Feasibility of Growing Pierce?s Disease Tolerant American and French-American Hybrid Bunch Grape Cultivars and Advanced Grape Selections in Alabama by Yilanna Hu A thesis submited to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama May 4, 2013 Keywords: American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars, sedles table grapes, vegetative growth, cropping potential, fruit quality, Xylela fastidiosa, Copyright 2013 by Yilanna Hu Approved by Elina Coneva, Chair, Asociate Profesor of Horticulture J. Raymond Kesler, Jr., Profesor of Horticulture Jay Spiers, Asistant Profesor of Horticulture ii Abstract Eleven Pierce?s Disease (PD) tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars including ?Black Spanish?, ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Champanel?, ?Conquistador?, ?Cynthiana?, ?Favorite?, ?Lake Emerald?, ?Stover?, ?Vilard Blanc?, ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc? grafted on Coudrec 3309 rootstock (?Seyval Blanc?/3309C) were planted at the Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center (SMREC) in Crossvile, AL in 2008 to study the feasibility of growing PD tolerant hybrid bunch grape cultivars in the Alabama environment. Our results indicate that ?Champanel? had the most vigorous vegetative growth, while ?Seyval Blanc? had the weakest. ?Stover? had the earliest shoot development, while ?Champanel? and ?Cynthiana? had the latest. ?Stover? and ?Seyval Blanc? flowered earliest, while ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? flowered late in the season. ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had the earliest fruit maturity, while ?Lake Emerald? matured late. ?Vilard Blanc? produced the largest yield of 12.7 kg/vine and had the largest mean cluster weight of 287.1 g in 2011 and 2012. ?Champanel? produced the largest berries of 4.8 g. ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? had the highest soluble solids content (SSC) with 19.8% and 18.8%, respectively, while ?Champanel? had the SC of 13.1% at harvest. ?Blanc du Bois? and ?Stover? had the highest pH of 3.58 and 3.49, respectively. There were no significant diferences in titratable acidity (TA) among cultivars tested which ranged from 0.56 to 1.36 g/100 ml. ?Vilard Blanc?, ?Cynthiana?, and ?Black Spanish? were the best performing cultivars combining vigorous vegetative growth, high yields, and good fruit quality at the SMREC in the two study years. iii Three recently released sedles table grape cultivars from the University of Arkansas breeding program, ?Faith? (?A2412?), ?Joy? (?A2494?), and ?Gratitude? (?A2505?); eight advanced grape selections ?A2817?, ?A2245?, ?A2359?, ?A2467?, ?A2574?, ?A2602?, ?A2632?, and ?A2786?; two previously released sedles cultivars ?Mars?, and ?Neptune?, as wel as two standard cultivars ?Conquistador?, and ?Stover?, were planted at the North Alabama Horticultural Research Center (NAHRC) in Cullman, AL in 2008 to study the feasibility of growing advanced table and procesing grape selections in Alabama environment. Vegetative growth, cropping potential and fruit quality of the tested cultivars and selections were evaluated during the 2011 and 2012 seasons. Our results indicate that ?Joy? had the most vigorous vegetative growth, while ?A2786? had the weakest. ?Stover? had the earliest shoot and flower development in both seasons. Selection ?A2359? had the greatest number of clusters per shoot. ?Mars? and ?Faith? were early ripening and maturing, while ?Conquistador? developed late in the season. The highest yielding selections and cultivars in our study were ?A2574?, ?A2359?, ?Neptune?, ?A2245?, and ?Conquistador?, which produced over 12.0 kg/vine in both seasons. Table grape cultivars ?Gratitude? and ?Neptune? had the largest average cluster size of 490 g. ?Gratitude? and selection ?A2817? produced the largest berries. ?A2632?, ?Stover?, ?Faith?, and ?Joy? had high SC at harvest, while ?Conquistador? had relatively low sugar content. Selection ?A2467? had the highest TA of 1.34 g/100 ml. The remaining cultivars and selections had TA levels ranging from 0.52 to 0.79 g/100 ml. Selection ?A2817? had the largest number of sed traces (3.2), while ?Gratitude? had the fewest sed traces. ?Neptune?, ?Gratitude?, and ?A2817? performed best at NAHRC during study due to their superior cropping potential, fruit quality, and combined vegetative growth. iv Acknowledgments I would like to thank my major advisor, Dr. Elina Coneva, for her patience, guidance, as wel as the opportunity to conduct my research. Additionaly I would like to thank the members of my advisory commite: Dr. J. Raymond Kesler, and Dr. Jay Spiers. Their expertise was crucial to the completion of my research as wel as this thesis. I would like to thank Edgar Vinson for his help both with field work as wel as data collection. I would like to expres thanks to Dr. Floyd Woods for the training and instruction he provided to complete my fruit quality evaluation lab work. I would like to extend very special thanks to Mr. Arnold Caylor, Ms. Joyce Ducar and the entire staf at the North Alabama Horticulture Research Center, Cullman, AL, and the Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center, Crossvile, AL for maintaining the experimental plots as wel as their help with harvesting of the research plots and sample collections over the past two years. Additionaly, I would like to thank Dr. Kasie Conner for her help with pest identification and ELISA results interpretation in the plant pathology lab. I am extremely grateful to my friends and family, and particularly to my husband, Song Chen, without him this would not be possible. v Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ ii Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. ix Chapter One: Cultivation and Horticultural Characteristics of American and French-American Hybrid Bunch Grape (Vitis spp.) Cultivars: Literature Review ................................................... 1 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 16 Chapter Two: Feasibility of Growing Pierce?s Disease Tolerant American and French-American Hybrid Bunch Grape Cultivars in North Alabama .................................................................... 21 Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 21 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 22 Materials and Methods ................................................................................................... 28 Results ............................................................................................................................ 38 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 39 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 42 Tables .............................................................................................................................. 46 Figures ???????????????????????????????52 Chapter Three: Feasibility of Growing Recently Released Sedles Table Grape Cultivars and Advanced Selections Developed by University of Arkansas Breeding Program in Alabama .. 60 Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 60 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 61 vi Materials and Methods ................................................................................................... 64 Results ............................................................................................................................ 69 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 74 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 76 Tables .............................................................................................................................. 78 Figures ???????????????????????????????.86 vii List of Tables Chapter Two Table 1. Comparison of vine pruning weight and trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ........................................................ 46 Table 2. Comparison of leaf chlorophyll content and leaf area of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ....................................................................... 47 Table 3. Comparison of number of fruiting clusters per shoot of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ....................................................................... 48 Table 4. Comparison of yield per vine, cluster weight, and berry weight of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ....................................................................... 49 Table 5. Comparison of fruit pH, soluble solids content (SSC), and titratable acidity (TA) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. .............................................. 50 Table 6. Comparison of Pierce's disease symptoms of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. ...................................................................................................................................... 51 Chapter Three Table 1. Comparison of vine pruning weight and trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ................................................................................................. 78 Table 2. Comparison of leaf area and leaf chlorophyll content of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. .............................................................................................................................. 79 vii Table 3. Comparison of the number of fruiting clusters per shoot of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ..................................................................................................................... 80 Table 4. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. ........................... 81 Table 5. Comparison of yield per vine, cluster weight, and berry weight of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. ..................................................................................................................... 82 Table 6. Comparison of fruit pH, soluble solids content (SSC), and titratable acidity (TA) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined. .......................................................................................... 83 Table 7. Comparison of the number of sed traces of newly released grape cultivars and advanced table sedles grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined... .................................................................................................................. 84 Table 8. Comparison of Pierce?s disease symptoms of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. ........................... 85 ix List of Figures Chapter Two Figure 1. Comparison of early season shoot development of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. ...................................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 2. Comparison of early season shoot development of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. ...................................................................................................................................... 53 Figure 3. Comparison of percent open flowers of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. .... 54 Figure 4. Comparison of percent open flowers of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. .... 55 Figure 5. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. ...................................................................................................................................... 56 Figure 6. Season of veraison progresion (percent) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. ...................................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 7. Season of ripening of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. ................................ 58 Figure 8. Season of ripening of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. ................................ 59 Chapter Three Figure 1. Comparison of early season shoot development of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. ........................... 86 x Figure 2. Comparison of early season shoot development of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. ........................... 87 Figure 3. Comparison of percent open flowers of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. ........................................... 88 Figure 4. Comparison of percent open flowers of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. ........................................... 89 Figure 5. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. ........................... 90 Figure 6. Season of ripening of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. ..................................................................... 91 Figure 7. Season of ripening of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. ..................................................................... 92 1 CHAPTER ONE Cultivation and Horticultural Characteristics of American and French-American Hybrid Bunch Grape (Vitis spp.) Cultivars: Literature Review Classification of Grapes Grape, which belongs to the botanical family Vitaceae, is an important fruit crop in the world. Vitaceae, made up of approximately 1000 species assigned to 17 genera (Keller, 2010), is widely distributed in tropical and subtropical climate zones with ranges extending into the temperate regions (Einset and Prat, 1975). Al cultivated grapes of economic importance belong to either the genus Muscadinia (2n = 40 somatic chromosomes) or the genus Vitis (2n = 38 somatic chromosomes) (Keler, 2010). The genus Muscadinia is native from the southeastern United States to Mexico. Members of this genus usualy have glabrous leaves, simple tendrils, non-shredding bark, nodes without diaphragms, and hard wood (Munson, 1909; Mullins et al., 1992). This genus has only three species, al of which are very similar (Mullins et al., 1992; Olien, 1990). Muscadinia rotundifolia, known as muscadine grape, is grown for use as a table grape, or procesed into juice, jely, or wine. The species is indigenous to Florida and the south coast of the U. S. (Einset and Prat, 1975). Muscadine grapes have distinctive aromas and flavors; the wines produced from them are considered a specialty product (Winkler et al., 1974). The species has resistance to or tolerance of some of the major grapevine diseases and pests native to North America, including fungal pathogens such as powdery mildew [Uncinulata necator (Schw.) Burr], black rot [Guignardia bidweli (Elis) Viala and Ravaz], and downy mildew 2 [Plasmopara viticola (Berk. and Curt.) Berl. and de Toni]; bacteria such as Xylela fastidiosa, which causes Pierce?s disease; the phylloxera insect (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae Fitch); and the nematode (Xiphinema spp.) that transmits the grapevine fanleaf virus, but is sensitive to winter frost and lime-induced chlorosis (Aleweldt and Possingham, 1988). Currently, there are many cultivated varieties of muscadine grapes; most of them have pistilate flowers, while others, those of more recent origin, have perfect flowers. ?Scuppernong? is the oldest cultivated North American cultivar of muscadine grape, which was found in North Carolina and has pistilate flowers (Winkler et al., 1974). The perfect-flowered muscadine cultivars are used primarily as pollinizers for the pistilate cultivars. Their pollen has high germination ability, and they produce good crops of fair quality fruits. However, they are more susceptible to diseases and pests than the pistilate cultivars (Winkler et al., 1974). Muscadinia munsoniana Small (Simpson) is another species in the Muscadinia genus that is native to Florida and the Bahamas, but it is not cultivated (Keler, 2010). Information about southern Mexico species Muscadinia popenoei is relatively unknown (Keler, 2010). The genus Vitis occurs prevalently in temperate and subtropical climate regions (Mullins et al., 1992; Wan et al., 2008). Al members of this genus are perennial vines or shrubs with tendril-bearing shoots, hairy leaves with five main veins, forked tendrils, shredding bark when mature, nodes with diaphragms, and soft secondary wood (Keler, 2010). Al species within the genus are separated only by geographic, phenologic, and ecologic barriers (Einset and Prat, 1975), and can readily interbreed to form fertile interspecific crosses caled hybrids (Keler, 2010). The genus is often divided into two major groups: the American group and the Eurasian group. The dominant species of the two groups difer greatly in their useful agronomic traits. The grapes from the Eurasian group have good fruitfulnes, fruit quality, propagation capacity, and 3 lime tolerance, but poor phylloxera tolerance and disease resistance, while the American group has good phylloxera tolerance and disease resistance, but poor fruitfulnes and fruit quality (Keler, 2010). The American group contains 8 to 34 species, of which several have become economicaly important wine or juice grapes. Vitis labrusca (L.) is one of the most important species. It is a vigorous climber known as northern fox grape that is native to the eastern U.S. from Georgia to southeastern Canada. Some of the V. labrusca cultivars, such as ?Concord? and ?Niagara?, are commercialy grown in the U.S. for juice, jam, jely, and wine production. This species is cold tolerant and resistant to powdery mildew and crown gall (Rhizobium radiobacter), but it is susceptible to phylloxera, downy mildew, black rot, and Pierce?s disease and has poor lime tolerance (Keller, 2010). Vitis aestivalis (Michaux), also known as summer grape, is another important species from the American group. The vine is a vigorous climber native to eastern North America, growing in dry upland forests and bluffs. It is very cold hardy, drought tolerant, and also tolerates wet and humid summers. It is resistant to important economical diseases including powdery and downy mildew and Pierce?s disease (Keler, 2010). Vitis riparia (Michaux) is widespread in North America from Canada to Texas and from the Atlantic Ocean to the Rocky Mountains. This species climbs on trees and shrubs along riverbanks and thus is known as a bank grape. It is very cold hardy, tolerant to phylloxera, and resistant to fungal diseases, but susceptible to Pierce?s disease (Keler, 2010). Vitis rupestris (Scheele) is native to the southwestern U.S. from Texas to Tennese. It is found in rocky creek beds (rock grape) with permanent water. This species tolerates phylloxera and is resistant to powdery and downy mildew, but is susceptible to anthracnose [Elsinoe ampelina (de Bary) Shear.] (Keler, 2010). Vitis berlandieri (Planchon) is native to central Texas and eastern Mexico. It is one of very few 4 American Vitis species that has good tolerance to lime (Winkler et al., 1974). It is somewhat tolerant to phylloxera and resistant to fungal diseases and Pierce?s disease (Mullins et al., 1992). Vitis candicans (Engelmann) is a very vigorous climber native to the southern U.S. and northern Mexico. This species has drought tolerance, phylloxera tolerance, and resistance to powdery and downy mildew and Pierce?s disease, but it is dificult to propagate (Keler, 2010). Approximately 40 known species of grapes belong to the Eurasian group, and most of them are confined to eastern Asia (Keler, 2012). Chinese species are particularly diverse, growing in the dry southwest, the northern and southern foothils of the Himalayas, the very cold northeastern area, and the hot and humid southeastern part (Wan et al., 2008). Most Eurasian species are not resistant to the North American grapevine diseases. Vitis vinifera is the most well known species in the Eurasian group because it gave rise to most of the cultivated grape cultivars grown around the world (Keler, 2010). Vitis sylvestris (or silvestris) (Gmelin) Hegi is native to an area ranging from central Asia to the Mediterranean region, growing mainly in damp woodlands on aluvial soils of riverbanks and hilsides, thus it is considered the ?forest grape?. These wild grapes are thought to be cold tolerant and resistant to leafroll and fanleaf viruses (Keler, 2010). Vitis amurensis (Ruprecht) is native to northeastern China and Russian Siberia (?Amur grape?), and it is considered to be the cold hardiest of al Vitis species (Aleweldt and Possingham, 1988; Wan et al., 2008). It is resistant to downy mildew, but susceptible to phylloxera (Du et al., 2009). Vitis coignetiae (Pulliat) is native to Japan, and used locally for jam production. The species strongly resemble the American V. labrusca (Mullins et al., 1992). 5 Cultivation and Cultivar Development Grape cultivation began in Asia Minor, in the region betwen, and to the south of the Black and Caspian seas (Winkler et al., 1974). That region is the home of the Old World grape, Vitis vinifera, from which al cultivated grape cultivars derived before the discovery of North America. From there, culture of the grape spread both west and east. Viticulture was brought to the western shores of the Americas by the conquistadors. In western North America during the sevententh and eightenth centuries, the spread of grape and wine production was largely asociated with the church. Grape growing and wine making became established in California and rapid expansion occurred from 1860 to 1900 (Einset and Prat, 1975). The Jesuit misionaries planted the first cultivar of Vitis vinifera in California at the San Diego Mision in the late eightenth century. The cultivar was ?Mision?, which was the principal cultivar in California until about 1870 (Winkler et al., 1974). The ?Mision? grape was very vigorous, productive, and hardy. The fruit of ?Mision? atained a high sugar concentration, but was deficient in acid and color (Winkler et al., 1974). Tapia et al. (2007) reported that they found a perfect match for ?Mision? in a litle-known Spanish cultivar caled ?Listan Prieto?. With the development of the industry, especialy the production of grapes for fresh consumption and for raisins, the need for diferent and beter cultivars became apparent. Many cultivars were imported from Europe. The cultivars imported included ?Muscat of Alexandria?, ?Tokay, ?Sauvignon blanc?, etc. (Winkler et al., 1974). Colonists landed on the eastern shore of North America 150 years before the San Diego mission was established. Several trials with V. vinifera cultivars in the eastern part of the U.S. were atempted, but the ventures did not succed (Hedrick, 1907). In 1821, thousands of grapevines were planted on the Tombigbee River in Alabama by former Napoleonic officers, but the result was a record of misfortune, probably owing to Pierce?s 6 disease (Hedrick, 1907). The climate of the areas east of the Rocky Mountains with rainfals throughout the year and cold winters, and some native North American pests such as the phylloxera and other diseases prevented the succesful growing of Vinifera cultivars in the eastern U.S. (Clark, 2003). The grapes now grown succesfully in the eastern U.S. are either cultivars selected from the native species, such as ?Concord?, or hybrids of native species, such as ?Clinton?, which are categorized as ?American hybrids?, and hybrids of native species with vinifera cultivars, which are caled ?French-American hybrids? or ?French hybrids?, such as ?Delaware? (Winkler et al., 1974; Hedrick, 1907). These American and French-American hybrid cultivars combine environmental adaption and good fruit quality (Winkler et al., 1974). Major Grape Production Practices Grapevine pruning comprises the removal of living canes, shoot, leaves, and other vegetative parts of the vine (Winkler et al., 1974). The principal pruning is done when the vine is dormant, betwen leaf fal in autumn and the bud break in spring. Lider et al. (1973) developed pruning methods based on the weight of previous year?s cane growth that provided a beter balance of crop and growth. A common balanced pruning formula for French or American hybrids suggests retaining of 20 buds for the first 0.45 kg of wood prunings, plus another 10 buds for each additional 0.45 kg of prunings, up to a maximum of 50 buds per vine. For native American cultivars, the optimum pruning formula suggests to leave 30 buds for the first 0.45 kg of prunings, plus another 10 buds for each additional 0.45 kg of prunings, up to a maximum of 60 buds per vine (Rombough, 2002). Thinning is removal of flower clusters and includes, imature clusters, or parts of imature clusters (Winkler et al., 1974). Shoot thinning has been reported to decrease yield and 7 open the canopy to improve the fruit quality (Reynolds et al., 1986). Cluster thinning has been reported to result in fewer clusters per vine but provides greater individual cluster weight (Reynolds et al., 1986). Hummel and Ferree (1998) also reported that cluster thinning could impact fruit quality of ?Seyval Blanc?. Berkey et al. (2011) found that shoot thinning and cluster thinning reduced yield, but improved soluble solids content of ?Seyval Blanc? in 2009. Grapevines are adaptable to a wide range of soil fertility. The roots are active from early spring to late fal and explore the subsoil and the surface soil to absorb the required nutrients. The leaves contain 90% or more of the plant nutrients. The requirements for fertilizing vineyards have been limited (Winkler et al., 1974). Four elements are the most critical to grapevine growth, including nitrogen, potasium, zinc and boron (Winkler et al., 1974). Grape Nutrition and Production Recent nutraceutical studies have revealed the benefits of grape or wine consumption to human health and disease prevention. There are strong epidemiological evidences favoring the view that light to moderate consumption of alcoholic drinks reduces mortality and cardiovascular risk in humans, when compared to zero or more than moderate intake (Ronksley et al., 2011). Polyphenols, such as resveratrol, also provide health benefits. Resveratrol could alter molecular mechanisms in blood vesels to reduce susceptibility to vascular damage, decrease the activity of angiotensin to reduce blood presure, and increase production of the vasodilator hormone (Opie and Lecour, 2007). Acording to the Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations (FAOUN), 75,866 km 2 of the world are dedicated to grapes (FAOUN, 2010). Approximately 71% of world grape production is used for wine, 27% for fresh fruit, and 2% for dried fruit. China was the 8 largest grape producer with 8,651,831 metric tons in 2010, followed by Italy and United States with 7,787,800 metric tons and 6,220,360 metric tons, respectively. Acording to the world wine consumption rank provided by the wine institute in California, the U.S. was the largest wine consumption nation in the world with 2,912,041,000 liters in 2010, which increased 5.8% from the 2007 consumption rate and 5.4% from the 2009 wine consumption rate. The U.S.A. wine consumption was 12.54% of the world consumption (World Wine Consumption, 2010). Acording to the 2007 Census of Agriculture-State Data, there were 284 farms producing grapes in Alabama that represented a 53% increase from 2002. The area in grape production in Alabama was 1.89 km 2 that constitutes a 45% increase in 2007, in comparison to 2002 (USDA-NAS, 2007). Grape Cultivation Constraints in the Southeast - Pierce?s Disease The most important limitation for grape production in Alabama and other southeastern states is the Pierce?s disease (PD). PD is a deadly grapevine disease. PD eliminated commercial viticulture in the Los Angeles Basin of California in the 1880s, and was discovered in 1892 by Newton B. Pierce (Pierce, 1892). It is caused by Xylela fastidiosa (X.f.), which is a gram- negative, xylem-limited bacterium that was first asociated with PD of grapevines in 1973 (Hopkins and Mollenhauer, 1973). X.f. is transmited into grape xylem by sharpshooters, particularly the glasy-winged sharpshooters (Hil and Purcel, 1997). Once it is in the xylem, the bacteria uses the xylem sap as a nutrient source to multiply, spread, and increase to concentrations that block the xylem vascular tisue and can eventualy cause PD in susceptible grape cultivars (Rombough, 2002). 9 Infection of virulent strains of X.f. is fatal in some grape cultivars such as most V. vinifera grapes. General PD symptoms include chlorotic spots on leaves and leaf scorching (Rombough, 2002). PD is asociated with distinctive visible symptoms including leaf ?matchsticks? and ?green islands? (Stevenson et al., 2005). Matchstick exhibits when dried leaves can fal off their petioles, while the petioles remain atached to the canes. The petioles then dehydrate and have a burnt appearance on their distal tips (Stevenson et al., 2005). Green islands appear on stems of infected plants in an intermediate zone betwen the uniformly green stem in apical regions and the uniformly browned (matured) stem parts in basal regions. In the intermediate zone, smal spots of both exclusively green and darkened stem can be found, instead of a typical even transition betwen the two (Stevenson et al., 2005). Diseases caused by X.f. are mainly tropical or subtropical (Hopkins and Purcel, 2002). PD is typical for the Gulf Coastal Plain states of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Misisippi, Louisiana, and Texas. It seems to be rare or absent from parts of North America with cold winters. Feil and Purcel (2001) discovered that temperatures below 10?C gradualy reduced, but did not eliminate populations of the bacterium in grape. X.f. has maximum growth at a temperature of 33?C. The PD transition from areas of severe to rare or no PD is gradual rather than abrupt (Hopkins and Purcel, 2002). The incidence of PD in the eastern U.S. diminishes from the highest levels near the Gulf of Mexico to low levels or absence in the southern mid-western states (Hopkins, 1976; Purcel, 1980). Acording to a study conducted by Sutton (2005), the number of days with temperature ? -12.2 ?C or ? -9.4 ?C are important in defining the regions where PD is not likely to be a problem because X.f. populations in grape xylem were shown to decline under cool conditions, and the vines recovered following freezing temperatures. The 10 increase in winter temperatures during the period 1997-2005, compared to the previously studied period 1972-1997, amplified PD occurrence in the Southeast. Up until 2005, areas north of Birmingham, AL were not considered high PD risk locations, but with the increased winter temperatures in recent years, the entire state of Alabama is considered a high PD risk zone. Ma et al. (2010) confirmed the spread of X.f. infection in major fruit crops, including hybrid bunch grapes, muscadine grapes, peaches, plums, blueberries, and Satsuma mandarins, throughout Alabama. The study also found the highest PD presure in the Gulf Coast area of Alabama. Selected PD Tolerant Cultivars Description Because Alabama is located in a high PD risk zone, it is critical to select and plant grape cultivars with PD tolerance for sustainable grape production. Several American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars are found to have PD tolerance. ?Seyval Blanc? is a French-American hybrid cultivar, developed as a cross betwen Siebel 5656 and Seibel 4986 by the French hybridizers Seyve and Vilard (NGR). Wilson et al. (2010) studied the performance of ?Seyval Blanc? grown in Kentucky. It produced an average cluster weight of 219 g, an average berry weight of 1.94 g, and the fruit soluble solids content (SSC) was 23.7%. Another long-term study investigated productivity and fruit quality of ?Seyval Blanc? in the Ozark region of Misouri. Based on overal productivity (yield, pruning weight, juice composition), it was one of the wine cultivars best suited for the region (Kaps and Odneal, 2010). The average yield per vine of ?Seyval Blanc? for the period 1989 to 1994 was 11.5 kg. ?Seyval Blanc? combined higher yield with a good balance in wine quality, and it has become widely planted in Misouri. Vine pruning weights were generaly low to moderate because the shalow soil profile typical of the Ozark region restricted vine growth. The average pruning 11 weight per vine was 1.1 kg. The average cultivar cluster weight was 300 g for ?Seyval Blanc?, which represented the largest clusters among the cultivars tested. This cultivar required crop thinning to balance fruit production and vine growth in high crop load years. ?Seyval Blanc?s fruit produced SSC of 19.8%, which is aceptable for wine production acording to a study conducted by Kaps and Odneal (2001). ?Vilard Blanc? is a French-American hybrid cultivar developed by crossing Seibel 6468 and Seibel 6905 (NGR). ?Vilard Blanc? was planted on the Texas South Plains during 1974- 1986 (Lipe and Davenport, 1988). It has a SC of 20.7%, and a berry size of 2.56 g. ?Black Spanish?, also known as ?Lenoir?, is a cultivar of the American Vitis aestivalis species of grape vine native to Texas (Rombough, 2002). ?Black Spanish? is a vigorous vine with large, dark green foliage and smal black berries (Munson, 1909). It has resistance to phylloxera and PD (Rombough, 2002). It does not lose acidity in the heat, so it makes a decent quality red wine in hot areas (Rombough, 2002). ?Favorite? is a clone of ?Black Spanish? developed by John Neiderauer in Brenham, Texas. This grape has higher yields and is even more disease resistant than ?Black Spanish? (Rombough, 2002). According to Hedrick (1907), ?Cynthiana? (Vitis aestivalis Michx) was found growing in the wild in Arkansas. ?Cynthiana? prefers sandy or gravely loam soils. It has phylloxera resistance and is also used as a rootstock. Fruit ripens very late and keeps wel on the medium and smal clusters. Berries are smal, having no value as table grapes, but ?Cynthiana? is considered good for table wine production (Hedrick, 1907). Reisch et al. (1993) reported that there is no significant diferences betwen ?Norton? and ?Cynthiana? via isozyme and botanical 12 analyses and suggested that ?Norton? and ?Cynthiana? might be cultivars derived from the same clonal source. ?Champanel? is an American hybrid cultivar of V. champini and V. labrusca. It has exceding high resistance to heat and drought. ?Champanel? produces large, black and juicy berries (Munson, 1909). It is reported to have resistance to anthracnose (Mortensen, 1981) and tolerance of PD (Kamas et al., 2000). Acording to Stover (1954), ?Lake Emerald? was developed at the University of Florida breding program by crossing native ?Pixiola? (V. simpsoni) and ?Golden Muscat? (hybrids from V. labrusca and V. vinifera), so it is an American hybrid cultivar having vinifera background. It produces average clusters of 184 g and berries with 18% sugar content (Halbrooks and Mortensen, 1989). ?Lake Emerald? is resistant to black rot, downy mildew, and tolerant of PD. ?Stover? is another hybrid cultivar developed by the University of Florida breeding program. It is resistant to PD, downy mildew, and moderately resistant to black rot, but susceptible to anthracnose and powdery mildew in Florida (Mortensen, 1968). Clusters are medium size and the sugar content is 17-18% with a mild taste. ?Conquistador? is a multipurpose, self-fertile Florida hybrid cultivar having V. aestivalis and ?Concord? parentage (Mortensen, 1983). Vine growth is moderate. The clusters are 118 g and the slipskin type berries are 2.5 g. Unevenly ripened berries appear in bunches occasionaly, and some bunches mature later than others (Mortensen, 1983). ?Conquistador? is resistant to PD and somewhat resistant to anthracnose, downy mildew, and black rot. Mortensen (1987) describes Florida-grown ?Blanc du Bois? as an early ripening French- American hybrid cultivar for wine making with a cluster size of 133 g, and a berry weight of 2.9 g. Berries are round, light green, slipskin, juicy, with a muscat flavor. The number of seds per 13 berry is 3.2. ?Blanc du Bois? is reported to have resistance to PD, rarely showing symptoms. It is also resistant to downy mildew and grape leaf folder (Desmia funeralis Hubner). ?Blanc du Bois? is susceptible to anthracnose, black rot and ripe rot, but could be managed by spraying preventively with fungicides. Cultivars and Selections Developed by the University of Arkansas Breding Program The University of Arkansas breeding program was begun at 1964 with a focus on the development of table grape cultivars. The table grape is defined as a grape developed exclusively for the table market with major characteristics of sedlesness, crisp texture, and edible skin that can be consumed easily without discarding the skins or other inedible component (Clark, 2010). Released from the program are the sedles table grape cultivars ?Venus? (1977), ?Reliance? (1983), ?Mars? (1985), ?Saturn? (1989), ?Jupiter? (1999), ?Neptune? (1999) (Clark, 2003), ?Faith?, ?Hope?, ?Joy?, and ?Gratitude? (Clark, 2012). The major objectives in eastern table grape improvement programs include improving the textures of both slipskin and non-slipskin grape types, which provide diferent mouth sensation to customers; development of sedles cultivars; fruit cracking resistance and winter hardines; wider flavor palet combined with crisp texture; and more elongated fruit shape (Clark, 2010). ?Mars? is a hybrid of V. labrusca and V. vinifera. It has demonstrated outstanding resistance to black rot, anthracnose, powdery and downy mildew under minimum chemical disease control at the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station in Clarksvile, AR (Moore, 1985). The ripening date of ?Mars? is July 22 nd in central Arkansas. Fruit skins are medium thick and do not adhere to the flesh (non-slipskin). The fruit color is blue at maturity. The berry size is 14 3.5 g, which is considered large for a sedles grape cultivar. The flavor is strong and typicaly resembles labrusca species characteristics. Soluble solids content (SSC) of the fruit is medium (16%), but acid content is low and the fruit tastes swet. Fruit clusters, are medium in size, wel- filed, and compact. ?Neptune? is a hybrid of V. labrusca and V. vinifera, and is the first advanced sedles white table grape developed by the University of Arkansas breeding program. The vines and fruit have demonstrated good resistance to black rot, anthracnose, and powdery mildew (Clark and Moore, 1999). The ripening date of ?Neptune? is August 4 th in central Arkansas. The fruit is yelow-green in color at maturity. Fruit skin is moderately thick and non-slipskin. The berry size is medium and the berry weight is 2.5 g with a fruity flavor. Fruit SC are 19.7%. Fruit clusters are usualy borne two per shoot, have a conical shape and very often have a smal shoulder. They are large in size (345g), and wel-filed. ?Faith? (A2412) is a blue, non-slipskin, sedles table grape with early ripening, late July to early August in Arkansas (Clark, 2012). Cluster weight ranges from 150 to 250 g, and berries are 4 g. SSC is 19% with a neutral flavor. Some berries matured unevenly in some years. ?Joy? (A2494) is a blue, non-slipskin, sedles table grape with average harvest date of August 11 th in Arkansas (Clark, 2012). Cluster weight is usualy 300 g, and berries are 3 g. The flavor is exceptional fruity. Shater of mature berries occurred in some years. ?Gratitude? (A2505) is a white, non-slipskin, sedles table grape (Clark, 2012). Cluster weight is up to 500 g, and berries are 3.5 g. SC is 19% with exceptional crisp texture. The flavor is neutral, similar to Vitis vinifera table grapes. 15 Other selections have not been tested outside of Arkansas and information on their performance is not available. These cultivars and selections were not exposed to PD during development or testing, so we are not aware of their PD resistance. The demand for high quality, localy produced table and wine grapes from consumers, grape growers and winemakers is increasing. Science based information is lacking on the performance of American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars and newly released or existing sedles table grapes in Alabama?s high PD risk environment. Data about cultivar growing requirements, cropping potential, and fruit quality in Alabama would be very beneficial to the grape growing industry in the state and the entire southeastern region. We hypothesized that American and French-American hybrid cultivars and table grapes wil perform diferently in terms of their vegetative growth, cropping potential and fruit quality in response to the environmental condition present in Alabama. The main objective of the current study was to evaluate the performance of PD tolerant American and French-American hybrid grape cultivars and sedles table grapes in Alabama?s environment to gain science based empirical information on their productivity, fruit quality, PD resistance and longevity; and to provide grape growers with recommendations on cultivar selection as a means to expand and sustain the grape growing industry in the southeastern region of the U.S. 16 Literature Cited Aleweldt, G., and J.V. Possingham. 1988. Progres in grapevine breeding. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 75:669-673. Berkey, T.G., A.K. Mansfield, S.D. Lerch, J.M. Meyers, and J.E. Vanden Heuvel. 2011. Crop load adjustment in ?Seyval Blanc? winegrape: impacts on yield components, fruit composition, consumer wine preferences, and ecomomics of production. HortTechnology 21:593-598. Clark, J.R. 2003. Grape growing at the University of Arkansas: approaching forty years of progres. Proc. VIIIth IC on Grape. Acta Hort. 603, ISHS. 357-360. Clark, J.R. 2010. Eastern United States table grape breeding. J. Amer. Pomol. Soc. 64:72-77. Clark, J.R. 2012. University of Arkansas table grapes ?Faith?, ?Hope?, ?Joy?, and ?Gratitude? sedles table grape for local markets. University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Research and Extension. Clark, J.R. and J.N. Moore. 1999. ?Neptune? sedles table grape. HortScience 34:1300-1302. Einset, J. and C. Prat. 1975. Advances in Fruit Breeding. Grapes. Purdue University Pres. West Lafayete, Indiana. FAOUN. 2010. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations: Economic and Social Department: The Statistical Division. Available at: http:/faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor Feil, H. and A.H. Purcel. 2001. Temperature-dependent growth and survival of Xylela fastidiosa in vitro and in potted grapevines. Plant Disease 85:1230-1234. 17 Halbrooks, M.C. and J.A. Mortensen. 1989. Origin and significance of Florida hybrid bunch grapes and rootstocks. HortScience 24:546-550. Hedrick, U.P. 1907. The Grapes of New York. (Fiftenth annual report. Department of Agriculture, State of New York.) Albany, J. B. Lyon, State Printer. Hil, B.L. and A.H. Purcel. 1997. Populations of Xylela fastidiosa in plants required for transmision by an eficient vector. Phytopathology 87:1197-1201. Hopkins, D.L. and H.H. Mollenhauer. 1973. Ricketsia-like bacterium asociated with Pierce's disease of grapes. Science 179:298-300. Hopkins, D.L. 1976. Pierce?s disease of grapevines. Am. Wine Soc. J. 8:26-27. Hopkins, D.L. and A.H. Purcel. 2002. Xylela fastidiosa: cause of Pierce?s disease of grapevine and other emergent disease. Plant Disease 86:1056-1066. Hummel, A.K. and D.C. Ferree. 1998. Interaction of crop level and fruit cluster exposure on ?Seyval Blanc? fruit composition. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 123:755-761. Kamas, J., M. Black, D. Appel, and L.T. Wilson. 2000. Management of Pierce?s disease in Texas. Texas Agricultural Extension Service L-5383. Kaps, M.L., and M.B. Odneal. 2001. Grape cultivar performance in the Misouri Ozark region. J. Amer. Pomol. Soc. 55:34-44. Keler, M. 2010. The Science of Grapevines: Anatomy and Physiology. Academic Pres. Oxford, UK. Lider, L.A., A.N. Kasimatis, and W.M. Kiewer. 1973. Efect of pruning severity and rootstock on growth and yield of two grafted, cane-pruned wine grape cultivars. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 98:8-11. 18 Lipe, W.N. and D. Davenport. 1988. Grape cultivar performance on the Texas South Plains, 1974-1986. Texas A&M University. Ma, X., E. Coneva, H. Fadamiro, J.F. Murphy, C. Ray and F. Dane. 2010. Seasonal occurrence and abundance of sharpshooter leafhoppers in Alabama orchards and vineyards. International Journal of Fruit Science 10:341-354. Moore, J.N. 1985. ?Mars? sedles grape. HortScience 20:313. Mortensen, J.A. 1968. Stover: An early bunch grape for central Florida. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-195. Mortensen, J.A. 1981. Sources of resistance to anthracnose. J. Hered. 72:423-426. Mortensen, J.A. 1983. Conquistador: a purple bunch grape for Florida. Circular S-300. Mortensen, J.A. 1987. Blanc du Bois: A Florida bunch grape for white wine. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-340. Mullins, M.G., A. Bouquet, and L.E. Wiliams. 1992. Biology of the Grapevine. Cambridge University Pres, Cambridge, UK. Munson, T.V. 1909. Foundations of American Grape Culture. Orange Judd Co., NY. NGR. National Grape Registry. Supported by University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Foundation Plant Services, and National Clonal Germplasm Repository of the USDA Agriculture Research Service. Available at: http:/ngr.ucdavis.edu Opie, L.H. and S. Lecour. 2007. The red wine hypothesis: from concepts to protective signaling molecules. Eur. Heart. J. 28:1683-1693. Pierce, N.B. 1892. The California Vine Disease. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Division of Vegetable Pathology. Bulletin No. 2. 19 Purcel, A.H. 1980. Environmental therapy for Pierce?s disease of grapevines. Plant Disease. 64:388-390. Reisch, B.I., R.N. Goodman, M.H. Martens, and N.F. Weden. 1993. The relationship betwen Norton and Cynthiana red wine cultivars derived from vitis aestivalis. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 44:441-444. Reynolds, A.G., R.M. Pool, and L.R. Matick. 1986. Efect of shoot density and crop control on growth, yield, fruit composition and wine quality of ?Seyval Blanc? grapevines. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 111:55-63. Rombough, L. 2002. The Grape Grower: A Guide to Organic Viticulture. Chelsea Green Publishing. White River Junction, VT. Ronksley, P.E., S.E. Brien, B.J. Turner, K.J. Mukamal, W.A. Ghali. 2011. Asociation of alcohol consumption with selected cardiovascular disease outcomes: a systematic review and meta- analysis. BMJ. 342:671. Stevenson, J.F., M.A. Mathews, and T.L. Rost. 2005. The developmental anatomy of Pierce?s disease symptoms in grapevines: green islands and matchsticks. Plant Disease 89:543-548. Stover, L.H. 1954. The Lake Emerald grape. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-68. Sutton, T.B. 2005. Progres report: Pierce?s disease risk zones in the Southeast. North Carolina State University. Available at: http:/ww.smalfruits.org/SRSFCReserchFunding/Research05/Sutton_ProgresReport05.pd f 20 Tapia, A.M., J.A. Cabezas, F. Cabelo, T. Lacombe, J.M. Mart?nez-Zapater, P. Hintichsen, and M.T. Cervera. 2007. Determining the Spanish origin of representative ancient American grapevine varieties. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 58:242-251. USDA-NAS. 2007. Census of Agricultural-State Data. USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service. Available at: http:/ww.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/index.php Wan, Y., H. Schwaninger, D. Li, C.J. Simon, Y. Wang, and P. He. 2008. The eco-geographic distribution of wild grape germplasm in China. Vitis 47:77-80. Wilson, P., J. Wheeler, and S. Lynch. 2010. Wine and Table Grape Cultivar Evaluation Trial in Kentucky. Fruit and Vegetable Research Report. University of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. PR-608. Winkler, A.J., J.A. Cook, W.M. Kliewer, and L.A. Lider. 1974. General Viticulture. University of California Pres. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA. World Wine Consumption. 2010. Wine Institute. Available at: http:/ww.wineinstitute.org/files/2010_World_Wine_Consumption_By_Volume_Rank.pdf 21 Chapter Two Feasibility of Growing Pierce?s Disease Tolerant American and French-American Hybrid Bunch Grape Cultivars in North Alabama Abstract Eleven Pierce?s disease (PD) tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars including ?Black Spanish?, ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Champanel?, ?Conquistador?, ?Cynthiana?, ?Favorite?, ?Lake Emerald?, ?Stover?, ?Vilard Blanc?, ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc? grafted on Coudrec 3309 rootstock (?Seyval Blanc?/3309C) were planted at the Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center (SMREC) in Crossvile, AL in 2008 to study the feasibility of growing PD tolerant hybrid bunch grape cultivars in the Alabama environment. Our results indicate that ?Champanel? had the most vigorous vegetative growth, while ?Seyval Blanc? had the weakest. ?Stover? had the earliest shoot development, while ?Champanel? and ?Cynthiana? had the latest. ?Stover? and ?Seyval Blanc? flowered earliest, while ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? flowered late in the season. ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had the earliest fruit maturity, while ?Lake Emerald? matured late. ?Vilard Blanc? produced the largest yield of 12.7 kg/vine and had the largest cluster weight of 287.1 g. ?Champanel? produced the largest berries of 4.8 g. ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? had the highest soluble solids content (SSC) with 19.8% and 18.8%, respectively, while ?Champanel? had the SC of 13.1% at harvest. ?Blanc du Bois? and ?Stover? had the highest pH of 3.58 and 3.49, respectively. There were no 22 significant diferences in titratable acidity (TA) among cultivars tested which ranged from 0.56 to 1.36 g/100 ml. ?Villard Blanc?, ?Cynthiana?, and ?Black Spanish? were the best performing cultivars combining vigorous vegetative growth, high yields, and good fruit quality at the SMREC in the two study years. Introduction The climate of areas east of the Rocky Mountains with rainfals year around and cold winters, and some native North American pests such as the phylloxera (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae Fitch) and other diseases prevent Vitis vinifera species from developing and surviving in the eastern U.S. (Clark, 2003). The grapes now grown succesfully in the eastern U.S. are cultivars selected from native species, such as ?Concord?; hybrids of native species, such as ?Clinton?; and hybrids of native species with varieties of vinifera, such as ?Delaware? (Winkler et al., 1974; Hedrick, 1907). Although the quality of wine produced from hybrid grape cultivars is generaly inferior to the wine produced from V. vinifera cultivars, the hybrid grapes have a distinct application in the eastern U.S., because they are adaptable to the climate and resistant to some native pests and diseases, such as Pierce?s disease (PD). 23 Grape Cultivation Constraints in the Southeast - Pierce?s Disease The most important limitation for grape production in Alabama and other southeastern states is Pierce?s disease (PD). PD is a deadly grapevine disease. PD eliminated commercial viticulture from the Los Angeles Basin of California in the 1880s, and was discovered in 1892 by Newton B. Pierce (Pierce, 1892). It is caused by Xylela fastidiosa (X.f.), which is a gram- negative, xylem-limited bacterium that was first asociated with PD of grapevines in 1973 (Hopkins and Mollenhauer, 1973). X.f. is transmited into grape xylem by sharpshooters, particularly the glasy-winged sharpshooters (Hil and Purcel, 1997). Once it is in the xylem, the bacteria uses the xylem sap as a nutrient source to multiply, spread, and increase to concentrations that block the xylem vascular tisue and can eventualy cause PD in susceptible grape cultivars (Rombough, 2002). Infection of virulent strains of X.f. is fatal in some grape cultivars such as most V. vinifera grapes. General PD symptoms include chlorotic spots on leaves and leaf scorching (Rombough, 2002). PD is asociated with distinctive visible symptoms including leaf ?matchsticks? and ?green islands? (Stevenson et al., 2005). Matchstick symptom is observed when dried leaf blades fal off their petioles, while the petioles remain atached to the stems. The petioles then dehydrate and have a burnt appearance on their distal tips (Stevenson et al., 2005). Green islands appear on stems of infected plants in an intermediate zone betwen the uniformly green stem in apical regions and the uniformly browned (matured) stem parts in basal regions. In this intermediate 24 zone, smal spots of both exclusively green and darkened stem can be found, instead of a typical even transition betwen the two (Stevenson et al., 2005). Diseases caused by X.f. are mainly tropical or subtropical (Hopkins and Purcel, 2002). PD is typical for the Gulf Coastal Plain states of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Misisippi, Louisiana, and Texas. It seems to be rare or absent from parts of North America with cold winters. Feil and Purcel (2001) discovered that temperatures below 10?C gradualy reduced, but did not eliminate populations of the bacterium in grape. X.f. exhibits maximum growth at a temperature of 33?C. The PD transition from areas of severe to rare or no PD is gradual rather than abrupt (Hopkins and Purcel, 2002). The incidence of PD in the eastern U.S. diminishes from the highest incidences near the Gulf of Mexico to the lowest incidences or absence in the southern mid-western states (Hopkins, 1976; Purcel, 1980). Acording to a study conducted by Sutton (2005), the number of days with temperature ? -12.2 ?C or ? -9.4 ?C are important in defining the regions where PD is not likely to be a problem because X.f. populations in grape xylem were shown to decline under cool conditions, and the vines recovered following freezing temperatures. The increase in winter temperatures during the period 1997-2005, compared to the previously studied period 1972-1997, amplified PD occurrence in the Southeast. Up until 2005, areas north of Birmingham, AL were not considered high PD risk locations, but with the increased winter temperatures in recent years, the entire state of Alabama is considered a high PD risk zone. Ma et al. (2010) confirmed the spread of X.f. infection in major fruit crops, including hybrid bunch 25 grapes, muscadine grapes, peaches, plums, blueberries, and Satsuma mandarins, throughout Alabama. The study also found the highest PD presure in the Gulf Coast area of Alabama. Selected PD Tolerant Cultivars Description Because Alabama is located in a high PD risk zone, it is critical to select and plant grape cultivars with PD tolerance for sustainable grape production. Several American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars are found to have PD tolerance. ?Seyval Blanc? is a French-American hybrid cultivar, developed as a cross betwen Siebel 5656 and Seibel 4986 by the French hybridizers Seyve and Vilard (NGR). Wilson et al. (2010) studied the performance of ?Seyval Blanc? grown in Kentucky. It produced a cluster weight of 219 g, and the berry weight of 1.94 g, and the fruit soluble solids content (SSC) was 23.7%. Another long-term study investigated ?Seyval Blanc?s productivity and fruit quality in the Ozark region of Misouri. Based on overal productivity (yield, pruning weight, juice composition), it was one of the wine cultivars best suited for the region (Kaps and Odneal, 2010). Yield per vine of ?Seyval Blanc? for the period 1989 to 1994 was 11.5 kg. ?Seyval Blanc? combined higher yield with a good balance in wine quality, and it has become widely planted in Misouri. Vine pruning weights were generaly low to moderate in the Ozark region because the shalow soil profile typical for this region restricted vine growth. Pruning weight per vine was 1.1 kg. ?Seyval Blanc? average cluster weight was 300 g, which represented the largest clusters among the cultivars tested. This cultivar required crop thinning to balance fruit production and 26 vine growth in high crop load years. ?Seyval Blanc?s fruit produced SSC of 19.8%, which is aceptable for wine production acording to a study conducted by Kaps and Odneal (2001). ?Vilard Blanc? is a French-American hybrid cultivar developed by crossing Seibel 6468 and Seibel 6905 (NGR). ?Vilard Blanc? was planted on the Texas South Plains during 1974- 1986 (Lipe and Davenport, 1988). It had a SSC of 20.7%, and a berry size of 2.56 g. ?Black Spanish?, also known as ?Lenoir?, is a cultivar of the American Vitis aestivalis Michx species of grape vine native to Texas (Rombough, 2002). ?Black Spanish? is a vigorous vine with large, dark green foliage and smal black berries (Munson, 1909). It has resistance to phylloxera and PD (Rombough, 2002). It does not lose acidity in the heat, so it makes a decent quality red wine in hot areas. ?Favorite? is a clone of ?Black Spanish? developed by John Neiderauer in Brenham, Texas. This grape has higher yields and is even more disease resistant than ?Black Spanish? (Rombough, 2002). Acording to Hedrick (1907), ?Cynthiana? (V. aestivalis) was found growing in the wild in Arkansas. ?Cynthiana? prefers sandy or gravely loam soils. It has phylloxera resistance and is also used as a rootstock. Fruit ripens very late and keeps wel on the medium and smal clusters. Berries are smal, having no value as table grapes, but ?Cynthiana? is considered good for table wine production (Hedrick, 1907). Reisch et al. (1993) reported that there is no significant diference betwen ?Norton? and ?Cynthiana? via isozyme and botanical analyses and suggested that ?Norton? and ?Cynthiana? might be cultivars derived from the same clonal source. 27 ?Champanel? is an American hybrid cultivar of V. champini and V. labrusca. It has high resistance to heat and drought. ?Champanel? produces large, black and juicy berries (Munson, 1909). It is reported to have resistance to anthracnose (Mortensen, 1981) and tolerance of PD (Kamas et al., 2000). Acording to Stover (1954), ?Lake Emerald? was developed by the University of Florida breding program by crossing native ?Pixiola? (V. simpsoni) and ?Golden Muscat? (hybrids from V. labrusca and V. vinifera), so it is an American hybrid cultivar having vinifera background. It produces clusters of 184 g and berries with 18% sugar content (Halbrooks and Mortensen, 1989). ?Lake Emerald? is resistant to black rot, downy mildew, and tolerant of PD. ?Stover? is another hybrid cultivar developed by the University of Florida breeding program. It is resistant to PD, downy mildew, and moderately resistant to black rot, but susceptible to anthracnose and powdery mildew in Florida (Mortensen, 1968). Clusters are medium size and the sugar content is 17-18% with a mild taste. ?Conquistador? is a multipurpose, self-fertile Florida hybrid cultivar having V. aestivalis and ?Concord? parentage (Mortensen, 1983). Vine growth is moderate. The clusters are 118 g and the slipskin type berries are 2.5 g. Unevenly ripened berries appear in bunches occasionaly, and some bunches mature later than others. ?Conquistador? is resistant to PD and somewhat resistant to anthracnose, downy mildew, and black rot. Mortensen (1987) describes Florida-grown ?Blanc du Bois? as an early ripening French- American hybrid cultivar for wine making with a cluster size of 133 g, and a berry weight of 2.9 28 g. Berries are round, light green, slipskin, juicy, with a muscat flavor. The number of seds per berry is 3.2. ?Blanc du Bois? is reported to have resistance to PD, rarely showing symptoms. It is also resistant to downy mildew and grape leaf folder (Desmia funeralis Hubner). ?Blanc du Bois? is susceptible to anthracnose, black rot and ripe rot, but these could be managed by spraying preventively with fungicides. Science based information is lacking on the performance of American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars in Alabama. Data about their growing requirements, cropping potential, and eficient pest control management in Alabama would be very beneficial to the grape growing industry in the state and the entire southeastern region, as the consumers? demand for high quality, localy produced table and wine grapes is increasing. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of PD tolerant American and French-American bunch grape cultivars in Alabama?s environment to gain science-based empirical information on their productivity, fruit quality, PD resistance and longevity, and to provide grape growers with recommendations on cultivar selection as a means to expand and sustain the grape growing industry. Materials and Methods An experimental vineyard was established in 2008 at the Sand Mountain Research and Extension Center (SMREC) in Crossvile, AL (lat. 34.287449 N, long. -85.972073E), USDA Plant Hardines Zone 7A (USDA Plant Hardines Zone Map, 2012). It consists of 11 American 29 and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars including: ?Black Spanish?, ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Champanel?, ?Conquistador?, ?Cynthiana?, ?Favorite?, ?Lake Emerald?, ?Seyval Blanc?, ?Seyval Blanc? grafted on Coudrec 3309 rootstock (?Seyval Blanc?/3309C), ?Stover?, and ?Vilard Blanc?. Al experimental vines were two-year-old rooted cutting, except ?Seyval Blanc? which was also two-year-old grafted on Couderc 3309 rootstock. The soil in the SMREC is Hartsels fine sandy loam (USDA Web Soil Survey, 2012). The experimental design for this vineyard was a randomized complete block design with 4 blocks and 4 individual plants per cultivar, per block. Standard commercial practices were implemented for the planting and maintenance of the vines (Poling, 2007). Supplemental irrigation was instaled to ensure a succesful plant establishment and production using drip tape. Irrigation was provided during the growing season acording to the weather conditions. The emiters delivered water rate at 3.785 liters per hour, and the system operated betwen two and four hours per day as needed. The irrigation was stil operated at veraison stage, because the cultivars had diferent veraison progresion. The irrigation was maintained to make sure the experiment condition was uniform. Cultivar shoot development was determined by counting the number of fully developed leaves per shoot after bud break. In 2011, the number of fully developed leaves per shoot per vine was visualy rated on March 27 th and April 5 th . In 2012, six shoots per vine were chosen and the number of fully developed leaves per shoot were counted on March 21 st , March 26 th , April 1 st , and April 8 th . After bud break, six shoots were chosen and flagged on each vine as follows: two 30 shoots located at the distant part of each cordon, two shoots located in the middle part of each cordon, and two shoots located in the basal part of each cordon. In 2011, the percentage of open flowers per vine was rated visually on May 14 th and May 20 th . In 2012, six clusters per vine were chosen and the number of open flowers per cluster were counted on April 23 rd , April 29 th , and May 8 th to determine flowering progresion. A flower was considered fully open when the pistil and stamens were observed. Six clusters were chosen and flagged on each vine as follows: two clusters located at the distant part of each cordon; two clusters located in the middle part of each cordon, and two clusters located in the basal part of each cordon. To determine the cultivar vegetative growth and vigor characteristics, vine pruning weight, trunk cross sectional area (TCSA), leaf area and leaf chlorophyll levels were measured. Dormant pruning was done at bud break on March 1 st , 2011 and March 7 th , 2012, respectively. Each experimental vine was pruned to sever spurs per cordon with two buds on each spur for a total number of 30 buds per vine (Rombough, 2002). Pruned wood per vine was collected and the individual pruning weight per vine was recorded by using an Adam CPWplus-35 scale (Adam Equipment Inc, Danbury, CT, USA). The vine trunk diameter was measured at 20 cm above the ground level using a digital caliper (Serial No. 0107312, Mitutoyo Corporation, Kawasaki, Japan) to determine the TCSA. To determine the leaf area per vine, 10 recently mature leaves per vine were collected in mid-July and measured with a Licor LI-3100 area meter (Lincoln, NB, USA). Mature leaves 31 located at least 5 nodes back from the terminal bud of the shoot apex were used. The relative amount of chlorophyll was measured with a SPAD-502 Plus chlorophyll meter (Konica Minolta Sensing, INC, Osaka, Japan) on 10 leaves per experimental vine to evaluate the cultivar chlorophyll content. To determine the number of fruiting clusters per shoot, six shoots per vine were marked and the number of clusters per shoot were counted. Six shoots were chosen on each vine as follows: two shoots located at the distant part of each cordon, two shoots located in the middle part of each cordon, and two shoots located in the basal part of each cordon. Veraison progresion was determined by visual rating the percentage of berries per vine turning color on July 6 th , July 15 th , July 25 th , and August 1 st in 2011; and on June 19 th , June 22 nd , July 2 nd , July 8 th , July 13 th , July 20 th , and July 27 th in 2012, respectively. Experimental vines were hand-harvested during August in 2011 and from mid-July to late August in 2012. Total yield per vine was measured for each experimental vine on each harvest date using an Adam CPWplus-35 scale. A subsample of five clusters per vine was collected at harvest to determine cluster weight using an Adventurer Pro digital scale (Adventurer Pro AV4101, Ohaus Corporation, Pine Brook, NJ, USA). A subsample of 50 berries was also collected from each experimental vine to determine berry weight using an Adventurer Pro digital scale. The berries were placed in a cooler and kept at 4 ?C until further analysis was performed. 32 Fruit quality analysis was performed by measuring berry soluble solids content (SSC), titratable acidity (TA), and pH. SC was determined by squeezing the juice from ten berries per vine and filtering the liquid with Veratec Graphic Arts cheesecloth (BBA Nonwovens, Simpsonvile, SC, USA). The extracted juice was analyzed using a digital refractometer (Pal-1 Atago, Co., Tokyo, Japan) to determine the percent brix at room temperature. Titratable acidity (TA) was measured by using a DL 15 Titrator (Metler-Toledo, LC, Columbus, OH). One mililiter of grape juice was diluted to 40 ml of solution, titrated by 0.1 N NaOH, with an endpoint of pH 8.2. Results were expresed as grams of tartaric acid equivalent per 100 ml extracted juice. The juice pH was measured in the initial titration procedure. PD symptom expresions, including leaf scorching, ?matchstick?, and ?green island?, were visualy rated after harvest using the following scale in 2011: 0 = no symptoms; 1 = 1 to 20% leaves with scorching; 2 = 21 to 40% leaves with scorching; 3 = 41 to 60% leaves with scorching; 4 = 61 to 80% leaves with scorching; 5 = 81 to 100% leaves with scorching. In 2012, 10 petioles per vine were collected from the basal part of each cordon to conduct serological tests to determine Xylela fastidiosa infections. Samples were submited to the Auburn University Plant Diagnostic Lab and ELISA test was conducted using Agdia ELISA kits (Agdia, Inc, USA), and following manufacturer?s recommendations. Follow-up PCR tests were utilized to confirm positive X.f. infections. Analysis of variance was performed on al data using PROC GLIMMIX in SAS version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). The experimental design was a randomized complete block 33 design. The homogeneity of variance asumption for ANOVA was tested for al responses using the COVTEST statement. Appropriate correction for heterogeneity of variance was applied where needed using the GROUP option on the RANDOM statement in PROC GLIMMIX. For data collected in 2011 and 2012 including pruning weight, TCSA, leaf area, leaf chlorophyll level, the number of fruiting clusters per shoot, yield per vine, average cluster weight, mean berry weight, SC, TA and pH, the two years and blocks were analyzed as random variables. Where data were collected over time including shoot development, seasonal flowering, and veraison progresion, a factorial treatment design was used with cultivars and time as main efects. Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate mean separation test because of mising data. Linear and quadratic polynomial contrasts were used to determine trends over weks. Al data presented are least squares means. Al significances were at ?=0.05. 34 Results Experimental cultivars studied showed diferences in vine pruning weights in both seasons (Table 1). ?Champanel? had the highest pruning weight of 3.0 kg/vine. ?Seyval Blanc? had the lowest pruning weight of 0.3 kg/vine. The remaining cultivars had the pruning weights ranging from 0.4 to 1.6 kg/vine. The cultivars difered in trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) (Table 1). ?Champanel? had the largest TCSA with 9.5 cm 2 , followed by ?Vilard Blanc? of 8.8 cm 2 , and ?Stover? of 7.6 cm 2 . These cultivars also had higher pruning weight. ?Seyval Blanc? had the smalest TCSA with 4.4 cm 2 , which also corresponded to its low pruning weight. The cultivars difered in leaf chlorophyll content (Table 2). ?Favorite? and ?Black Spanish? had the highest leaf chlorophyll levels of 41.5 and 40.7, respectively. ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had the lowest chlorophyll levels of 33.4. The remaining cultivars had leaf chlorophyll levels ranging from 34.0 to 38.1. The cultivars difered in leaf area (Table 2). ?Favorite? and ?Cynthiana? had the largest leaf area of 142.8 cm 2 and 141.1 cm 2 , respectively. ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Stover?, ?Seyval Blanc?, and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had the smalest leaf area ranging from 79.3 to 88.9 cm 2 . The remaining cultivars had the leaf area ranging from 93.3 to 136.8 cm 2 . The cultivars had diferences in early season shoot development in 2011 (Figure 1). ?Stover? had the earliest shoot development with 2.5 fully developed leaves on March 27 th . It 35 also had the greatest number of fully developed leaves on April 5 th . ?Champanel? and ?Cynthiana? had relatively late shoot development. The cultivars difered in early season shoot development in 2012 (Figure 2). ?Stover? and ?Conquistador? had the earliest shoot development on March 21 st , with 2.8 and 2.4 fully developed leaves, respectively. ?Champanel? and ?Cynthiana? had relatively late shoot development, which started on March 26 th . Al the cultivars had more than 4 fully developed leaves on April 8 th . The flowering season difered among cultivars in 2011 (Figure 3). ?Stover?, ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had early flowering with more than 72% open flowers on May 14 rd , and they developed 100% open flowers on May 20 th . For ?Cynthiana?, ?Blanc du Bois?, and ?Lake Emerald?, the flowering season started later and vines only developed 11-17% open flowers on May 20 th . The flowering season difered among cultivars in 2012 (Figure 4). ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Stover? had early flowering with 25% and 23% open flowers on April 23 rd , and they developed 93% and 96% open flowers on April 29 th . For ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald?, the flowering season started after April 29 th . The cultivars varied in number of fruiting clusters per shoot (Table 3). ?Vilard Blanc?, ?Cynthiana?, ?Lake Emerald?, and ?Stover? had the highest number of clusters per shoot ranging from 2.3 to 2.4. ?Blanc du Blois? had the lowest number of fruiting clusters per shoot (1.3). The remaining cultivars produced betwen 1.8 and 2.0 fruiting clusters per shoot. 36 The cultivars difered in veraison progresion in 2011 (Figure 5). ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Seyval Blanc?, and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had early veraison progresion. They had 80% veraison on July 15 th . ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? were the late ripening cultivars. The American and French-American cultivars difered in veraison progresion in 2012 (Figure 6). ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C and ?Seyval Blanc? started veraison early, on June 19 th with veraison progresion of 31% and 37%, respectively, and they reached 100% veraison on July 8 th . ?Lake Emerald? was the latest cultivar starting veraison on July 27 th with 10% berries changing color. The season of maturity varied for cultivars in our test in 2011 (Figure 7). ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C were very early ripening cultivars that matured on August 1 st in 2011. ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Stover? and ?Vilard Blanc? matured early, on August 8 th and August 10 th , respectively in 2011. ?Black Spanish?, ?Cynthiana?, and ?Lake Emerald? ripened late, and were harvested on August 30 th . Period of ripening varied in 2012 (Figure 8). ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C matured very early and were harvested on July 18 th . Due to the unusual warm spring season in 2012, grape ripening was advanced by about two weks, but cultivars followed a similar ripening patern as in 2011. ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C had the earliest ripening in both seasons, while ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? had a consistently late maturity. The remaining cultivars matured in mid-August. 37 The cultivars difered in total yield per vine in both study seasons (Table 4). The highest yielding cultivar was ?Vilard Blanc? with 12.7 kg/vine. The lowest yielding cultivar was ?Conquistador? of 2.0 kg/vine. The remaining cultivars were intermediate in yield, betwen 2.9 and 7.6 kg/vine. ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc/3309C? had an estimated 30% yield loss due to green June beetle (Cotinis nitida Linnaeus) damage in both seasons. Green June beetle damage was recorded for ?Blanc du Bois? in 2011, resulting in about 30% yield loss. Additionaly, bunch rot [Botryotinia cinerea (De Bary) Whezel] damage occurred on ?Blanc du Bois? clusters during the flowering period that resulted in complete crop loss in 2012. The low crop of ?Conquistador? was mainly due to powdery mildew damage that occurred prior to harvest in 2011. Rainy weather delayed ?Conquistador? harvest in 2012 and also resulted in 80% loss due to over ripe fruit. The cultivars difered in cluster weight (Table 4). ?Vilard Blanc? produced the largest clusters with weight of 287.06 g. ?Seyval Blanc?, ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C, ?Black Spanish?, and ?Favorite? had cluster weights betwen 153.28 and 180.04 g. The remaining cultivars produced smaler clusters ranging from 73.8 to 113.95 g. PD tolerant hybrid cultivars difered in berry weight (Table 4). ?Champanel? produced the largest berries with a weight of 4.8 g, followed by ?Blanc du Bois? (3.3 g) and ?Vilard Blanc? (3.1 g). ?Cynthiana? (1.5 g) and ?Conquistador? (1.4 g) produced the smalest berries. 38 Our results suggested that cultivars difered in fruit pH (Table 5). ?Blanc du Bois? and ?Stover? had the highest pH of 3.58 and 3.49, respectively. ?Champanel? had the lowest juice pH of 3.25. The cultivars also difered in soluble solids content (SSC) (Table 5). ?Cynthiana? had the highest SSC of 19.8% at harvest, while ?Champanel? had the lowest sugar content of 13.1%. No diferences were found in fruit titratable acidity (TA) among the cultivars (Table 5). The TA ranged from 0.56 to 1.36 g/100 ml. PD symptoms were not observed in 2011 (data not shown). In 2012, PD symptoms, including leaf scorching, matchsticks, and green islands were found on several cultivars (Table 6). ELISA tests showed that three vines of ?Lake Emerald?, and one vine of ?Champanel? were positive for Xylela fastidiosa infection. PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) is much more sensitive than ELISA (about 100 times). When developing a protocol for a specific pathogen, al organisms in existence cannot be tested for cross-reaction (especialy those that have not been identified), so a certain amount of false positives can be expected. A false positive is when the test picks up a non-target organism. We had several positive samples, so the test was picking up the enzyme of another organism very similar to Xylella fastidiosa either on, or in the plant tissue. PCR is a very sensitive method of detection because it is designed to identify a specific segment of the organisms DNA/RNA that is targeted because this segment is unique only to the target organism. The follow-up PCR analysis revealed that there were no Xylela fastidiosa infected vines in our study. 39 Discusion ?Champanel? had the largest pruning weight and the largest TCSA, which suggested ?Champanel? had the most vigorous vegetative growth among al studied cultivars in both seasons. ?Seyval Blanc? had the lowest pruning weight and its vines also produced the smalest TCSA, which indicated ?Seyval Blanc? had the weakest vine vigor. Kaps and Odneal (2010) also found that Misouri - grown ?Seyval Blanc? had a low to moderate pruning weight of 1.1 kg/vine. Modification of pruning for an optimal crop load and vigor wil be needed for ?Seyval Blanc?. Reynolds et al. (1986) reported that ?Seyval Blanc? vines should be thinned to a density in the range of 12-19 shoots/months of row to obtain a desirable canopy. ?Stover? had the earliest shoot development in both 2011 and 2012. This observation is in agreement with Mortensen (1968) who suggested that ?Stover? responded to warmer spring temperatures prior to other cultivars and had the highest number of fully expanded leaves per shoot early. Cultivars in our study were harvested depending on fruit color, sugar acumulation, and flavor development. ?Seyval Blanc? and ?Seyval Blanc/3309C? had the earliest ripening in both seasons, while ?Cynthiana? and ?Lake Emerald? were late ripening cultivars. Wolf (2008) also stated that ?Seyval Blanc? had early ripening in New York. Information about the horticultural characteristics and performance of ?Vilard Blanc? in various environments is recently very scarce. Our research suggested that ?Vilard Blanc? had 40 good vegetative growth and excelent crop productivity, producing the highest yield and largest cluster size in the North Alabama environment. ?Champanel? produced the largest berries in both 2011 and 2012 in comparison to al the other American and French-American hybrid grape cultivars tested. Similarly, Munson (1909) also reported that ?Champanel? had large berries. For wine procesing cultivars, a SC of 20 to 24 % after fermentation yields an aceptable alcohol level for a good quality table wine (Amerine et al., 1980). A titratable acidity (TA) of 0.65 to 0.80 g/100 ml is also desirable for producing a good table wine depending on the color and style. A grape juice pH of 3.4 or below at these SC and TA levels is desirable to obtain microbial stability in wine. In our study, the pH of tested cultivars was around 3.4, which suggested al cultivars produced fruit with an aceptable pH level, but had a relatively low SC when compared to the desirable level. The reason for low SC perhaps was the rainy weather prior to harvest in Alabama. ?Blanc du Bois?, ?Seyval Blanc?, and ?Seyval Blanc?/3309C produced fruit with TA within the desirable range. Empirical information on the performance of American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars in Alabama?s high PD risk environment was obtained in this study. ?Black Spanish? and ?Favorite? performed similarly in our study, but vineyard management for ?Favorite? was more dificult than ?Black Spanish? because ?Favorite? had thicker canopy and more root suckers, which required additional labor for proper canopy management. ?Black Spanish? ?Cynthiana?, and ?Vilard Blanc?, were the best performing cultivars in our study based 41 on vegetative growth and fruit productivity and quality. Multiple years? observations are needed to fully evaluate the selected cultivars before sound recommendations can be made to the grape industry. More detailed studies wil be needed to investigate cultivar vine canopy management and adjust the crop load, and to ases the cultivar PD tolerance. 42 Literature Cited Amerine, M.A., R.E. Kunkee, C.S. Ough, V.L. Singleton, and A.D. Webb. 1980. The Technology of Wine Making. AVI Publishing Co. Inc. Westport, CT. Clark, J.R. 2003. Grape growing at the University of Arkansas: approaching forty years of progres. Proc. VIIIth IC on Grape. Acta Hort. 603, ISHS. 357-360 Feil, H. and A.H. Purcel. 2001. Temperature-dependent growth and survival of Xylela fastidiosa in vitro and in potted grapevines. Plant Disease 85:1230-1234. Halbrooks, M.C. and J.A. Mortensen. 1989. Origin and significance of Florida hybrid bunch grapes and rootstocks. HortScience 24:546-550. Hedrick, U.P. 1907. The Grapes of New York. (Fiftenth annual report. Department of Agriculture, State of New York.) Albany, J. B. Lyon, State Printer. Hil, B.L. and A.H. Purcel. 1997. Populations of Xylela fastidiosa in plants required for transmision by an eficient vector. Phytopathology 87:1197-1201. Hopkins, D.L. and H.H. Mollenhauer. 1973. Ricketsia-like bacterium asociated with Pierce's disease of grapes. Science 179:298-300. Hopkins, D.L. 1976. Pierce?s disease of grapevines. Am. Wine Soc. J. 8:26-27. Hopkins, D.L. and A.H. Purcel. 2002. Xylela fastidiosa: cause of Pierce?s disease of grapevine and other emergent disease. Plant Disease 86:1056-1066. 43 Kamas, J., M. Black, D. Appel, and L. T. Wilson. 2000. Management of Pierce?s disease in Texas. Texas Agricultural Extension Service. L-5383. Kaps, M.L., and M.B. Odneal. 2001. Grape cultivar performance in the Misouri Ozark region. J. Amer. Pomol. Soc. 55:34-44. Lipe, W.N. and D. Davenport. 1988. Grape cultivar performance on the Texas South Plains, 1974-1986. Texas A&M University. Ma, X., E. Coneva, H. Fadamiro, J.F. Murphy, C. Ray and F. Dane. 2010. Seasonal occurrence and abundance of sharpshooter leafhoppers in Alabama orchards and vineyards. International Journal of Fruit Science 10:341-354. Mortensen, J.A. 1968. Stover: An early bunch grape for central Florida. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-195. Mortensen, J.A. 1981. Sources of resistance to anthracnose. J. Hered. 72:423-426. Mortensen, J.A. 1983. Conquistador: a purple bunch grape for Florida. Circular S-300. Mortensen, J.A. 1987. Blanc du Bois: A Florida bunch grape for white wine. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-340. Munson, T.V. 1909. Foundations of American Grape Culture. Orange Judd Co., NY. NGR. National Grape Registry. Supported by University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Foundation Plant Services, and National Clonal Germplasm Repository of the USDA Agriculture Research Service. Available at: http:/ngr.ucdavis.edu 44 Pierce, N.B. 1892. The California Vine Disease. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Division of Vegetable Pathology. Bulletin No. 2. Poling, B. 2007. The North Carolina Winegrape Grower?s Guide. North Carolina State University. Available at: http:/cals.ncsu.edu/hort_sci/extension/wine_grape.php Purcel, A.H. 1980. Environmental therapy for Pierce?s disease of grapevines. Plant Disease 64:388-390. Reisch, B.I., R.N. Goodman, M-H. Martens, and N.F. Weden.1993. The relationship betwen Norton and Cynthiana red wine cultivars derived from vitis aestivalis. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 44:441-444. Reynolds, A.G., R.M. Pool, and L.R. Matick. 1986. Efect of shoot density and crop control on growth, yield, fruit composition and wine quality of ?Seyval Blanc? grapevines. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 111:55-63. Rombough, L. 2002. The Grape Grower: A Guide to Organic Viticulture. Chelsea Green Publishing. White River Junction, VT. Stevenson, J.F., M.A. Mathews, and T.L. Rost. 2005. The developmental anatomy of Pierce?s disease symptoms in grapevines: green islands and matchsticks. Plant Disease 89:543-548. Stover, L.H. 1954. The Lake Emerald grape. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-68. Sutton, T.B. 2005. Progres report: Pierce?s disease risk zones in the Southeast. North Carolina State University. Available at: 45 http:/ww.smalfruits.org/SRSFCReserchFunding/Research05/Sutton_ProgresReport05.pd f USDA Plant Hardines Zone Map. 2012. USDA Agricultural Research Service. Available at: http:/planthardines.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/# USDA Web Soil Survey. 2012. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available at: http:/websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm Wilson, P., J. Wheeler, and S. Lynch. 2010. Wine and Table Grape Cultivar Evaluation Trial in Kentucky. Fruit and Vegetable Research Report. University of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. PR-608. Winkler, A.J., J.A. Cook, W.M. Kliewer, and L.A. Lider. 1974. General Viticulture. University of California Pres. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA. Wolf, T.K. 2008. Winegrape production guide for eastern North America. Natural Resources. Agr. Eng. Serv., Ithaca, NY. 46 Table 1. Comparison of vine pruning weight and trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Pruning weight (kg/vine) TCSA (cm 2 ) Champanel 3.0 y a x 9.5 a Lake Emerald 1.6 ab 6.9 cd Blanc du Bois 1.4 ab 6.2 cde Vilard Blanc 1.4 ab 8.8 ab Stover 1.3 ab 7.6 abc Conquistador 1.0 ab 4.6 ef Favorite 0.8 ab 6.9 cd Cynthiana 0.8 ab 5.4 def Black Spanish 0.8 ab 7.2 bc Seyval Blanc/3309C 0.4 ab 7.5 bc Seyval Blanc 0.3 b 4.4 f z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 47 Table 2. Comparison of leaf chlorophyll content and leaf area of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Leaf chlorophyll content Leaf area (cm 2 ) Favorite 41.5 y a x 142.8 a Black Spanish 40.7 a 136.8 ab Conquistador 38.1 b 119.3 bc Cynthiana 37.8 b 141.1 a Lake Emerald 36.6 bc 110.3 cd Champanel 35.8 cd 129.9 ab Blanc du Bois 34.6 de 88.9 e Vilard Blanc 34.0 de 93.3 de Stover 34.0 de 84.9 e Seyval Blanc 33.4 e 79.3 e Seyval Blanc/3309C 33.4 e 80.7 e z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 48 Table 3. Comparison of number of fruiting clusters per shoot of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Number of fruiting clusters per shoot Vilard Blanc 2.4 y a x Cynthiana 2.3 a Lake Emerald 2.3 a Stover 2.3 ab Conquistador 2.0 bc Seyval Blanc/3309C 2.0 cd Sevyal Blanc 2.0 cd Favorite 2.0 cd Black Spanish 1.9 cd Champanel 1.8 d Blanc du Bois 1.3 e z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 49 Table 4. Comparison of yield per vine, cluster weight, and berry weight of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Yield (kg/vine) Cluster weight (g) Berry weight (g) Vilard Blanc 12.7 y a x 287.06 a 3.1 b Black Spanish 7.6 b 155.41 b 1.8 ef Favorite 7.6 b 153.28 b 1.7 fg Seyval Blanc 6.1 bc 180.04 b 2.0 de Cynthiana 5.7 bcd 113.95 c 1.5 g Stover 5.5 bcd 80.19 c 2.5 c Seyval Blanc/3309C 5.2 cd 163.65 b 2.0 d Champanel 4.0 cde 109.36 c 4.8 a Lake Emerald 3.0 de 100.76 c 1.6 fg Blanc du Bois 2.9 de 105.78 c 3.3 b Conquistador 2.0 e 73.81 c 1.4 g z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 50 Table 5. Comparison of fruit pH, soluble solids content (SSC), and titratable acidity (TA) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar pH SSC (% Brix) TA (g/100 ml) Blanc du Bois 3.58 y a x 16.7 c 0.77 Stover 3.49 a 17.3 bc 0.56 Black Spanish 3.44 ab 18.3 b 1.36 Conquistador 3.43 ab 16.7 c 0.90 Cynthiana 3.43 ab 19.8 a 1.01 Sevyal Blanc 3.42 ab 16.5 c 0.74 Lake Emerald 3.35 ab 18.8 ab 1.13 Favorite 3.34 ab 18.5 b 1.28 Vilard Blanc 3.33 ab 16.3 c 0.85 Seyval Blanc/3309C 3.32 ab 17.4 bc 0.75 Champanel 3.25 b 13.1 d 1.06 z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 51 Table 6. Comparison of Pierce's disease symptoms of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. Leaf scorching scale z Matchsticks y Green islands Blanc du Bois 0 N N Black Spanish 1 Y Y Champanel 1 Y Y Conquistador 1 Y N Cynthiana 0 N N Favorite 1 Y Y Lake Emerald 1 Y Y Seyval Blanc/3309C 0 N N Seyval Blanc 0 N N Stover 1 Y N Vilard Blanc 1 Y N z 0 = no symptoms; 1 = 1 to 20% leaves with scorching; 2 = 21 to 40% leaves with scorching; 3 = 41 to 60% leaves with scorching; 4 = 61 to 80% leaves with scorching; 5 = 81 to 100% leaves with scorching; y Y=Yes N=No 52 Figure 1. Comparison of early season shoot development of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. 53 Figure 2. Comparison of early season shoot development of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. 54 Figure 3. Comparison of percent open flowers of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. 55 Figure 4. Comparison of percent open flowers of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French- American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. 56 Figure 5. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. 57 Figure 6. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. 58 Figure 7. Season of ripening of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2011. 59 Figure 8. Season of ripening of Pierce?s disease tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars grown at the SMREC, Crossvile, AL, in 2012. 60 Chapter Thre: Feasibility of Growing Advanced Grape Selections Developed by the University of Arkansas Breding Program in Alabama Abstract Three recently released sedles table grape cultivars ?Hope?, ?Joy?, and ?Gratitude?; two previously released cultivars ?Mars?, and ?Neptune?; and eight advanced grape selections from the University of Arkansas breeding program ?A2817?, ?A2245?, ?A2359?, ?A2467?, ?A2574?, ?A2602?, ?A2632?, and ?A2786? were planted at the North Alabama Horticultural Research Center (NAHRC) in Cullman, AL in 2008 to study the feasibility of growing advanced table and procesing grape selections in the Alabama environment. Two Pierce?s disease (PD) tolerant cultivars ?Conquistador? and ?Stover? were also included as controls. Vegetative growth, cropping potential and fruit quality of the tested cultivars and selections were evaluated during 2011 and 2012 seasons. Our results indicate that ?Joy? (A2494) had the most vigorous vegetative growth, while ?A2786? had the least. ?Stover? had the earliest shoot and flower development in both seasons. Selection ?A2359? had 3.5 fruiting clusters per shoot that was the highest fruiting cluster number among al the cultivars and selections. ?Mars? and ?Faith? were early ripening and early maturing, while ?Conquistador? started to develop late in the season. The highest yielding selections and cultivars recorded were ?A2574?, ?A2359?, ?Neptune?, ?A2245?, and ?Conquistador? that produced 12.0 kg/vine or higher in both experimental years. Sedles table grape cultivars ?Gratitude? and ?Neptune? had the largest cluster size of 490 g. ?Gratitude? and ?A2817? produced the largest berries of 4.9 g. ?A2632? had the highest soluble solids content, while ?Conquistador? had the lowest sugar concentration at harvest. Fruit pH level of al cultivars 61 and selections ranged from 3.28 to 3.95. ?A2817? had the highest number of sed traces, 3.2, while ?Gratitude? had the lowest number of sed traces. ?A2602?, ?A2817? and ?Mars? were found to have positive infection for Xylela fastidiosa (X.f.) when ELISA asay was employed, but the follow-up PCR tests did not confirm X.f. infected vines. Based on our results, ?Neptune? and ?Gratitude? were the best performing sedles table grape cultivars based on their vegetative growth, cropping potential, and fruit quality. Introduction The continental climate of areas east of the Rocky Mountains with hot, wet summers and cold, dry winters, and some native North American pests such as the phylloxera (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae Fitch) and bacterial diseases have prevented Vitis vinifera cultivars from developing and surviving in the eastern United States (Clark, 2003). The grapes now grown succesfully in the eastern United States are cultivars selected from the native species, such as ?Concord?; hybrids of native species, such as ?Clinton?; and hybrids of native species with varieties of V. vinifera, such as ?Delaware? (Winkler et al., 1974; Hedrick, 1907). The University of Arkansas breeding program was begun in 1964 with a focus on the development of table grape cultivars. The table grape is defined as a grape developed exclusively for the table market with the major characteristics such as sedlesnes, crisp texture, and edible skin that can be consumed easily with no discarding of skins or other inedible components (Clark, 2010). Released from the program were the sedles table grape cultivars ?Venus? (1977), ?Reliance? (1983), ?Mars? (1985), ?Saturn? (1989), ?Jupiter? (1999), ?Neptune? (1999) (Clark, 2003), ?Faith?, ?Hope?, ?Joy?, and ?Gratitude? (Clark, 2012). The major objectives in this eastern table grape improvement program includes improving the textures of both slipskin and non- 62 slipskin grape types that provide diferent mouth sensation to customers, development of sedles cultivars, fruit cracking resistance and winter hardines, wider flavor palet combined with crisp texture, and more elongated fruit shape (Clark, 2010). ?Mars? is a hybrid of V. labrusca and V. vinifera. It has demonstrated outstanding resistance to black rot, anthracnose, powdery mildew and downy mildew under minimum chemical disease control at the Arkansas agricultural experiment station in Clarksvile, AR (Moore, 1985). The average ripening date of ?Mars? is July 22 nd in central Arkansas. Fruit skins are medium thick and do not adhere to the flesh (non-skipskin). Fruit color is blue at maturity. The berry size is 3.5 g, which is considered large for a sedles grape cultivar. The flavor is strong and typicaly resembles V. labrusca species. Soluble solids content (SSC) of the fruit is medium (16%), but acid content is low and the fruit tastes swet (Moore, 1985). Fruit clusters are medium in size, wel-filed, and compact. Kaps and Odneal (2001) conducted a study to evaluate ?Mars? in the Ozark region of Missouri. Acording to the authors ?Mars? was one of the table grape cultivars best suited for the region based on overal productivity (yield, pruning weight, juice composition). Acording to the annual data from 1989 to 1994, the yield per vine of ?Mars? was 5.0 kg, which was considered an intermediate yield. The pruning weight of ?Mars? was 1.6 kg, and the cluster weigh was 143 g, which is considered a medium size cluster. ?Mars? had a SC of 16.2%. Early ripening blue colored ?Mars? berries were found to be susceptible to bird feding before SSC was high enough for harvesting the crop. ?Neptune? is a hybrid of V. labrusca and V. vinifera, and is the first advanced sedles white table grape developed by the University of Arkansas breeding program. ?Neptune? has demonstrated good resistance to black rot, anthracnose, and powdery mildew (Clark and Moore, 1999). The average ripening date of ?Neptune? is August 4 th in central Arkansas. The fruit is 63 yelow-green in color at maturity, and berries within a cluster are evenly colored. Fruit skin is moderately thick, and the pulp adheres to the skin of the berry, providing a non-slipskin texture. The berry size of ?Neptune? was medium and the berry weight was 2.5 g. The flavor is fruity and swet. Fruit SC was 19.7%. Fruit clusters were large in size (345 g), and wel-filed (Clark and Moore, 1999). Wilson et al. (2010) reported that Kentucky-grown ?Neptune? grapes were harvested on September 8, 2010, and produced a cluster weight of 340 g. Fruit sugar concentration of ?Neptune? was 21.8%, and the berry weight was 5.83 g. ?Faith? (A2412) is a blue, non-slipskin, sedles table grape with early ripening, late July to early August in Arkansas (Clark, 2012). Cluster weight ranged from 150 to 250 g, and berries were 4 g. SSC was 19% with neutral flavor. Some berries matured unevenly in some years. ?Joy? (A2494) is a blue, non-slipskin, sedles table grape that was harvested date on August 11 th in Arkansas (Clark, 2012). Cluster weight was 300 g, and berries were 3 g. The flavor is exceptional fruity. Shater of mature berries occurred in some years. ?Gratitude? (A2505) is a white, non-slipskin, sedles table grape (Clark, 2012). Cluster weight was up to 500 g, and berries were 3.5 g. Soluble solids content was 19% with exceptional crisp texture. The flavor is neutral, similar to Vitis vinifera table grapes. Newly developed grape selections have not been tested outside of Arkansas and information on their performance is not available. It is unknown if these newly released cultivars and selections posses resistance to the major grape pest in the southeast ? Pierce?s disease (PD). The demand for high quality, localy produced table and wine grapes from consumers, grape growers and winemakers is increasing. Science based information is lacking on the performance of recently released or existing sedles table grapes in Alabama?s high PD risk environment. Data about cultivar growing requirements, cropping potential, and fruit quality in 64 Alabama would be very beneficial to the grape growing industry in the state and the entire southeastern region. We hypothesized that sedles table grapes wil respond diferently in terms of their vegetative growth, cropping potential and fruit quality due the climatic conditions in Alabama. The main objective of the current study was to evaluate the performance of sedles table grapes in Alabama?s environment to gain science based empirical information on their productivity, such as fruit quality, PD resistance and longevity, and to provide grape growers with recommendations on cultivar selection as a means to expand and sustain the grape growing industry in the southeastern region of the nation. Materials and Methods: An experimental vineyard was established in 2008 at the North Alabama Horticulture Research Center (NAHRC) in Cullman, AL (long. 34.193559N, lat. -86.794975E), USDA Plant Hardines Zone 7B (USDA Plant Hardines Zone Map, 2012). Thirten cultivars and advanced table and procesing grape selections developed by the University of Arkansas breeding program, and another two PD tolerant American and French-American hybrid bunch grape cultivars were used in this study. The soil in the NAHRC is Hartsels sandy loam (USDA Web Soil Survey, 2012). The experimental design was a randomized complete block design with 4 blocks and 2 individual plants per cultivar, per block. The vines from were obtained as stem cuttings from the University of Arkansas and rooted at the Auburn University Paterson greenhouse, Auburn, AL under mist conditions. After 8 weks, the rooted cutting were transported to the NAHRC in Cullman, transplanted in 2-galon pots, and grown for the reminder of the season before planted in the open field in the fal. Standard commercial practices were implemented for the planting 65 and maintenance of the vines (Poling, 2007). Supplemental irrigation was instaled to ensure a succesful plant establishment and production using drip tape. Irrigation was provided during the growing season acording to the weather conditions. The emiters delivered water rate at 3.785 liters per hour, and the system operated betwen two and four hours per day as needed. The irrigation was stil operated at veraison stage, because the cultivars had diferent veraison progresion. The irrigation was maintained to make sure the experiment condition was uniform. Newly released sedles table grape cultivars ?Faith? (A2412), ?Joy? (A2494), and ?Gratitude? (A2505); one advanced selection ?A2817?; and two previously released sedles table grape cultivars ?Mars?, and ?Neptune? were used. Procesing grape selections were ?A2245?, ?A2359?, ?A2467?, ?A2574?, ?A2602?, ?A2632?, and ?A2786?. Procesing cultivars ?Conquistador? and ?Stover? were included as standards. In 2011, the average number of fully developed leaves per shoot per vine was rated visualy on March 27 th , April 5 th , and April 17 th . In 2012, six shoots per vine were chosen and the number of fully developed leaves per shoot were counted on March 21 st , March 26 th , April 2 st , and April 8 th to determine shoot development. After the bud brake, six shoots per vine were chosen and flagged as follows: two shoots located at the distal part of each cordon; two shoots located in the middle part of each cordon, and two shoots located in the basal part of each cordon. Grape flowering was determined by visual rating the percentage of fully open flowers. In 2011, the percentage of fully open flowers per vine was visually rated on May 1 th and May 20 th . In 2012, six clusters per vine were chosen and the percentage of fully open flowers per cluster was recorded on April 23 rd , April 29 th , and May 8 th to determine flowering progresion. A flower was considered fully open when the pistil and stamens were observed. Six clusters were chosen and flagged on each vine as follows: two clusters located at the distal part of each cordon; two 66 clusters located in the middle part of each cordon, and two clusters located in the basal part of each cordon. To determine cultivar vegetative growth and vigor characteristics, vine pruning weight, trunk cross sectional area (TCSA), vine leaf area and leaf chlorophyll content were measured. Dormant pruning was done at bud break on March 18 th in 2011 and March 6 th in 2012. Each vine was pruned to seven spurs per cordon with two buds on each spur for a total number of 30 buds per vine (Rombough, 2002). Pruned wood was collected and the individual pruning weight per vine was recorded by using an Adam CPWplus-35 scale (Adam Equipment Inc, Danbury, CT, USA). The vine trunk diameter was measured at 30 cm above the ground level using a digital caliper (Serial No. 0107312, Mitutoyo Corporation, Kawasaki, Japan), and was used to determine the TCSA. To determine the leaf area per vine, 10 recently matured leaves were collected in mid- July and measured with a Licor LI-3100 area meter (Lincoln, NB, USA). Mature leaves located at least five nodes back from the terminal bud of the shoot were used. Leaf chlorophyll content were taken on 10 leaves per vine with a SPAD-502 Plus chlorophyll meter (Konica Minolta Sensing, INC, Osaka, Japan) to evaluate the cultivar chlorophyll content. To determine the number of fruiting clusters per shoot, six shoots per vine were marked and the number of clusters per shoot was counted. Six shoots were chosen on each vine as follows: two shoots located at the distal part of each cordon; two shoots located in the middle part of each cordon, and two shoots located in the basal part of each cordon. Veraison progresion was determined by periodical visual rating of the percentage of berries per vine turning their color. Percentage of berries turning their color was evaluated on 67 July 11 th in 2011; and on June 12 th , June 22 nd , July 2 nd , July 8 th , July 13 th , July 20 th , and July 27 th in 2012. Vines were hand-harvested from mid-July until late August in both years. Total yield was measured for each experimental vine on each harvest date using an Adam CPWplus-35 scale. Five cluster subsamples per vine were collected at harvest to determine cluster weight using a digital scale (Adventurer Pro AV4101, Ohaus Corporation, Pine Brook, NJ, USA). Fifty berry subsamples were collected from each vine to determine the mean berry weight using a digital scale (Adventurer Pro AV4101, Ohaus Corporation, Pine Brook, NJ, USA). The berries were placed in a cooler and kept at 4 ?C for no more than 2 days before analysis. Fruit quality analysis was performed by measuring berry soluble solids content (SSC), titratable acidity, and pH. SC was determined by squeezing the juice from 10 berries per vine and filtering the liquid with Veratec Graphic Arts cheesecloth (BBA Nonwovens, Simpsonvile, SC, USA). The extracted juice was analyzed using a digital refractometer (Pal-1 Atago, Co., Tokyo, Japan) to determine the percent brix at a room temperature. Titratable acidity was measured by using a DL 15 Titrator (Metler-Toledo, LC, Columbus, OH). One mililiter of grape juice was diluted to 40 ml solution, titrated by 0.1 N NaOH, with an end point of pH 8.2. Results were expresed as grams of tartaric acid equivalent per 100 ml extracted juice. Juice pH was measured in the initial titration procedure. Pierce?s disease symptom expresions, including leaf scorching, ?matchstick?, and ?green island?, were visualy rated after harvest using the following scale in 2011: 0 = no symptoms; 1 = 1 to 20% leaves with scorching; 2 = 21 to 40% leaves with scorching; 3 = 41 to 60% leaves with scorching; 4 = 61 to 80% leaves with scorching; 5 = 81 to 100% leaves with scorching. In 2012, 10 petioles per vine were collected from the basal part of each cordon to conduct serological tests 68 to determine Xylela fastidiosa infections. Samples were submited to the Auburn University Plant Diagnostic Lab and ELISA test was conducted using Agdia ELISA kits (Agdia, Inc, USA), and following manufacturer?s recommendations. Follow-up PCR tests were utilized to confirm positive X.f. infections. Analysis of variance was performed on al data using PROC GLIMMIX in SAS version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). The experimental design was a randomized complete block design. The homogeneity of variance asumption for ANOVA was tested for al responses using the COVTEST statement. Appropriate correction for heterogeneity of variance was applied where needed using the GROUP option on the RANDOM statement in PROC GLIMMIX. For data collected in 2011 and 2012 including pruning weight, TCSA, leaf area, leaf chlorophyll level, the number of fruiting clusters per shoot, yield per vine, average cluster weight, mean berry weight, SC, TA and pH, the two years and blocks were analyzed as random variables. Where data were collected over time including shoot development, seasonal flowering, and veraison progresion, a factorial treatment design was used with cultivars and time as main efects. Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate mean separation test because of mising data. Linear and quadratic polynomial contrasts were used to determine trends over weks. Al data presented are least squares means. Al significances were at ?=0.05. 69 Results The cultivars and selections showed diferences in vine pruning weights (Table 1). Seedles table grape cultivar ?Joy? had the highest pruning weight of 3.0 kg/vine, followed by ?A2245? (2.7 kg/vine), ?A2632? (2.7 kg/vine), and ?Gratitude? (2.6 kg/vine). Selection ?A2786? had the lowest pruning weight of 0.9 kg/vine. The remaining cultivars and selections had the pruning weights ranging from 1.1 kg/vine to 2.4 kg/vine. The cultivars and selections difered in TCSA (Table 1). ?Stover? had the largest TCSA with 9.7 cm 2 , followed by ?A2467?, ?A2359?, ?A2245?, ?A2602?, and ?A2632? ranging from 7.3 cm 2 to 8.5 cm 2 . These selections also had high pruning weights. ?A2786? had the smalest TCSA of 4.6 cm 2 , which also corresponded to its lowest pruning weight among al the cultivars and selections studied. The table and procesing cultivars and selections difered in leaf area (Table 2). ?Faith?, ?Mars?, and ?Conquistador? had the largest leaf area of 168.4 cm 2 , 158.9 cm 2 , and 148.8 cm 2 , respectively. ?A2602? and ?A2359? had the smalest leaf area of 87.6 cm 2 and 82.4 cm 2 , respectively. The remaining cultivars and selections had the leaf area ranging from 91.8 cm 2 to 128.1 cm 2 . Newly developed cultivars and selections difered in leaf chlorophyll content (Table 2). ?Conquistador? and ?A2632? had the highest leaf chlorophyll level of 43.0 and 42.5, respectively. ?A2817? had the lowest chlorophyll level of 31.5. The cultivars and selections had diferences in early shoot development in 2011 (Figure 1). ?Stover? had the earliest shoot development with 0.8 fully developed leaves on March 27 th . ?Stover? also had the largest number of fully developed leaves on April 5 th and April 17 th of 2.2 70 and 5.9, respectively. ?Joy?, ?Gratitude?, ?A2632?, ?A2786?, ?A2817?, ?Conquistador?, and ?Mars? had relatively late shoot development beginning after April 5 th and grew the fewest number of fully developed leaves on April 17 th . Diferences in early shoot development were evident for the cultivars and selections tested in 2012 (Figure 2). ?Stover?, ?A2574?, and ?Faith? had the earliest shoot development on March 21 st , with 2.8, 2.5, and 2.2 fully developed leaves, respectively. ?Stover? also had a high number of fully developed leaves on March 26 th , April 2 rd , and April 8 th . ?Joy?, ?Gratitude?, ?A2632?, ?A2786?, and ?A2817? had relatively late shoot development and the lowest number of fully developed leaves on April 8 th ranging from 4.6 to 5.1. Sedles and procesing grape selections and cultivars difered in season of flowering in 2011 (Figure 3). ?Stover?, ?Faith?, and ?A2574? had early flowering with 77%, 72%, and 72% open flowers on May 11 th . ?A2786? and ?Conquistador? flowered late with 1% and 8% open flowers on May 20 th . Diferences in the percentage of open flowers were found among the selections and cultivars in 2012 (Figure 4). ?Stover? and ?A2574? flowered early in the season with 15% and 11% open flowers on April 23 rd , and these two cultivars developed more than 80% open flowers on April 29 th . ?A2602? flowered late with 50% open flowers on May 8 th , while the remaining selections and cultivars reached the stage of over 75% open flowers. Table and procesing cultivars and selections varied in number of fruiting clusters per shoot (Table 3). ?A2359? had the highest number of clusters per shoot with 3.5, followed by ?A2574? with 3.1 fruiting clusters per shoot. ?Gratitude? had the lowest number of fruiting clusters per shoot with 1.5. The number of fruiting clusters per shoot of the remaining cultivars and selections ranged from 1.6 to 2.9. 71 Diferences were observed among studied selections and cultivars in the percentage of veraison progresion in 2011 (Table 4). ?Mars? had the most advanced veraison with 97% berries turning red on July 11 th , followed by ?Faith? and ?A2467? with 60% and 56% maturing berries, respectively. Veraison started late in the season, on July 11 th , for ?Conquistador?, and ?Stover?. Cultivars and selections showed diferences in veraison progresion in 2012 (Figure 5). ?A2467? was the first selection to start maturing fruit with 13% of berries turning red on June 12 th , but the proces was extended over a long period of time and the selection did not achieve 100% veraison until July 20 th . Veraison was the most advanced for the sedles table grape ?Faith?, which reached 98% veraison on July 2 rd . ?Gratitude?, ?Mars?, and ?Neptune? also developed early in the season reaching 94% or higher fruit maturity on July 8 th . Veraison occurred late for ?Conquistador?, which had 63% of its berries turning red on July 27 th . In 2011, ?Faith?, ?A2467?, and ?Mars? were early maturing grapes that were harvested in mid-July (Figure 6). ?A2602? and ?Conquistador? were late maturing and harvested in late August. The remaining cultivars and selections were harvested from late July to early August. A tornado occurred on April 27 th , 2011 that damaged the selections ?Joy?, ?A2632?, and ?A2786?. These three selections had complete yield loss in 2011. In 2012, ?Faith? and ?Mars? ripened early in the season and were harvested in mid July (Figure 7). ?A2245?, ?A2359?, ?A2602?, ?A2632?, ?Conquistador?, and ?Stover? were late season cultivars and were harvested in mid August. The remaining cultivars and selections had intermediate ripening and were harvested at early August. Diferences were found for total yield per vine among the cultivars and selections in 2011 and 2012 (Table 5). The highest yielding selections and cultivars were ?A2574?, ?A2359?, ?Neptune?, ?A2245?, and ?Conquistador? with a yield ranging from 12.0 to 13.7 kg/vine. The lowest yielding cultivars and selections were ?A2632?, ?A2786?, ?A2602?, and ?Stover? with 72 yield ranging from 1.5 to 4.3 kg/vine. The remaining cultivars were intermediate in yield, betwen 5.3 and 9.7 kg/vine. Individual clusters from the vines of ?A2786? did not ripe uniformly and some vines had over ripe fruit at harvest resulting in a 50% yield loss in 2012. Advanced grape selections and cultivars difered in cluster weight (Table 5). Sedles table grapes ?Gratitude? and ?Neptune? had the largest cluster weight of 495.6 and 492.0 g, respectively. Procesing grapes ?Stover? and ?A2602? produced the smalest clusters of 69.8 and 74.5 g, respectively. The remaining cultivars and selections produced clusters ranging from 157.2 to 360.9 g. In general, the table grape selections produced larger clusters, while the procesing selections produced smaler clusters, which is a desirable characteristic for each market group. Studied grape cultivars and selections difered in berry weight (Table 5). ?Gratitude? and ?A2817? produced the largest berries of 4.9 g, respectively. ?A2467? produced the smalest berries of 1.4 g. The remaining selections and cultivars produced berries with sizes ranging from 1.8 to 3.6 g. In general, sedles table grape selections produced larger berries, while procesing selections produced smaler size berries. Selections and cultivars difered in SC and TA (Table 6). ?A2632? had the highest SC of 21%, while ?Conquistador? had the lowest sugar content of 13% at harvest. ?A2467? had the highest TA of 1.34 g/100 ml. The TA for the remaining cultivars and selections was similar and ranged from 0.52 to 0.79 g/100 ml. No diference was found among the studied grapes in juice pH levels and pH ranged from 3.28 to 3.95. Sedles table grape difered in number of sed traces per berry (Table 7). ?A2817? had the highest number of sed traces of 3.2, while ?Gratitude? had the lowest number of sed traces 73 of 1.5. The sed traces were not noticeable when eating the fruit. The berry texture of al the table grapes was described as non-slipskin. Pierce?s disease symptoms were not observed in 2011 (data not shown). In 2012, PD symptoms, including leaf scorching, ?matchsticks?, and ?green islands? were found in several cultivars and selections (Table 8). ?A2602?, ?A2817? and ?Mars? were found to be Xylela fastidiosa infected when an ELISA test was performed. PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) is much more sensitive than ELISA (about 100 times). When developing a protocol for a specific pathogen, al organisms in existence cannot be tested for cross-reaction (especialy those that have not been identified), so a certain amount of false positives can be expected. A false positive is when the test picks up a non-target organism. We had several positive samples, so the test was picking up the enzyme of another organism very similar to Xylella fastidiosa either on, or in the plant tisue. PCR is a very sensitive method of detection because it is designed to identify a specific segment of the organisms DNA/RNA that is targeted because this segment is unique only to the target organism. The follow-up PCR analysis revealed that there were no Xylela fastidiosa infected vines in our study. 74 Discusion ?Joy? had the largest pruning weight indicating it had the most vigorous vegetative growth. ?A2786? had the smalest pruning weight and TCSA indicating it had the weakest vegetative growth in both 2011 and 2012. Acording to balanced crop pruning (Rombough, 2002), ?A2786? perhaps would benefit from a pruning that leaves fewer buds after dormant pruning. ?Stover? had early shoot development and flowering development in 2011 and 2012. This was in agreement with Mortenson (1968) who stated ?Stover? started developing in early spring. Acording to our results, ?Mars? was an early ripening cultivar in 2011 and 2012. This result is similar to studies conducted by other authors in diferent locations. Moore (1985) reported that the average ripening date for ?Mars? is July 22 nd in central Arkansas. Kaps and Odneal (2001) also found that ?Mars? had early ripening in Misouri. ?Neptune? had high yield with large clusters and medium berry size in our study. This result is similar to trials in Arkansas and Kentucky (Clark and Moore, 1999; Wilson et al. 2010). Newly released cultivar ?Faith? had early ripening, medium cluster weight and berry size. SC of ?Faith? fruit was 18% with a non-slipskin texture. This is in agreement with results from a study conducted in Arkansas (Clark, 2012). In our research, maturing berries of ?Joy? had a tendency to shater, which is also similar to the breeder?s report (Clark, 2012). ?Gratitude? fruit provided the largest cluster weight and berry weight among tested cultivars. Acording to Clark (2012), this cultivar had similar characteristics when grown in Arkansas. 75 Science based information on the performance of newly released cultivars and advanced selections developed by the University of Arkansas breeding program in Alabama?s high PD risk environment was obtained through our study. Due to the tornado in 2011, ?Joy?, ?A2632?, and ?A2786? only had one-year yield data, so the result for these cultivar and selections were not conclusive. ?Neptune? and ?Gratitude? were the best performing sedles table grape cultivars combining a good vegetative growth, cropping potential and fruit quality. Multiple years of observations are needed to fully evaluate the selected cultivars and selections before sound recommendations can be made to the grape industry. Vineyard management, such as cultivar specific pruning and thinning, should be further explored. The cultivars and selections developed by University of Arkansas breeding program were not breed for PD before, so it is uncertain that if they have PD tolerance or not. Acording to the PCR results, there were no Xylela fastidiosa infected vines in our study in 2011 and 2012, but further research is needed to explore PD tolerance in the future before making a sound conclusion. 76 Literature Cited Clark, J.R. 2003. Grape growing at the University of Arkansas: approaching forty years of progres. Proc. VIII th IC on Grape. Acta Hort. 603, ISHS. Clark, J.R. 2010. Eastern United States table grape breeding. J. Amer. Pomol. Soc. 64:72-77. Clark, J.R. 2012. University of Arkansas table grapes ?Faith?, ?Hope?, ?Joy?, and ?Gratitude? sedles table grape for local markets. University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Research and Extension. Clark, J.R. and J.N. Moore. 1999. ?Neptune? sedles table grape. HortScience 34:1300-1302. Hedrick, U.P. 1907. The Grapes of New York. (Fiftenth annual report. Department of Agriculture, State of New York.) Albany, J. B. Lyon, State Printer. Moore, J.N. 1985. ?Mars? sedles grape. HortScience 20:313. Kaps, M.L., and M.B. Odneal. 2001. Grape cultivar performance in the Misouri Ozark region. J. Amer. Pomol. Soc. 55:34-44. Mortensen, J.A. 1968. Stover: An early bunch grape for central Florida. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular S-195. Poling, B. 2007. The North Carolina Winegrape Grower?s Guide. North Carolina State University. Available at: http:/cals.ncsu.edu/hort_sci/extension/wine_grape.php Rombough, L. 2002. The Grape Grower: A Guide to Organic Viticulture. Chelsea Green Publishing. White River Junction, VT. USDA Plant Hardines Zone Map. 2012. USDA Agricultural Research Service. Available at: http:/planthardines.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/# 77 USDA Web Soil Survey. 2012. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available at: http:/websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm Wilson, P., J. Wheeler, and S. Lynch. 2010. Wine and Table Grape Cultivar Evaluation Trial in Kentucky. Fruit and Vegetable Research Report. University of Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. PR-608. Winkler, A.J., J.A. Cook, W.M. Kliewer, and L.A. Lider. 1974. General Viticulture. University of California Pres. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA. 78 Table 1. Comparison of vine pruning weight and trunk cros sectional area (TCSA) of newly grape released cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Pruning Weight (kg/vine) TCSA (cm 2 ) Joy 3.0 y a x 6.5 bcd A2245 2.7 a 7.5 abcd A2632 2.7 a 7.3 abcd Gratitude 2.6 a 6.4 bcd Faith 2.4 ab 5.7 bcd A2602 2.4 ab 7.4 abcd Mars 2.4 ab 6.5 bcd Stover 2.4 ab 9.7 a Conquistador 2.1 ab 6.7 bcd A2467 1.8 ab 8.5 ab A2359 1.7 abc 7.9 abc A2574 1.7 abc 5.6 bcd A2817 1.6 abc 5.5 bcd Neptune 1.1 bc 5.1 cd A2786 0.9 c 4.6 d z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. z Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 79 Table 2. Comparison of leaf area and leaf chlorophyll content of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Leaf area (cm 2 ) Chlorophyll content Faith 168.4 y a x 34.5 efg Mars 158.9 a 38.1 cd Conquistador 148.8 ab 43.0 a Joy 128.1 bc 36.3 def A2786 122.7 bcd 39.5 bc Neptune 122.3 bcde 37.2 cde Gratitude 120.7 bcde 34.1 fg A2245 113.7 cdef 36.6 cdef A2574 111.3 cdef 34.8 ef A2817 111.1 cdef 31.5 g A2467 104.3 cdef 35.1 def A2632 93.1 def 42.5 ab Stover 91.8 ef 35.4 def A2602 87.6 f 36.3 def A2359 82.4 f 34.5 efg z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 80 Table 3. Comparison of the number of fruiting clusters per shoot of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar No. of fruiting clusters per shoot, (No.) A2359 3.5 y a x A2574 3.1 ab Conquistador 2.9 bc Stover 2.6 cd A2245 2.4 de Faith 2.3 de Joy 2.2 e Neptune 2.1 ef A2817 2.1 ef A2467 2.1 ef Mars 2.0 ef A2632 2.0 ef A2786 1.8 fgh A2602 1.6 gh Gratitude 1.5 h z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 81 Table 4. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. Cultivar Veraison grogresion (%), July 11 st , 2011 Mars 96.9 z a y Faith 60.0 b A2467 56.4 b Gratitude 36.3 c A2817 18.8 cd Neptune 18.8 cd A2786 6.3 d Joy 1.3 d A2245 0.1 d A2359 0.0 d A2574 0.0 d A2602 0.0 d A2632 0.0 d Conquistador 0.0 d Stover 0.0 d z Al data presented are least squares means. y Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 82 Table 5. Comparison of yield per vine, cluster weight, and berry weight of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Yield (kg/vine) Cluster weight (g) Berry weight (g) A2574 13.7 y a x 250.9 bc 1.8 ef A2359 13.6 a 177.4 cd 2.3 de Neptune 12.9 a 492.0 a 3.5 b A2245 12.8 a 251.4 bc 2.4 cde Conquistador 12.0 a 168.3 cd 2.9 bc A2817 9.7 ab 360.9 b 4.9 a A2467 9.1 ab 215.7 c 1.4 f Mars 6.3 bc 235.1 c 3.3 b Joy 6.2 bc 205.4 cd 2.5 cd Faith 6.0 bc 217.1 c 3.2 b Gratitude 5.3 bc 495.6 a 4.9 a Stover 4.3 c 69.8 d 2.4 cd A2602 2.7 c 157.2 cd 2.3 de A2786 1.7 c 189.0 cd 3.6 b A2632 1.5 c 74.5 d 2.1 de z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 83 Table 6. Comparison of fruit pH, soluble solids content (SSC), and titratable acidity (TA) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar pH SSC (%) TA (g/100 ml) A2632 3.82 21.0 y a x 0.78 b Stover 3.81 18.1 ab 0.52 b Faith 3.95 17.5 abc 0.62 b Joy 3.54 16.7 abcd 0.70 b A2574 3.56 16.7 bcd 0.66 b A2602 3.83 15.8 cd 0.59 b A2245 3.62 15.4 cd 0.66 b A2359 3.55 15.2 cd 0.55 b Gratitude 3.57 14.7 cde 0.70 b Neptune 3.35 14.7 de 0.79 b A2786 3.54 14.6 de 0.65 b Mars 3.34 14.6 de 0.75 b A2817 3.44 14.1 de 0.55 b A2467 3.28 13.4 de 1.34 a Conquistador 3.65 13.0 e 0.66 b z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 84 Table 7. Comparison of the number of sed traces of newly released grape cultivars and advanced table sedles grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011 and 2012 combined z . Cultivar Sed traces A2817 3.2 y a x Neptune 2.0 b Joy 1.8 bc Mars 1.7 bc Faith 1.7 bc Gratitude 1.5 c z Year was analyzed as a random variable. y Al data presented are least squares means. x Diferences among cultivars were determined using the Simulate test at ? = 0.05. 85 Table 8. Comparison of Pierce?s disease symptoms of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. Cultivar Leaf scorching z Matchsticks y Green islands A2245 0 N N A2359 1 Y Y Faith 0 N N A2467 0 N N Joy 1 Y Y Gratitude 0 N N A2574 0 N N A2602 1 Y Y A2632 0 N N A2786 1 N N A2817 1 Y Y Conquistador 0 N N Mars 1 N N Neptune 1 N Y Stover 0 N N z 0 = no symptoms; 1 = 1 to 20% leaves with scorching; 2 = 21 to 40% leaves with scorching; 3 = 41 to 60% leaves with scorching; 4 = 61 to 80% leaves with scorching; 5 = 81 to 100% leaves with scorching y Y=Yes N=No 86 Figure 1. Comparison of early season shoot development of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. 87 Figure 2. Comparison of early season shoot development of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. 88 Figure 3. Comparison of percent open flowers of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. 89 Figure 4. Comparison of percent open flowers of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. 90 Figure 5. Comparison of veraison progresion (percent) of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012. 91 Figure 6. Season of ripening of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2011. 92 Figure 7. Season of ripening of newly released grape cultivars and advanced grape selections grown at the NAHRC, Cullman, AL, in 2012.