<mets:mets OBJID="oai:orgprints.org:6380" LABEL="Eprints Item" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/METS/ http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/mets.xsd http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-0.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mets="http://www.loc.gov/METS/"><mets:metsHdr CREATEDATA="2009-11-27T10:40:54Z"><mets:agent TYPE="ORGANIZATION" ROLE="CUSTODIAN"><mets:name>Organic Eprints</mets:name></mets:agent></mets:metsHdr><mets:dmdSec ID="DMD_oai:orgprints.org:6380_mods"><mets:mdWrap MDTYPE="mods"><mets:xmlData><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>Vergleich von Hybridsorten mit samenfesten Sorten bei Karotten</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:abstract>There is an ongoing discussion amongst researchers and farmers involved in organic horticulture concerning the role that F1 hybrid varieties should play in organic farming. Proponents of hybrids state that their use is already much established in organic farming and that it would be a step backwards to dispense with them. Agronomic superiority of hybrids over open pollinated (OP) varieties is often claimed. Opponents to hybrid varieties claim that heterosis puts an emphasis on biomass accumulation and yield but that the more subtle aspects of ripening and creation of aroma are neglected in hybrid varieties.&#13;
&#13;
Project aims including target group:&#13;
To characterize F1 and OP varieties of carrots in a 2-year field trial. Analytical and sensory parameters are collected. Target groups are plant breeders for organic farming, advisors and people interested in food quality.&#13;
&#13;
Methodology:&#13;
Field trial: 1 site, two years. First year (2002): 3 F1 varieties, 3 OP varieties, 4 inbred parent lines of hybrids (2 male sterile, 2 fertile). Second year: 3 F1 varieties, 3 OP varieties. 4 replications each year. &#13;
Parameters: yield, single carrot weight, proportion of marketable carrots, leaf yield, Alternaria, foul carrots at harvest, Brix, Malat, Dry matter, ash, α-carotene, β-carotene, Isocumarin, Saccharose, Glucose, Fructose, Total sugar content, Relation of mono- and disaccharids, Protein, P, K, Ca, Mg, and 5 parameters from the tasting: Texture, Aroma, Sweetness, Bitterness and Overall impression.&#13;
Results, conclusion, state of the art:&#13;
In 2002, 29 Parameters were collected. F1 hybrids performed significantly better in 5 of these parameters (Alternaria occurence, dry matter content, dry matter yield, Saccharose content and the relation of Mono- to disaccharids). Most noticeable was the clearly higher dry matter yield of F1 varieties. OP varieties only performed better in 1 of the parameters (less bitter in the tasting).&#13;
There was a tendency for the F1 hybrids to perform better in agronomic and analytical parameters and for OP varieties to perform better in the tasting. &#13;
In 2003, 24 parameters were collected up to now (Threre was no noteworthy alternaria occurence in the field and no foul carrots at harvest. Carotene und Isocumarin contents are still owing). F1 hybrids performed significantly better in 4 of these parameters (proportion of marketable carrots, sweetness, less bitterness and overall impression in the tasting). OP varieties only had a significantly higher ash content. &#13;
There was a tendency for higher contents of minerals in OP varieties, whereas F1 hybrids tended to have higher yield and sugar parameters.&#13;
None of the collected parameters showed a significant, constant difference between the variety groups over both years. &#13;
However, F1 hybrids tended to have higher sugar contents in both years which was especially due to use of the variety “Bolero”. &#13;
This strong emphasis on sweetness was evaluated positively in the tasting: Bolero obtained the best overall impression score in both years. &#13;
</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc"> Breeding, genetics and propagation</mods:classification><mods:genre>Project description</mods:genre></mets:xmlData></mets:mdWrap></mets:dmdSec><mets:amdSec ID="TMD_oai:orgprints.org:6380"><mets:rightsMD ID="rights_oai:orgprints.org:6380_mods"><mets:mdWrap MDTYPE="mods"><mets:xmlData><mods:useAndReproduction>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><strong>Deposit Agreement</strong></p> 
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In depositing this eprint (a collection of files and associated bibliographic 
metadata), I grant Organic Eprints the right to make 
it permanently available on-line, with open access to all or in accordance 
with any access restrictions that I have specified. (Removal of eprints from the 
public archive is strongly discouraged, but will be granted upon request.)<br /> 
I understand that Organic Eprints does not assume any responsibility 
if there is any breach of copyright in distributing these 
files or metadata.</p>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><strong>For work being deposited by its own first author:</strong> 
I declare that this eprint is my own intellectual property and that I have 
the right to make it available in Organic Eprints in the manner chosen.</p>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><strong>For work being deposited by someone other than its first
author:</strong> I declare that I have gained the proper permissions
from someone with the right to make this eprint available in Organic Eprints 
in the manner chosen - or that the material is in the public domain.</p>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Clicking on the deposit button indicates your agreement to these 
terms. If you do not wish to deposit the eprint right now you can 
<a href="http://orgprints.org/perl/users/myhome">return to your user area</a>, where you will find 
this eprint in your workspace. You can then later edit, clone and deposit it.</p>
    </mods:useAndReproduction></mets:xmlData></mets:mdWrap></mets:rightsMD></mets:amdSec><mets:fileSec></mets:fileSec><mets:structMap><mets:div DMDID="DMD_oai:orgprints.org:6380_mods" AMDID="TMD_oai:orgprints.org:6380"></mets:div></mets:structMap></mets:mets>