and ‘Crown Purple’ with ratings of 3.6. The best performers in the white category were ‘Maxim Marina’, ‘Maxim White’, and ‘Nature White’ with ratings of 3.5 while the best in the yellow category were ‘Crystal Bowl Yellow’ and ‘Nature Yellow’ with ratings of 3.8. The best performing pansies in the blue, mixed, orange, red, and rose categories were ‘Nature Blue’ (4.0), ‘Maxim Mix’ (3.6), ‘Clear Sky Orange’ (3.2), ‘Clear Sky Red’ (3.3), and ‘Nature Rose w/ Blotch’ (3.7), respectively. Among purple violas, ‘Sorbet Blackberry Cream’ and ‘Sorbet Purple Duet’ performed the best with ratings of 3.9. The best performing violas in the blue, mixed, white, and yellow categories were ‘Penny Azure Wing’ (4.0), ‘Sorbet Mix’ (3.5), ‘Sorbet Coconut’ (3.6), and ‘Sorbet Yellow Delight’ (4.0), respectively. Similar to Auburn, dianthus and snapdragons did not perform as well as pansies and violas. However, snapdragon ‘Flamenco Mix’ (3.0) did receive a rating greater the 2.5.
Few measurable differences could be found in plant performance between Auburn and Cullman. As shown in the table, only five entries performed better at one location than at the other. Within the top six best-performing plant groups at Auburn, 14 of 15 were in common with the top six at Cullman. Theses included pansy ‘Maxim Marina’, viola ‘Sorbet Purple Duet’, viola ‘Sorbet Blackberry Cream’, viola ‘Penny Azure Wing’, viola ‘Sorbet Coconut’, viola ‘Sorbet Blue Heaven’, pansy ‘Maxim Yellow’, viola ‘Sorbet Sunny Royale’, viola ‘Sorbet Yellow Delight’, pansy ‘Crystal Bowl Purple’, pansy ‘Crystal Bowl True Blue’, pansy ‘Nature Blue’, pansy ‘Maxim Mix’, and pansy ‘Nature Ocean’. Note that one-half of these are violas.
While useful, the average performance rating for bedding plant species tested does not provide a complete picture of performance through the season. The charts depict average performance rating of bedding plant cultivars for the two locations at each evaluation date. In general, performance rating at Cullman increased soon after planting in the fall, declined in January and February, and increased again as weather warmed in the spring. Some of the best average performers were those that showed strong performance in the fall.