2005 Pumpkin Variety Evaluations
in Pennsylvania

Timothy E. Elkner
Horticulture Extension Educator
Penn State Cooperative Extension
1383 Arcadia Rd., Rm. 1
Lancaster, PA 17601

Tom Butzler
Horticulture Extension Educator
Penn State Cooperative Extension
7996 Nittany Valley Drive
Mill Hall, PA 17751

Mike Orzolek
Horticulture Extension Specialist
Penn State University
Department of Horticulture
103 Tyson Building
University Park, PA 16802

INTRODUCTION
Pumpkins are a high value crop in the mid-Atlantic region. In Pennsylvania, pumpkin acreage is second only to sweet corn. PA ranked first in fresh market pumpkin production in 2002 with 7,376 acres harvested for 9% of the total US acreage (non-processing). Because of the importance of pumpkins in PA, multiple field trials are often conducted throughout the state. There have been many new varieties of pumpkins introduced in recent years by commercial seed companies and some are reported to have PM tolerance or resistance. The studies reported in this paper were designed to evaluate new pumpkin varieties, including PM tolerant and resistant pumpkin varieties, under PA growing conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Seven varieties of small pumpkins (<5 lbs), 10 varieties of medium pumpkins (7-24 lbs.) and 12 varieties of large pumpkins (25+ lbs) were grown in Lancaster County while 4 varieties of small pumpkins, 8 varieties of medium pumpkins and 9 varieties of large pumpkins were grown in Centre County in 2005. The pumpkins were grown using raised beds with black plastic row covers and drip irrigation in Lancaster and on bare soil with overhead irrigation at Centre County. Spacing of the plants was as follows: small - 2 ft in row X 8 ft between rows (Lancaster) and 6x3 (Centre County), medium - 4 ft in row X 8 ft between rows and large - 8 ft X 8 ft (Lancaster)and 9 ft X 9 ft (Centre County). Transplants were set June 15 in Lancaster and June 23 in Centre County. Admire was applied through the drip system post-planting in Lancaster at the labeled rate. Recommended fertility, weed control and disease and insect control practices were used. There were three 10 plant replicates per variety at Lancaster and two 10 plant replicates per variety at Centre County. Fruit were harvested and weighed on September 28 in Centre County and September 29 and 30 in Lancaster.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Overall, yields were similar or slightly higher in Lancaster for the small and medium varieties with higher yields in the large varieties (Tables 1, 2). Average fruit sizes were similar at both sites for small and medium varieties while Centre County had higher average fruit size in the large varieties. This was most likely a function of greater space for each plant at that location (81 ft2 vs. 64 ft2). Producers of large pumpkins will need to consider their markets when spacing large-fruited plants - higher spacing resulted in larger fruit but overall reduced yields.

Iron Man was the highest yielding small variety at Lancaster followed by Cannonball. Iron Man had similar yields at Lancaster in 2004 (Note: 2004 data not reported in this paper. See web address at end for this information.). Cannonball was the highest yielding small variety at Centre County followed by Prankster (RPX 089). Ironman did not perform well at Centre County. The small pumpkins tended to have a smooth texture (Table 3) and good handle quality.

RPX 764 and RPX 763 were the most productive medium-sized fruit at Lancaster while RPX 764 and Racer were best at Centre County. However, there were some fruit quality issues with both RPX 763 and RPX 764 so these lines have been dropped by Rupp. Racer and Charisma both performed better at Centre County than Lancaster. These varieties suffered heavily from sunburn at Lancaster which significantly reduced yields. Magician and Gold Gem performed well at Lancaster but not in Centre County. Magic Lantern, the current standard in Lancaster County, performed poorly this season compared to previous seasons. However, Scarecrow and Gold Bullion, which performed well at Lancaster in 2004 also performed poorly in 2005. The medium varieties generally had good handle quality at both locations and tended to have more ribbing than the smaller varieties at Lancaster.

Dependable had the highest yields at Lancaster in the large pumpkin group. RPX 768 and Gold Medallion (RPX 771) were the highest yielding varieties at Centre County. These varieties also did well at Lancaster. Harvest Time and Gold Medal were two additional varieties that did well at both locations. Expert did well at Centre County but suffered from sunburn at Lancaster. Autumn King and Golden Condor were two varieties that performed well in 2004 but poorly in 2005 at Lancaster. Texture of the large pumpkins varied more within the group than in the medium pumpkins. Growers should match the texture of varieties grown to their anticipated market needs.

Photographs from all varieties grown at Lancaster can be viewed at: http://capitalhort.cas.psu.edu/Default.html . Select "Research/Variety Trails". Additional data and photographs from all varieties grown at Centre County can be viewed at: http://clinton.extension.psu.edu/hort/pumpkin/05Pumpkin_demonstration.htm.

Table 1: Yield and fruit quality ratings for 29 varieties of small, medium, and large pumpkins grown in Lancaster County, PA in 2005. Click on variety name to view image.

*Handle quality was rated using a scale from 1 to 5 with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent
**Line dropped by Rupp
*** Line still in trial at Rupp

Table 2: Yield and fruit quality ratings for 21 varieties of small, medium, and large pumpkins grown in Centre County, PA in 2005.

*Handle quality was rated using a scale from 1 to 5 with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent
**Line dropped by Rupp
*** Line still in trial at Rupp
^^Medium pumpkins grown at Large spacing

Table 3: Evaluation of color, shape, and texture for 29 pumpkin varieties grown in Lancaster County, PA in 2005. Texture is rated on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being very smooth and 5 being heavily ribbed.

**Line dropped by Rupp
*** Line still in trial at Rupp