USPP8268P - Tulare walnut tree - Google Patents
Tulare walnut tree Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- USPP8268P USPP8268P US07/759,009 US75900991V US8268P US PP8268 P USPP8268 P US PP8268P US 75900991 V US75900991 V US 75900991V US 8268 P US8268 P US 8268P
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- payne
- sup
- serr
- tehama
- tulare
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Lifetime
Links
- 240000007049 Juglans regia Species 0.000 title claims abstract description 14
- 235000009496 Juglans regia Nutrition 0.000 title claims abstract description 13
- 235000006667 Aleurites moluccana Nutrition 0.000 title claims description 4
- 230000012010 growth Effects 0.000 abstract description 25
- 235000014571 nuts Nutrition 0.000 abstract description 24
- 235000020234 walnut Nutrition 0.000 abstract description 13
- 241000758789 Juglans Species 0.000 abstract 1
- 241000003955 Tehama Species 0.000 description 57
- 101100043434 Oryza sativa subsp. japonica SERR gene Proteins 0.000 description 13
- 238000003306 harvesting Methods 0.000 description 11
- 229920003266 Leaf® Polymers 0.000 description 10
- 241000758791 Juglandaceae Species 0.000 description 6
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 6
- 238000012935 Averaging Methods 0.000 description 4
- 235000013399 edible fruits Nutrition 0.000 description 4
- 240000004869 Juglans hindsii Species 0.000 description 3
- 230000001488 breeding effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000002420 orchard Substances 0.000 description 3
- 230000009105 vegetative growth Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000017260 vegetative to reproductive phase transition of meristem Effects 0.000 description 2
- 241001259789 Amyelois transitella Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000015185 California walnut Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241001635274 Cydia pomonella Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000238631 Hexapoda Species 0.000 description 1
- 206010061217 Infestation Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 244000026839 Juglans californica Species 0.000 description 1
- 230000006578 abscission Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001154 acute effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000011681 asexual reproduction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000013465 asexual reproduction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000034303 cell budding Effects 0.000 description 1
- 150000001875 compounds Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 208000015181 infectious disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 230000000644 propagated effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000033458 reproduction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000000926 separation method Methods 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
- A01H—NEW PLANTS OR NON-TRANSGENIC PROCESSES FOR OBTAINING THEM; PLANT REPRODUCTION BY TISSUE CULTURE TECHNIQUES
- A01H6/00—Angiosperms, i.e. flowering plants, characterised by their botanic taxonomy
- A01H6/54—Leguminosae or Fabaceae, e.g. soybean, alfalfa or peanut
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
- A01H—NEW PLANTS OR NON-TRANSGENIC PROCESSES FOR OBTAINING THEM; PLANT REPRODUCTION BY TISSUE CULTURE TECHNIQUES
- A01H5/00—Angiosperms, i.e. flowering plants, characterised by their plant parts; Angiosperms characterised otherwise than by their botanic taxonomy
- A01H5/08—Fruits
Definitions
- This invention relates to a new and distinct cultivar of walnut tree, named ⁇ Tulare ⁇ , botanical classification Juglans regia.
- the original tree grew from a seed from the University of California walnut breeding program in 1967.
- FIG. 1 illustrates four views of nuts in the shell which are typical of the new cultivar.
- FIG. 2 illustrates the nut in cross section and in longitudinal view with half the shell removed at the suture and perpendicular to the suture.
- FIG. 3 illustrates kernel halves of the nut of the new cultivar.
- FIG. 4 illustrates a view of a specimen of a tree typical of the new cultivar.
- This new and distinct cultivar of walnut tree named ⁇ Tulare ⁇ is characterized by its semi-upright growth, good vigor, good bloom overlap, and early and heavy production. Nearly all shoots from terminal buds and over 75 percent of the shoots from axillary buds produce pistillate flowers. The start of growth and leafing is about 12 days after ⁇ Payne ⁇ and male and female bloom and harvest dates are about 6-10 days after ⁇ Payne ⁇ . Male bloom consistently overlaps pink female bloom in mature trees and covers an average of 80 percent of the entire female bloom period.
- Table 1 below compares the vigor and growth habit of ⁇ Tulare ⁇ (67-11) with 14 other cultivars grown together in Tulare county, California.
- ⁇ Tulare ⁇ had 5 to 6 feet, 4 to 6 feet, and less than 4 feet of new growth per shoot, respectively.
- branch angle is less than 45°, making it an upright tree suitable to high density (hedgerow) plantings.
- ⁇ Tulare ⁇ is compared with its parents, ⁇ Serr ⁇ and ⁇ Tehama ⁇ , in Table 2 below.
- ⁇ Tulare ⁇ leafs out later than both parents but closer to ⁇ Tehama ⁇ than ⁇ Serr ⁇ .
- In male and female bloom dates it is similar to ⁇ Tehama ⁇ , usually falling within a few days.
- catkin abundance ⁇ Tulare ⁇ resembles ⁇ Tehama ⁇ but has fewer catkins than ⁇ Serr ⁇ . The latter is remarkable for its abundant catkin production.
- ⁇ Tulare ⁇ is laterally fruitful like both parents, and in subjective yield estimates it is similar or better.
- Nut and kernel characteristics of the three cultivars are similar, although in general ⁇ Serr ⁇ has a higher percent kernel, and ⁇ Tulare ⁇ has lighter colored kernels. ⁇ Tulare ⁇ does not exhibit severe pistillate flower abscission, a trait common in ⁇ Serr ⁇ .
- ⁇ Tulare ⁇ is substantially different from a) ⁇ Chico ⁇ which has smaller nuts; b) ⁇ Chandler ⁇ which requires a pollenizer because male and female flowering periods do not overlap; c) ⁇ Howard ⁇ which is a smaller, less vigorous tree and also requires a pollenizer; and d) ⁇ Vina ⁇ which has poorer nut quality and willowy growth.
- ⁇ Tulare ⁇ ranked higher in yield than ⁇ Chico ⁇ , ⁇ Vina ⁇ , ⁇ Chandler ⁇ and ⁇ Howard ⁇ , the other cultivars heretofore recommended for high-density plantings. In a Yolo county trial, ⁇ Tulare ⁇ ranked higher than those four in 1990 but lower than ⁇ Chico ⁇ in 1989 and lower than either ⁇ Chico ⁇ or ⁇ Vina ⁇ in 1988.
- Tree Size, medium (between ⁇ Chandler ⁇ and ⁇ Serr ⁇ ); vigor, vigorous; growth, semi-upright tree, tends to be a little taller than it is wide; production, very productive; bearing, early regular bearer.
- Trunk and branches Like most other J. regia. Old bark, smooth, very old bark would probably roughen as it does in other walnuts. Like other walnuts, new shoots have green bark which turns brown as the season progresses, this is also like other walnuts.
- Leaves are pinnately compound with 5 to 9 leaflets per leaf. Leaves are similar in color to other walnuts with lower surface being lighter than the top.
- Leaves vary in length from about 29 to 45 cm., averaging about 36 cm.
- Leaflets vary in length from about 4 to 16 cm. averaging about 11 cm., and in width from about 3 to 10 cm., averaging about 6 cm.
- the basal leaflets are smaller with the terminal leaflet and the leaflets next to it being the largest.
- Leaflet shape is elliptic to elongated ovate.
- Leaflets have acute apices and rounded or uneven bases. Uneven bases have blade on one side of the mid-rib 2 to 5 mm. farther from the rachis than it is on the other side.
- Leaf texture smooth; margin, smooth; venation, pinnate.
- leafing date is mid-season having been 4 to 19 days after ⁇ Payne ⁇ , averaging 12 days after ⁇ Payne ⁇ . This is practically the same leafing date as ⁇ Hartley ⁇ .
- Inflorescence This cultivar is precocious, young grafted trees having produced pistillate flowers at two years of age and catkins at three. About 75 percent of the axillary (lateral) buds produce pistillate flowers.
- the Fruit The green fruit before it is ready to harvest is almost spherical in shape being only 2-4 mm. longer than wide.
- the hull is similar in color to other walnuts and is of average thickness.
- the Nut and the Shell The shape of the nut is nearly round (36 ⁇ 40 mm.) and slightly flattened on the stem end. Nuts can be easily balanced on the stem end. Sutures protrude from the shoulder to the tip, slightly but not unusually. The nut separates cleanly from the hull as with other commercial cultivars.
- the nut shell is medium light colored and has a medium texture. It is well-sealed, strong and about 1.5 mm thick.
- the kernel is of average plumpness and makes up about 53 percent of the whole nut weight.
- the average kernel weight is 7.1 grams, the nut about 13.3 grams.
- An average of 75 percent of the kernels are classified as light according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture grading chart.
Landscapes
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Physiology (AREA)
- Botany (AREA)
- Developmental Biology & Embryology (AREA)
- Environmental Sciences (AREA)
- Natural Medicines & Medicinal Plants (AREA)
- Breeding Of Plants And Reproduction By Means Of Culturing (AREA)
Abstract
A new and distinct cultivar of walnut (Juglans regia) characterized in having semi-upright growth, good vigor and excellent production in high density (hedgerow) plantings. The medium textured, light colored shell is well-sealed and nearly round (36×40 mm). The light colored kernel weighs an average of 7.1 grams and makes up over 53 percent of the nut weight. This cultivar is especially well-suited to hedgerow plantings.
Description
This invention relates to a new and distinct cultivar of walnut tree, named `Tulare`, botanical classification Juglans regia. The original tree grew from a seed from the University of California walnut breeding program in 1967.
A continuous walnut breeding program has been maintained at the University of California from 1948 until the present, with substantial support and/or personnel from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service from 1982 on. In 1966, pistillate flowers of the cultivar `Tehama` were bagged and pollinated with pollen from the cultivar `Serr`. This selection grew from one of the resulting seeds, therefore, the parents of this selection are `Tehama` and `Serr`. `Tehama` and `Serr` were released as cultivars from the University of California Breeding Program by E. F. Serr and H. I. Forde in 1968. `Tehama` resulted from crossing `Waterloo`×`Payne` in 1957. `Serr` resulted from the cross P.I. 159568×`Payne` in 1958.
Twenty-one seedlings of the cross `Tehama`×`Serr` were established in the test orchard on the campus of the University of California, Davis. These seedlings were maintained under careful and coninuous observation. When such seedlings bore fruit, one which is the instant cultivar, identified as 67-11, evidenced novel and commercially desirable characteristics and was selected for asexual reproduction to permit further testing and possible introduction to the trade.
After its origin, as above, this selection was asexually reproduced by grafting in 1973 on seedlings of the two common rootstocks, Northern California black walnut Juglans hindsii and Paradox J. hindsii×J. regia, in the University of California (Department of Pomology) experimental orchard. Subsequently, it was also asexually propagated by grafting and budding in test plots in some of the walnut growing areas of California. The trees, leaves and fruit resulting from such reproductions all ran true to the parent trees in every respect.
In the photographs:
FIG. 1 illustrates four views of nuts in the shell which are typical of the new cultivar.
FIG. 2 illustrates the nut in cross section and in longitudinal view with half the shell removed at the suture and perpendicular to the suture.
FIG. 3 illustrates kernel halves of the nut of the new cultivar.
FIG. 4 illustrates a view of a specimen of a tree typical of the new cultivar.
This new and distinct cultivar of walnut tree named `Tulare`, previously described as selection 67-11, is characterized by its semi-upright growth, good vigor, good bloom overlap, and early and heavy production. Nearly all shoots from terminal buds and over 75 percent of the shoots from axillary buds produce pistillate flowers. The start of growth and leafing is about 12 days after `Payne` and male and female bloom and harvest dates are about 6-10 days after `Payne`. Male bloom consistently overlaps pink female bloom in mature trees and covers an average of 80 percent of the entire female bloom period.
Table 1 below compares the vigor and growth habit of `Tulare` (67-11) with 14 other cultivars grown together in Tulare county, California. In its 4th, 5th, and 6th leaf `Tulare` had 5 to 6 feet, 4 to 6 feet, and less than 4 feet of new growth per shoot, respectively. Among other cultivars it ranked near the top in vigor in early evaluations but slowed down in the 6th leaf, probably due to its high nut yield. Branch angle is less than 45°, making it an upright tree suitable to high density (hedgerow) plantings.
TABLE 1
______________________________________
FOURTH LEAF VEGETATIVE GROWTH RATINGS
OF WALNUT CULTIVARS IN
HEDGEROW CONFIGURATION.sup.1
Vigor.sup.2 Uprightness.sup.3
Replicate Replicate
1 2 3 .sup.-- X
1 2 3 .sup.-- X
______________________________________
Amigo 2.88 3.67 4.33 3.63 1.38 1.67 2.75 1.93
Payne 3.00 3.67 3 57 3.41 1.60 2.33 1.43 1.79
Serr 4.50 4.57 3.71 4.26 1.25 2.56 2.00 1.94
Ashley 3.80 4.43 3.50 3.91 1.50 2.86 2.13 2.16
Chico 3.00 3.20 3.43 3.21 1.00 1.00 1.29 1.10
Vina 2.50 3.20 3.30 3.00 1.50 2.10 2.25 1.95
67-13 3.50 3.71 3.60 3.60 1.88 2.00 1.20 1.69
Tehama 3.50 4.57 4.43 4.17 1.88 2.15 2.57 2.20
Hartley 4.29 3.40 3.66 3.78 2.71 1.40 2.16 2.09
67-11 4.14 4.00 4.11 4.08 1.43 1.00 1.77 1.40
68-104 3.66 3.43 3.33 3.47 2.00 1.14 1.55 1.56
Howard 3.75 4.00 3.33 3.69 1.50 2.13 1.17 1.60
Chandler
3.11 3.60 3.57 3.43 1.22 1.00 1.43 1.22
Pedro 3.38 3.66 4.00 3.68 1.50 1.66 1.66 1.61
Sunland 4.43 4.20 4.16 4.26 2.43 2.60 2.00 2.34
______________________________________
.sup.1 Ratings made 73-85.
Only trees on J. hindsii rootstock included.
Data represent averages of approximately 9 trees per replicate
.sup.2 Vigor:
1 = <2' new growth per shoot
2 = 2-3' new growth per shoot
3 = 3-4' new growth per shoot
4 = 5-6' new growth per shoot
5 = >6' new growth per shoot
.sup.3 Uprightness:
1 = normal (upright)
2 = some "willowing" of new growth
3 = excessive willowing of new growth
______________________________________
FIFTH LEAF VEGETATIVE GROWTH RATINGS
OF WALNUT CULTIVARS IN
HEDGEROW CONFIGURATION - September, 19861.sup.1
Vigor.sup.2 Willowiness.sup.3
Replicate Replicate
1 2 3 .sup.-- X
1 2 3 .sup.-- X
______________________________________
Amigo 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.87 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.47
Payne 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.87 1.6 2.2 2.2 2.00
Serr 2.9 2.7 2.5 2.70 2.2 2.4 2.2 2.27
Ashley 2.1 2.0 1.9 2.00 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.43
Chico 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.53 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.23
Vina 1.5 2.1 1.9 1.83 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.40
67-13 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.83 1.4 1.9 1.9 1.73
Tehama 2.2 2.0 2.6 2.27 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.13
Hartley 2.1 1.6 2.4 2.03 2.1 2.0 2.4 2.17
67-11 2.8 2.4 1.8 2.33 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.97
68-104 2.5 1.6 1.9 2.00 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.97
Howard 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.10 1.4 1.1 1.3 1.27
Chandler
1.9 1.9 1.8 1.87 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.70
Pedro 1.7 2.1 1.3 1.70 1.6 2.3 1.9 1.93
Sunland 2.2 2.6 1.9 2.23 2.3 2.9 2.3 2.50
______________________________________
.sup.1 Ratings made 917-86.
Data represent averages of approximately 9 trees per replicate
.sup.2 Vigor: 1
1 = <4' average current season'shoot growth
2 = 4'-6' average current season'shoot growth
3 = >6' average current season'shoot growth
.sup.3 Willowiness:
1 32 <45° average angle of current season's shoot growth
2 = 45°-90° average angle of current season's shoot growth
3 = >90° average angle of current season'shoot growth ?
SIXTH LEAF VEGETATIVE GROWTH RATINGS
OF WALNUT CULTIVARS IN
HEDGEROW CONFIGURATION 1
VISALIA 7/l0/87.sup.1
Cultivar
Vigor.sup.2 Uprightness.sup.3
______________________________________
Amigo 1.22 1.67
Payne 1.22 1.89
Serr 2.33 2.00
Ashley 1.67 2.33
Chico 1.00 1.00
Vina 1.78 2.33
67-13 1.22 1.00
Tehama 2.00 2.00
Hartley 2.11 2.11
67-11 1.55 1.33
68-104 1.33 1.44
Howard 1.00 1.33
Chandler
1.78 1.67
Pedro 1.44 2.00
Sunland 2.22 2.00
______________________________________
.sup.1 Data represent mean of 3 replicates of 9 trees
shoots terminated growth by this date
only side of tree hedged 1986/87 (north side) rated
.sup.2 Vigor:
1 = <4' average new shoot growth
2 = 4'-6' average new shoot growth
3 = >6' average new shoot growth
.sup.3 Uprightness:
1 = <45° average new shoot attitude
2 = 45°-90° average new shoot attitude
3 = >90° average new shoot attitude
In a hedgerow trial (10'×20') grafted in 1983 in Tulare County, this cultivar ranked highest in yield compared with 15 other walnut cultivars in years 1987 through 1990 or 5th year from grafting on. In a similar trial (12'×24') of 13 cultivars grafted in 1985 in Yolo County this cultivar ranked highest in 1990, or 6th year from grafting.
`Tulare` is compared with its parents, `Serr` and `Tehama`, in Table 2 below. `Tulare` leafs out later than both parents but closer to `Tehama` than `Serr`. In male and female bloom dates it is similar to `Tehama`, usually falling within a few days. In catkin abundance `Tulare` resembles `Tehama` but has fewer catkins than `Serr`. The latter is remarkable for its abundant catkin production. `Tulare` is laterally fruitful like both parents, and in subjective yield estimates it is similar or better. Nut and kernel characteristics of the three cultivars are similar, although in general `Serr` has a higher percent kernel, and `Tulare` has lighter colored kernels. `Tulare` does not exhibit severe pistillate flower abscission, a trait common in `Serr`.
TABLE 2
______________________________________
Cultivars/ Pollen Shedding
Selections Leafing Abun-
(Parents) Date DAP.sup.a
1st Peak Last dance.sup.b
______________________________________
1989 Tehama (Payne
3/27 9 4/3 4/8 4/17 6
X Waterloo)
Serr (Payne X
3/19 1 3/24 4/4 4/9 8
PI 159568)
Tulare (Tehama
3/30 12 4/2 4/9 4/22 6
X Serr)
1990 Tehama (Payne
3/23 5 3/27 4/2 4/14 7
X Waterloo)
Serr (Payner X
3/19 1 3/24 3/28 4/6 8
PI 159568)
Tulare (Tehama
3/25 7 3/30 4/4 4/19 7
X Serr)
1991 Tehama (Payne
3/23 16 4/5 4/11 4/20 6
X Waterloo)
Serr (Payne X
3/10 3 3/22 3/31 4/12 8
PI 159568)
Tulare (Tehama
3/27 20 4/6 4/10 4/22 6
X Serr)
______________________________________
Cultivars/
Selections Pistillate Bloom
Fruitful
(Parents) 1st Peak Last Laterals
Yield.sup.c
Blight.sup.d
______________________________________
1989 Tehama 4/8 4/13 4/20 75 5 5
(Payne X
Waterloo)
Serr 4/3 4/9 4/14 60 6 5
(Payne X
PI 159568)
Tulare 4/8 4/14 4/23 60 6 4
(Tehama X
Serr)
1990 Tehama 4/6 4/14 4/21 50 6 3
(Payne X
Waterloo)
Serr 3/30 4/3 4/10 50 4 2
(Payne X
PI 159568)
Tulare 4/7 4/13 4/21 75 6 2
(Tehama X
Serr)
1991 Tehama 4/7 4/14 4/22 50 6 2
(Payne X
Waterloo)
Serr 4/1 4/5 4/13 90 6 0
(Payne X
PI 159568)
Tulare 4/10 4/14 4/23 80 6 2
(Tehama X
Serr)
______________________________________
.sup.a "DAP" denotes "days after Payne".
.sup.b Catkin abundance: 0 no catkins, 9 extremly dense catkin
production.
.sup.c Yield estimate: 0 no walnuts, 9 extremly high yield.
.sup.d Blight score: 0 no sign of infection, 9 extremly severe
infestation.
Shell
Cultivars/ Thick-
Selections Harvest Shell.sup.b
Shell.sup.c
ness
(Parents) Date DAP.sup.a
Seal Strength
(mm)
______________________________________
1989 Tehama 9/17 2 0 2 1.6
(Payne X
Waterloo)
Serr 9/17 2 0 1 1.5
(Payne X
PI 159568)
Tulare 9/19 4 0 2 1.6
(Tehama X
Serr)
1990 Tehama 9/16 1 0 2 1.4
(Payne X
Waterloo)
Serr 9/14 -1 0 1 1.5
(Payne X
PI 159568)
Tulare 9/19 4 0 2 1.3
(Tehama X
Serr)
1991 Tehama 9/26 7 0 2 1.4
(Payne X
Waterloo)
Serr 9/24 5 0 2 1.5
(Payne X
PI 159568)
Tulare 10/1 12 0 2 1.2
(Tehama X
Serr)
______________________________________
Cultivars/ Avg. Weight Kernel.sup.d
Selections In-Shell Kernel
% Fill
(Parents) (gms) (gms) KERNEL Grade
______________________________________
1989 Tehama (Payne
12.23 6.57 49.6 4
X Waterloo)
Serr (Payne X
10.60 5.94 56.0 4
PI 159568)
Tulare (Tehama
13.98 7.28 52.0 4
X Serr)
1990 Tehama (Payne
11.63 6.01 51.6 4
X Waterloo)
Serr (Payner X
15.69 8.98 57.2 3
PI 159568)
Tulare (Tehama
14.11 7.81 55.3 4
X Serr)
1991 Tehama (Payne
15.91 8.20 51.5 4
X Waterloo)
Serr (Payne X
14.59 8.08 55.3 4
PI 159568)
Tulare (Tehama
16.51 9.03 54.6 5
X Serr)
______________________________________
Cultivars/ Kernel Color (%)e
Selections Light
(Parents) Light Amber Amber
______________________________________
1989 Tehama (Payne X Waterloo)
100 0 0
Serr (Payne X PI 159568)
90 0 10
Tulare (Tehama X Serr)
90 10 0
1990 Tehama (Payne X Waterloo)
90 10 0
Serr (Payner X PI 159568)
90 10 0
Tulare (Tehama X Serr)
100 0 0
1991 Tehama (Payne X Waterloo)
90 0 10
Serr (Payne X PI 159568)
80 20 0
Tulare (Tehama X Serr)
100 0 0
______________________________________
Cultivars/
Selections Kernel Shrivel (%)e
(Parents) Tip <50 ≧50
Blank
______________________________________
1989 Tehama (Payne X Waterloo)
0 0 0 0
Serr (Payne X PI 159568)
0 0 20 10
Tulare (Tehama X Serr)
10 0 0 0
1990 Tehama (Payne X Waterloo)
10 10 0 0
Serr (Payner X PI 159568)
0 0 0 0
Tulare (Tehama X Serr)
0 0 0 0
1991 Tehama (Payne X Waterloo)
0 0 0 10
Serr (Payne X PI 159568)
0 0 0 0
Tulare (Tehama X Serr)
50 0 0 0
______________________________________
.sup.a "DAP" denotes "days after Payne".
.sup.b Shell Seal: percent with open seal under slight pressure.
.sup.c Shell Strength: 1 strong, 4 very weak.
.sup.d Kernel Fill: 3 well, 7 poor.
.sup.e Kernel Color and Shrivel taken on 10 randomly selected nuts, other
traits on ten sound nuts.
Compared with other cultivars recommended for hedgerows, `Tulare` is substantially different from a) `Chico` which has smaller nuts; b) `Chandler` which requires a pollenizer because male and female flowering periods do not overlap; c) `Howard` which is a smaller, less vigorous tree and also requires a pollenizer; and d) `Vina` which has poorer nut quality and willowy growth.
It is the habit of the new cultivar that nearly all shoots from terminal buds and>than 75% of the lateral shoots produce one or two pistillate flowers. Advantageous precocity of `Tulare` is indicated by pistillate flowers which usually appear in the second year from grafting. Exemplary dates of foliation, inflorescence and harvesting are given in Table 3 below. Yields from the fourth through the eighth leaf after grafting are shown in Table 4 below. `Tulare` ranked higher in yield than `Chico`, `Vina`, `Chandler` and `Howard`, the other cultivars heretofore recommended for high-density plantings. In a Yolo county trial, `Tulare` ranked higher than those four in 1990 but lower than `Chico` in 1989 and lower than either `Chico` or `Vina` in 1988.
TABLE 3 ______________________________________ Comparison of `Tulare` and `Chico`, 1981-90. Trait Mean Range ______________________________________ Tulare Leafing date 28 Mar. 18 Mar.-9 Apr. Firstfemale bloom 7 Apr. 27 Mar.-22 Apr. Peak female bloom 16 Apr. 6-28 Apr. Last female bloom 25 Apr. 19 Apr.-3 May First pollen shed 1 Apr. 19 Mar.-18 Apr. Last pollen shed 22 Apr. 11-29 Apr. Harvest 22 Sept. 9 Sept.-4 Oct. Laterial fruitfulness 78% 60%-90% In-shell yield.sup.z 6.0 5 -7 In-shell wt (g) 13.3 11.2-14.8 Kernel wt (g) 7.1 5.5-8.0 Kernel (%) 53.3 48.7-56.2 Light-colored kernels 75% 30%-100% Shell texture Medium Medium-rough Shell color Medium Medium-dark ______________________________________ Chico Leafing date 17 Mar. 6-24 Mar. First female bloom 23 Mar. 11 Mar.-4 Apr. Peak female bloom 31 Mar. 18 Mar.-18 Apr. Last female bloom 12 Apr. 2-22 Apr. First pollen shed 4 Apr. 24 Mar.-24 Apr. Last pollen shed 20 Apr. 11-29 Apr. Harvest 214Sept. 2-20 Sept. Laterial fruitfulness 91% 70%-100% In-shell yield.sup.z 6.4 5-8 In-shell wt (g) 10.7 9.1-12.1 Kernel wt (g) 5.0 4.2-5.6 Kernel (%) 46.6 43.7-51.4 Light-colored kernels 69% 50%-100% Shell texture Medium Medium-smooth Shell color Medium Medium-light ______________________________________ .sup.z Based on a 0-9 scale, woth 9 being unusually high yield.
TABLE 4
______________________________________
In-shell nut yield of `Tulare` walnut in comparison with `Chandle`,
`Howard`, `Chico`, and `Vina` from the fourth through the
eighth leaf after grafting (1986-90) in Tulare County.
Yield (kg · ha.sup.-1).sup.z
Cultivar
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
______________________________________
Tulare 2500 bc.sup.y
6490 a 7770 a 7100 a 6830 a
Chico 2920 ab 5990 ab 4650 b 7060 a 4010 b
Vina 3090 ab 4880 bc 4760 b 5490 b 3960 b
Chandler
3380 a 4240 cd 4340 b 3180 c 4990 b
Howard 20l0 c 3390 d 3900 b 3430 c 4650 b
______________________________________
.sup.z Based on 519 trees/ha.
.sup.y Mean separation in columns by Duncan's multiple range test, P =
0.05.
The botanical details of this new and distinct cultivar follow. Data on phenology and nut and kernel characteristics were gathered in the University of California, Davis Pomology orchards, over a ten year period on four grafted trees beginning on the eighth year from grafting:
Tree: Size, medium (between `Chandler` and `Serr`); vigor, vigorous; growth, semi-upright tree, tends to be a little taller than it is wide; production, very productive; bearing, early regular bearer.
Trunk and branches: Like most other J. regia. Old bark, smooth, very old bark would probably roughen as it does in other walnuts. Like other walnuts, new shoots have green bark which turns brown as the season progresses, this is also like other walnuts.
Leaves: Leaves are pinnately compound with 5 to 9 leaflets per leaf. Leaves are similar in color to other walnuts with lower surface being lighter than the top.
Leaves vary in length from about 29 to 45 cm., averaging about 36 cm. Leaflets vary in length from about 4 to 16 cm. averaging about 11 cm., and in width from about 3 to 10 cm., averaging about 6 cm. The basal leaflets are smaller with the terminal leaflet and the leaflets next to it being the largest.
Leaflet shape is elliptic to elongated ovate. Leaflets have acute apices and rounded or uneven bases. Uneven bases have blade on one side of the mid-rib 2 to 5 mm. farther from the rachis than it is on the other side.
Leaf texture, smooth; margin, smooth; venation, pinnate.
Start of growth, leafing date, is mid-season having been 4 to 19 days after `Payne`, averaging 12 days after `Payne`. This is practically the same leafing date as `Hartley`.
Inflorescence: This cultivar is precocious, young grafted trees having produced pistillate flowers at two years of age and catkins at three. About 75 percent of the axillary (lateral) buds produce pistillate flowers.
The male flowers mature first and shed pollen for about three weeks beginning about one week after `Payne` in late March or early April in Davis, Calif. Bloom of pistillate flowers starts about one week after the beginning of male bloom and continues for a few days after the end of male bloom. Peak female bloom occurs about one week after `Payne`. Most flowering tips have two pistillate flowers. There is nothing distinctive about the form or color of the male or female flowers as they are similar to most other walnut flowers.
Harvest: Nuts of this cultivar are ready to harvest about 8 days after `Payne` around the last week of September in Davis, Calif.
When 80 to 90% of the hulls have split the nuts are ready for harvesting by shaker. The cultivar responds to mechanical harvest in a manner similar to other commercial cultivars.
The Fruit: The green fruit before it is ready to harvest is almost spherical in shape being only 2-4 mm. longer than wide. The hull is similar in color to other walnuts and is of average thickness.
The Nut and the Shell: The shape of the nut is nearly round (36×40 mm.) and slightly flattened on the stem end. Nuts can be easily balanced on the stem end. Sutures protrude from the shoulder to the tip, slightly but not unusually. The nut separates cleanly from the hull as with other commercial cultivars.
The nut shell is medium light colored and has a medium texture. It is well-sealed, strong and about 1.5 mm thick. The kernel is of average plumpness and makes up about 53 percent of the whole nut weight. The average kernel weight is 7.1 grams, the nut about 13.3 grams. An average of 75 percent of the kernels are classified as light according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture grading chart.
Additional information on nut characteristics appear in Tables 5 and 6 below which list crack out data in comparison to other commercial cultivars.
TABLE 5
______________________________________
Cultivar and Selection Harvest Evaluations
at U. C. Davis (Fall 1991)
______________________________________
Cultivars/Selections
Harvest
(Cross) Date DAP.sup.a 5 yr avg.sup.b
______________________________________
Reference
PAYNE 9/19 0 0
HARTLEY 10/17 28 20
SCH FRANQUETTE 10/19 40 35
Established
SERR (PAYNE X 9/24 5 3
PI 159568)
ASHLEY 9/20 1 0
CHICO (SHARKEY X
9/22 3 1
MARCHETTI)
SUNLAND (LOWPOC X
10/8 19 15
PI 159568)
VINA (PAYNE X 9/25 6 5
SCH FRANQUETTE
TEHAMA (PAYNE X
9/26 7 6
WATERLOO)
AMIGO (SHARKEY X
9/17 -2 -1
C. MAYETTE)
PEDRO (PAYNE X 10/6 17 11
C. MAYETTE)
HOWARD (PEDRO X
9/25 6 6
56-224)
CHANDLER (PEDRO X
10/14 25 19
56-224)
CISCO (PEDRO X
MEYLAN) 10/19 3 0 24
Selections
TULARE, 67-011 10/1 12 9
(TEHAMA X SERR)
67-013 9/24 5 1
(TEHAMA X SERR)
72-013 discontinued
(59-165 X 53-39)
72-036 -- -- .sup. 11.sup.1
(53-39 X CHICO)
76-080 10/18 29 .sup. 14.sup.4
(CHANDLER X 61-25)
77-010 9/29 10 3.sup.2
(HOWARD X 64-57)
77-012 9/27 8 -1
(HOWARD X 64-57)
78-010 -- -- .sup. 28.sup.4
(53-153 X CHANDLER)
______________________________________
Shell
Cultivars/Selections
Shell.sup.c
Shell.sup.d
Thick.
(Cross) Seal Strength (mm)
______________________________________
Reference
PAYNE 0 2 1.6
HARTLEY 0 1 1.7
SCH FRANQUETTE 0 1 1.5
Established
SERR (PAYNE X 0 2 1.5
PI 159568)
ASHLEY 0 2 1.5
CHICO (SHARKEY X
0 1 1.7
MARCHETTI)
SUNLAND (LOWPOC X
0 1 1.3
PI 159568)
VINA (PAYNE X 0 2 1.5
SCH FRANQUETTE
TEHAMA (PAYNE X
0 2 1.3
WATERLOO)
AMIGO (SHARKEY X
0 2 1.5
C. MAYETTE)
PEDRO (PAYNE X 0 2 1.6
C. MAYETTE)
HOWARD (PEDRO X
0 2 1.3
56-224)
CHANDLER (PEDRO X
0 3 1.2
56-224)
CISCO (PEDRO X 0 2 1.5
MEYLAN)
Selections
TULARE, 67-011 0 2 1.2
(TEHAMA X SERR)
67-013 0 2 1.3
(TEHAMA X SERR)
72-013 discontinued
-- --
(59-165 X 53-39)
72-036 -- -- --
(53-39 X CHICO)
76-080 20 2 1.2
(CHANDLER X 61-25)
77-010 0 2 1.5
(HOWARD X 64-57)
77-012 0 2 1.7
(HOWARD X 64-57)
78-010 -- -- --
(53-153 X CHANDLER)
______________________________________
Avg. Weight % Kernel
Cultivars/Selections
In-Shell Kernal 5 yr
(Cross) (gms) (gms) 1991 avg
______________________________________
Reference
PAYNE 13.46 6.88 51.1 50.8
HARTLEY 17.36 8.43 48.5 46.4
SCH FRANQUETTE 13.93 7.28 52.2 48.9
Established
SERR (PAYNE X 14.59 8.07 55.3 56.7
PI 159568)
ASHLEY 13.43 6.48 48.2 49.7
CHICO (SHARKEY X
11.65 5.48 46.9 46.9
MARCHETTI) 18.65 10.64 57.0 57.7
SUNLAND (LOWPOC X
PI 159568) 13.77 6.73 48.9 48.4
VINA (PAYNE X
SCH FRANQUETTE 15.90 8.20 51.5 49.5
TEHAMA (PAYNE X
WATERLOO) 13.93 6.67 47.9 50.5
AMIGO (SHARKEY X
C. MAYETTE) 15.56 7.71 49.5 47.8
PEDRO (PAYNE X
C. MAYETTE) 12.72 6.46 50.7 49.5
HOWARD (PEDRO X
56-224) 12.93 6.94 53.6 50.0
CHANDLER (PEDRO X
56-224) 15.64 7.61 48.6 47.3
CISCO (PEDRO X
MEYLAN)
Selections
TULARE, 67-011 16.51 9.03 54.6 52.9
(TEHAMA X SERR)
67-013 17.80 10.44 58.6 55.9
(TEHAMA X SERR)
72-013 -- -- -- 58.1.sup.1
(59-165 X 53-39)
72-036 -- -- -- 59.0.sup.1
(53-39 X CHICO)
76-080 14.64 8.64 59.1 52.3.sup.4
(CHANDLER X 61-25)
77-010 14.85 7.36 49.5 49.9.sup.2
(HOWARD X 64-57)
77-012 15.72 7.53 47.9 47.3
(HOWARD X 64-57)
78-010 -- -- -- 46.2.sup.4
(53-153 X CHANDLER)
______________________________________
Kernel.sup.e
Kernel Color (%).sup.f
Cultivars/Selections
Fill Light
(Cross) Grade Light Amber Amber
______________________________________
Reference
PAYNE 4 100 0 0
HARTLEY 6 90 10 0
SCH FRANQUETTE 4 70 30 0
Established
SERR (PAYNE X 4 80 20 0
PI 159568)
ASHLEY 5 100 0 0
CHICO (SHARKEY X
3 100 0 0
MARCHETTI)
SUNLAND (LOWPOC X
4 80 20 0
PI 159568)
VINA (PAYNE X 5 90 0 10
SCH FRANQUETTE
TEHAMA (PAYNE X
4 90 0 10
WATERLOO)
AMIGO (SHARKEY X
5 100 0 0
C. MAYETTE)
PEDRO (PAYNE X 5 90 10 0
C. MAYETTE)
HOWARD (PEDRO X
5 100 0 0
56-224)
CHANDLER (PEDRO X
5 100 0 0
56-224)
CISCO (PEDRO X 5 100 0 0
MEYLAN)
Selections
TULARE, 67-011 5 100 0 0
(TEHAMA X SERR)
67-013 4 100 0 0
(TEHAMA X SERR)
72-013 -- -- -- --
(59-165 X 53-39)
72-036 -- -- -- --
(53-39 X CHICO)
76-080 4 100 0 0
(CHANDLER X 61-25)
77-010 5 90 10 0
(HOWARD X 64-57)
77-012 5 80 20 0
(HOWARD X 64-57)
78-010 -- -- -- --
(53-153 X CHANDLER)
______________________________________
Cultivars/Selections
Kernel Shrivel (%).sup.f
(Cross) Tip <50 50 Blank
______________________________________
Reference
PAYNE 0 0 0 0
HARTLEY 0 0 0 0
SCH FRANQUETTE 0 10 0 0
Established
SERR (PAYNE X 0 0 0 0
PI 159568)
ASHLEY 10 10 0 0
CHICO (SHARKEY X
0 0 0 0
MARCHETTI)
SUNLAND (LOWPOC X
0 0 0 0
PI 159568)
VINA (PAYNE X 0 0 0 0
SCH FRANQUETTE
TEHAMA (PAYNE X 0 0 0 10
WATERLOO)
AMIGO (SHARKEY X
20 20 0 0
C. MAYETTE)
PEDRO (PAYNE X 0 0 0 0
C. MAYETTE)
HOWARD (PEDRO X 0 0 0 0
56-224)
CHANDLER (PEDRO X
30 30 0 0
56-224)
CISCO (PEDRO X 0 0 0 0
MEYLAN)
Selections
TULARE, 67-011 50 50 0 0
(TEHAMA X SERR)
67-013 0 0 0 0
(TEHAMA X SERR)
72-013 -- -- -- --
(59-165 X 53-39)
72-036 -- -- -- --
(53-39 X CHICO)
76-080 30 30 0 0
(CHANDLER X 61-25)
77-010 20 20 0 0
(HOWARD X 64-57)
77-012 0 0 0 0
(HOWARD X 64-57)
78-010 -- -- -- --
(53-153 X CHANDLER)
______________________________________
.sup.a "DAP" denotes "days after Payne".
.sup.b Superscripts indicate number of years for average, if 5 years of
data not available.
.sup.c Shell Seal: percent with open seal under slight pressure.
.sup.d Shell Stength: 1 strong, 4 very weak.
.sup.e Kernel Fill: 3 well, 7 poor.
.sup.f Kernel Color and Shrivel taken on 10 randomly selected nuts, other
traits on ten sound nuts.
TABLE 6
______________________________________
1991 UCD Cultivar/Selecton Evaluation
______________________________________
Crack Test
Kernal Yield (percent in-shell wt.)
% Large Light
Cultivar/Selection
Size RLI.sup.a
Light Amber
______________________________________
Reference
Payne 100 52.2 49 1
Hartley 98 54.5 44 1
S. Franquette
99 52.4 39 5
Established
Ashley 100 51.8 42 5
Chico 46 54.1 40 3
Serr 100 50.0 47 7
Sunland 100 50.7 55 2
Vina 100 50.0 41 6
Tehama 99 53.2 46 1
Amigo 100 56.2 46 1
Pedro 100 52.1 44 2
Howard 100 53.9 49 0
Chandler 99 56.9 50 0
Cisco (UC 66-178)
100 54.1 47 0
Selections
UC 67-011 ("Tulare")
100 51.5 48 2
UC 67-013 100 54.8 52 2
UC 76-080 100 57.4 55 0
UC 77-012 100 48.9 26 4
______________________________________
Crack Test
Kernal Yield (percent in-shell wt.)
Total Off Total
Cultivar/Selection
Amber Edible Grade Yield
______________________________________
Reference
Payne 0 50 0 50
Hartley 1 46 1 47
S. Franquette
6 50 2 52
Established
Ashley 2 49 1 50
Chico 1 44 1 45
Serr 0 54 1 55
Sunland 0 57 0 57
Vina 0 47 2 49
Tehama 0 47 2 49
Amigo 0 47 0 47
Pedro 2 48 0 48
Howard 1 50 0 50
Chandler 0 50 1 51
Cisco (UC 66-178)
0 47 0 47
Selections
UC 67-011 ("Tulare")
0 50 2 52
UC 67-013 0 54 1 55
UC 76-080 0 55 0 55
UC 77-012 7 37 6 43
______________________________________
Internal Damage
(Number)
Cultivar/Selection
Shrivel Other.sup.b
$/100 lb
Date
______________________________________
Reference
Payne 0 0 71.74 9/19
Hartley 4 1 66.21 10/17
S. Franquette
3 1 66.58 10/29
Established
Ashley 1 2 64.39 9/20
Chico 2 2 59.48 9/22
Serr 1 1 71.09 9/24
Sunland 0 0 78.14 10/8
Vina 2 3 57.69 9/25
Tehama 3 2 63.16 9/26
Amigo 0 1 70.66 9/17
Pedro 0 1 68.58 10/6
Howard 2 0 72.73 9/25
Chandler 1 1 74.01 10/14
Cisco (UC 66-178)
2 0 67.23 10/19
Selections
UC 67-011 ("Tulare")
1 3 65.41 10/1
UC 67-013 2 1 77.85 9/24
UC 76-080 0 0 84.44 10/19
UC 77-012 5 2 43.55 9/27
______________________________________
.sup.a Relative Light Intensity
Other damage: mold, insects (Codling Moth and Navel Orange Worm), and
black kernals.
Claims (1)
1. The new and distinct variety of walnut tree herein described and illustrated and identified by the characteristics enumerated above.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US07/759,009 USPP8268P (en) | 1991-09-12 | 1991-09-12 | Tulare walnut tree |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US07/759,009 USPP8268P (en) | 1991-09-12 | 1991-09-12 | Tulare walnut tree |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| USPP8268P true USPP8268P (en) | 1993-06-22 |
Family
ID=25054030
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US07/759,009 Expired - Lifetime USPP8268P (en) | 1991-09-12 | 1991-09-12 | Tulare walnut tree |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | USPP8268P (en) |
-
1991
- 1991-09-12 US US07/759,009 patent/USPP8268P/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| USPP20436P2 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘DrisBlueThree’ | |
| USPP20449P2 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘DrisBlueOne’ | |
| US20200093045P1 (en) | Blueberry plant variety named 'DRISBLUESEVENTEEN' | |
| USPP4388P (en) | Walnut tree | |
| USPP4405P (en) | Walnut tree | |
| USPP4389P (en) | Walnut tree | |
| USPP8268P (en) | Tulare walnut tree | |
| USPP32461P2 (en) | Corylus plant named ‘Hunterdon’ | |
| USPP31007P3 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘C08-141’ | |
| USPP19764P3 (en) | Blueberry named ‘Beaufort’ | |
| USPP28529P3 (en) | Walnut tree named ‘Durham’ | |
| USPP5171P (en) | Tomato plant | |
| USPP33383P2 (en) | Walnut tree names 'wolfskill' | |
| USPP34976P3 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘C12-069’ | |
| USPP35156P2 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘DrisBlueTwentyEight’ | |
| USPP31403P2 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘Plablue 1542’ | |
| USPP34989P3 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘C14-771’ | |
| USPP31648P2 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘BB06-126VC-4’ | |
| USPP31346P2 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘Plablue 1502’ | |
| USPP31296P3 (en) | Strawberry plant named ‘Dr. Duncan’ | |
| USPP20818P3 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘Lucia’ | |
| USPP5987P (en) | Grapevine, Garlate | |
| USPP19903P3 (en) | Blueberry plant named ‘Carteret’ | |
| USPP16971P3 (en) | Strawberry variety named ‘Cabot’ | |
| USPP16496P3 (en) | Walnut tree named ‘Sexton’ |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, THE Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST.;ASSIGNOR:FORDE, HAROLD I.;REEL/FRAME:005844/0061 Effective date: 19910903 |