Results of New Cultivar Selection Trials for Lemon in
Arizona –2004-051
Glenn C. Wright
Department of Plant Sciences, U. of A., Yuma Mesa Agriculture Center, Yuma, AZ
Abstract
Three lemon cultivar selection trials are being conducted at the Yuma Mesa
Agriculture Center in Somerton, AZ. Data from these trials suggest that
‘
Li
mone
r
oFi
no49’selections may be a suitable alternative for the varieties
most commonly planted in Southwest Arizona today. ‘
Fe
mmi
ne
l
l
o’ and
‘
Vi
l
l
af
r
anc
a’mi
ghtal
s
obepl
ant
e
d on an experimental basis
Introduction
The Arizona lemon industry has historically relied on a small number of lemon cultivar selections. Int
h
e1950’
s
, the
i
n
du
s
t
r
ywa
se
s
t
a
bl
i
s
h
e
d wi
t
h‘
De
s
e
r
tLi
s
bon
’
, however within a few years, ‘
De
s
e
r
tLi
s
bon
’wa
seclipsed in
popu
l
a
r
i
t
yby‘
Fr
os
tNu
c
e
l
l
a
rLi
s
bon
’t
h
eon
l
yn
u
c
e
l
l
a
rc
l
on
a
ls
e
l
e
c
t
i
onoft
h
e‘
Li
s
bon
’cultivar. Other minor
s
e
l
e
c
t
i
on
sof‘
Li
s
bon
’t
h
a
twere planted in Arizona f
r
om t
h
e1960’
st
h
r
ou
g
ht
h
e1980’
sincluded ‘
Mon
r
oe
’
,‘
Pr
i
or
’
,
a
n
d‘
Ros
e
n
be
r
g
e
r
’
. Be
g
i
n
n
i
n
gi
nt
h
el
a
t
e1980’
s
, n
e
w pl
a
n
t
i
n
g
swe
r
ee
s
t
a
bl
i
s
h
e
du
s
i
n
g‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A Lisbon’
.
Mor
er
e
c
e
n
t
l
y
,‘
Cor
on
aFoot
h
i
l
l
sLi
s
bon
’i
si
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
l
ypopu
l
a
r
.‘
Al
l
e
nEu
r
e
k
a
’h
a
sa
l
s
obe
e
noc
c
a
s
i
on
a
l
l
ypl
a
n
t
e
d
in Arizona.
All of these represent clonal selections of outstanding trees that were then propagated. Typically, they are identified
by their originator or place of origin, and are valuable to Arizona growers because of their high vigor, high
productivity, precocity (trees bear at an early age), earliness (a high percentage of the fruit can be harvested before 1
November), short thorns and good fruit quality. When a commonly grown lemon cultivar selection is gradually
replaced in the industry, the new selection typically is improved in one of these characteristics. Sometimes a cultivar
selection may be replaced because of a n
e
g
a
t
i
v
ec
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
. Su
c
hwa
st
h
ec
a
s
ewi
t
h‘
Fr
os
tNu
c
e
l
l
a
rLi
s
bon
’
which appears to be susceptible to brown heartwood rot.
From t
h
el
a
t
e1980’
s
,t
ot
h
ee
a
r
l
y1990’
s
,Arizona lemon growers have received their information about new cultivar
selections through word of mouth or from nursery sources, since there were no trials planted in the state. With this in
mind, we have planted three new lemon cultivar selection trials in 1995, 1997 and 1998, all located at the Yuma
Mesa Agricultural Center. The 1997 and 1998 trial results are presented here.
1 1
The author wishes to thank Mr. Phillip Tilt, Mr. Marco Peña, Mr. Arturo Moreno, and the Yuma Mesa Fruit
Gr
owe
r
’
sAs
s
oc
i
a
t
i
onf
ort
h
e
i
ra
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
ei
nc
ompl
e
t
i
n
gt
h
i
spr
oj
e
c
t
.Th
ea
u
t
h
orwou
l
da
l
s
ol
i
k
et
ot
h
a
n
kt
h
eAr
i
z
on
a
Citrus Research Council for supporting this research. This is a partial final report for project 2004-08 –Citrus
rootstock and cultivar breeding and evaluation for the Arizona citrus industry –2004-05.
Materials and Methods
1997 Lemon Cultivar Selection Trial. This trial, comprising 13 cultivar selections, was established in March 1997 in
Block 22 of the Yuma Mesa Agricultural Center, near Yuma, Arizona. The land was laser leveled and fumigated
prior to planting. Trees were planted on an 8-m x 8-m spacing. Fifteen trees of each selection were planted. This
trial includes the following selections:
 ‘
Al
l
e
nEu
r
e
k
a
’–Th
emos
tc
ommona
n
dpopu
l
a
r‘
Eu
r
e
k
a
’s
e
l
e
c
t
i
onpl
a
n
t
e
di
nAr
i
z
on
a
.Or
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
di
nSa
n
t
a
Paula, CA
 ‘
Ar
a
n
c
i
n
o’–A minor Italian cultivar, with rounded fruit, a short nipple and thick rind. Fruit is seedy.
 ‘
Be
r
n
a
’(
‘
Ve
r
n
a
’
)–The common summer lemon of Spain. Thornless tree produces medium to large fruit
with few seeds.
 ‘
Ca
v
e
r
sLi
s
bon
’–Av
i
g
or
ou
s‘
Li
s
bon
’s
e
l
e
c
t
i
onor
i
g
i
n
a
t
i
n
gi
nUpl
a
n
d,CA.
 ‘
Ca
s
c
a
deEu
r
e
k
a
’–Another, less-commonly planted, vigorous selection that originated in San Diego
County, CA.
 ‘
CookEu
r
e
k
a
’–A selection from Limoneira Del Mar Ranch, Ventura County, California.
 ‘
Cor
pa
c
i
’–A minor Italian cultivar from Sicily. Vigorous, thorny trees are reportedly productive. Fruit
matures early and has few seeds.
 ‘
Fe
mmi
n
e
l
l
oComu
n
e
’–Italian, everbearing cultivar.
 ‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8ALi
s
bon
’–A vigorous selection originating from the Limoneira Ranch, Ventura County, CA.
The most popular lemon planted in Arizona today.
 ‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’–The chief winter lemon of Spain. Reportedly vigorous, thorny and highly productive.
Early producer with uniform yield. Fruit is spherical to oval, with a smooth rind and a relatively short
nipple. Relative high acid and about five seeds per fruit.
 ‘
Pr
i
mof
i
or
i
’–Or
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
di
nSpa
i
n
.Si
mi
l
a
rt
ot
h
e‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’de
s
c
r
i
be
da
bov
e
.
 ‘
Sa
n
t
aTe
r
e
s
a
’(Femminello Santa Teresa) –Si
mi
l
a
rt
o‘
Fe
mmi
n
e
l
l
oComu
n
e
’
,bu
tr
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
tt
ot
h
eMa
l
Secco disease prevalent in Italy.
 ‘
Vi
l
l
a
f
r
a
n
c
a
’–Said to be of Sicilian origin, introduced into Florida in 1875. Formerly planted in
Ca
l
i
f
or
n
i
a
,bu
tofl
i
t
t
l
ei
mpor
t
a
n
c
et
h
e
r
et
oda
y
. Fr
u
i
ta
n
dt
r
e
ec
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
ss
i
mi
l
a
rt
o‘
Eu
r
e
k
a
’
,bu
t
produces mainly a winter crop.
1998 Lemon Cultivar Selection Trial. This trial, comprising 7 cultivar selections, was established in late September
1998 in Block 14 of the Yuma Mesa Agricultural Center, near Yuma, Arizona. The land was laser leveled and
fumigated prior to planting. Trees were planted on an 8-m x 8-m spacing. Fifteen trees of each selection were
pl
a
n
t
e
d.Th
i
st
r
i
a
li
n
c
l
u
de
st
h
e‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8ALi
s
bon
’de
s
c
r
i
be
da
bov
ea
swe
l
la
st
h
ef
ol
l
owi
n
ga
ddi
t
i
on
a
lcultivar
selections:
 ‘
Dr
.St
r
on
gLi
s
bon
’–Originated at the Glen Good ranch, Santa Paula, CA. Large fruit, but tree is
reportedly precocious.
 ‘
Ge
n
oa
’–Si
mi
l
a
rt
ot
h
e‘
Vi
l
l
a
f
r
a
n
c
a
’
,i
mpor
t
e
df
r
omI
t
a
l
yt
ot
h
eU.
S.i
n1881.
 ‘
La
pi
t
h
ot
i
k
i
’–Originated in Cyprus. Reportedly harvested from September until March. Fruit is tapered at
both ends.
 ‘
Mon
r
oeLi
s
bon
’–Vigorous selection. Reportedly bears early, but fruit is small and coarse.
 ‘
Ta
y
l
orEu
r
e
k
a
’–A nucellar selection, originating in Australia. Reportedly produces late.
 ‘
Wa
l
k
e
rLi
s
bon
’–Vigorous selection from California.
Yield data is collected during the fall and winter. Trees were ring or strip-picked as noted below. For 2004-05, trees
in the 1997 trial were strip picked on 12-7-04. Trees in the 1998 trial were ring picked on 10-7-04 and strip picked
on 1-19-05 For each harvest date, the entire quantity of harvested fruit from each tree was passed through an
automated electronic eye sorter (Autoline, Inc., Reedley, CA), which provides weight, color, exterior quality and size
data for each fruit. Fruit packout data is reported on a percentage basis. Fruit quality data, including 
brix, peel
thickness, percentage juice, pH, and the total soluble solids to total acid ratio was collected for the 1998 trial.
All data was analyzed using SPSS 11.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois).
Results and Discussion
1997 Lemon Selection Trial. Yields of this trial, since its inception, are found in Figure 1. Because of the large
number of selections in this trial, the graph has been split for ease of viewing. Selections that have had superior
yields since the beginning, i
n
c
l
u
de‘
Ca
s
c
a
deEu
r
e
k
a
’
,‘
Cook
’Eu
r
e
k
a
,‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8ALi
s
bon
’
,‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’
,
‘
Pr
i
mof
i
or
i
’
,‘
Fe
mmi
n
e
l
l
oComu
n
e
’a
n
d‘
Vi
l
l
a
f
r
a
n
c
a
’
. Yields of most of the selections declined in 2004-05 due to
flower and fruitlet loss during untimely heat in the Spring and the influence of a large crop in 2003-04. All the
Eu
r
e
k
as
e
l
e
c
t
i
on
sf
e
l
lmor
et
h
a
n50%,i
n
c
l
u
di
n
g‘
Al
l
e
n
’
,‘
Ca
s
c
a
de
’a
n
d‘
Cook
’
.‘
Vi
l
l
a
f
r
a
n
c
a
’
,‘
Fe
mmi
n
e
l
l
oComu
n
e
’
a
n
d‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A’h
a
ds
l
i
g
h
tde
c
r
e
a
s
e
si
ny
i
e
l
d,wh
i
l
e‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’wa
st
h
eon
ly selection that had an
increased yield versus 2003-04.
Yield for the 2004-05 season is shown in Figure 2. ‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’h
a
dt
h
eg
r
e
a
t
e
s
ty
i
e
l
d,a
n
d‘
Fe
mmi
n
e
l
l
o
Comu
n
e
’
,‘
Vi
l
l
a
f
r
a
n
c
a
’a
n
d‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A’we
r
el
owe
r
,bu
ts
t
i
l
ls
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
l
yt
h
es
a
me
.‘
Pr
i
mof
i
or
i
’a
n
d‘
Sa
n
t
a
Te
r
e
s
a
’pe
r
f
or
me
dt
h
epoor
e
s
toft
h
os
es
e
l
e
c
t
i
on
st
h
a
tt
y
pi
c
a
l
l
yh
a
v
et
h
eg
r
e
a
t
e
s
ty
i
e
l
d.Most of the others performed
poorly, with yields of less than 150 lbs. per tree.
Packout for the 12-7-04 harvest, of seven of the most promising selections is shown in Figure 3. Fruit size was quite
large, a result of the unusually late harvest date. Wh
i
l
emos
toft
h
e
s
eh
a
ds
i
mi
l
a
rs
i
z
e
,‘
Ca
v
e
r
s
’
,‘
Primofiori’
,a
n
d
‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’h
a
ds
l
i
g
h
t
l
yl
a
r
g
e
rf
r
u
i
t
,wh
i
l
e‘
Sa
n
t
aTe
r
e
s
a
’a
n
d‘
Limoneira 8A’h
a
ds
ma
l
l
e
rf
r
u
i
t
.‘
Si
n
c
et
h
e
yields of‘
Ca
v
e
r
s
’and Primofiori are so low, it is doubtful that the larger fruit for this cultivar is of any real
a
dv
a
n
t
a
g
e
.‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49h
a
sh
a
dl
a
r
g
e
rf
r
u
i
tf
ors
e
v
e
r
a
loft
h
epa
s
tf
e
ws
e
a
s
on
s
.
Selected fruit quality parameters from the cultivars are shown in Table 1. While there were many similarities
be
t
we
e
nt
h
es
e
l
e
c
t
i
on
s
,af
e
ws
t
a
n
dou
t
.‘
Sa
n
t
aTe
r
e
s
a
’wa
sc
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
dbyal
ow j
u
i
c
epH a
n
dat
h
i
npe
e
l
.
‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49h
a
dahigh level of acids and a thin peel.
1998 Lemon Cultivar Selection Trial. 2001-02 to 2004-05 yields from this trial are found in Figure 4. Although the
‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A’i
ss
t
i
l
lt
h
ec
l
a
s
soft
h
i
strial; 2004-05 is the first year that any other selection has surpassed it in total
yield since 2001-02. ‘
Mon
r
oe
’
,‘
Wa
l
k
e
r
’a
n
d‘
Dr
.St
r
on
g
’Li
s
bonh
a
dy
i
e
l
dst
h
a
te
qu
a
l
e
dors
u
r
pa
s
s
e
dt
h
ey
i
e
l
dof
‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A Li
s
bon
’(
Fi
g
u
r
e5)
.Me
a
n
wh
i
l
e
,‘
Ge
n
oa
’
,‘
Ta
y
l
orEu
r
e
k
a
’a
n
d‘
La
pi
t
h
i
ot
i
k
i
’h
a
dy
i
e
l
ds40t
o70%
less than the others. All the higher yielding selections had similar quantities of fruit picked in the first harvest, while
the three selections that are lagging had less fruit picked early.
Fruit size for the 10-17-04 harvest of t
h
i
st
r
i
a
li
ss
h
owni
nFi
g
u
r
e6.Th
e‘
La
pi
t
h
i
ot
i
k
i
’h
a
sou
t
s
t
a
n
di
n
gs
i
z
e
,bu
ti
ti
s
an elongated lemon, and is probably unsuitable for the US market. Some of this size may be due to its low yield.
Th
es
i
z
eoft
h
e‘
Ge
n
oa
’f
r
u
i
tma
ya
l
s
obedu
et
oi
t
sl
owy
i
e
l
d.Oft
h
eot
h
e
r
s
,‘
Dr
.St
r
on
ga
ppe
a
r
sto have the best
s
i
z
ea
tt
h
i
st
i
me
,wh
i
l
e‘
Ta
y
l
or
’Eu
r
e
k
ah
a
st
h
es
ma
l
l
e
s
tf
r
u
i
t
.For the second harvest, Lapithiotiki again has the
largest fruit (Figure 7), while the others are similar.
Conclusions
One new lemon cultivar selection appears promising for Arizona. This is ‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’l
e
mon
, because its
y
i
e
l
dsa
r
es
i
mi
l
a
rt
ot
h
a
tof‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A’a
n
di
th
a
sl
a
r
g
e
rf
r
u
i
ts
i
z
e
.‘
Fe
mmi
n
e
l
l
oComu
n
e
’a
n
d‘
Vi
l
l
a
f
r
a
n
c
a
’ma
y
also be suitable, but neither consistently equals or surpasses ‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8ALi
s
bon
’l
e
moni
nt
e
r
msofoverall yield
a
n
d/
ore
a
r
l
i
n
e
s
sa
sof
t
e
na
sdoe
s‘
Li
mon
e
r
oFi
n
o49’
.‘
Sa
n
t
aTe
r
e
s
a
’had excellent yield in 2002-03, but stumbled
for the last two years, and is hobbled by its lateness. In the 1998 trial, no selection has proved to be better than
‘
Li
mon
e
i
r
a8A’
,bu
t‘
Wa
l
k
e
r
’
,‘
Mon
r
oe
’a
n
d‘
Dr
.St
r
on
g
’ma
ybec
on
t
e
n
de
r
s
.No other new selections stand out at
this time; however this may change as more data is collected. ‘
La
pi
t
h
i
ot
i
k
i
’h
a
sl
a
r
g
ef
r
u
i
t
,bu
tl
owy
i
e
l
ds
.‘
Eu
r
e
k
a
’
lemons have typically performed poor
l
yi
nc
ompa
r
i
s
ont
ot
h
e‘
Li
s
bon
s
’
,a
n
ds
h
ou
l
dn
otbec
on
s
i
de
r
e
da
sa
replacement for any of the high-y
i
e
l
di
n
g‘
Li
s
bon
’s
e
l
e
c
t
i
on
s
.
500
630
Allen Eureka
Arancino
Berna
Cacade Eureka
Cavers Lisbon
Cook Eureka
Corpaci
400
350
504
441
378
250
315
200
252
150
189
100
126
50
63
0
0
500
630
450
567
Femminello Comune
Limoneira 8A Lisbon
Limonero Fino 49
Primofiori
Sta. Teresa
Villafranca
400
350
300
504
441
378
150
189
100
126
50
63
0
0
20
0
20
04
-
20
0
20
03
-
20
0
20
02
-
20
0
20
01
-
20
0
00
20
5
252
4
200
3
315
1
250
2
Annual Yield (lbs. per tree)
300
567
Figure 1. 2000-2005 yield of thirteen lemon selections budded to C. macrophylla rootstock.
Approximate yield in
field boxes per acre
(based on 24 x 24 ft. spacing)
450
630
500
450
504
400
AB
350
Yield
(lbs. per tree)
ABC
ABC
378
300
250
BCD
200
BCD
252
BCD
CD
150
CD
D
D
100
126
D
D
Approximate yield in
field boxes per acre
(based on 24 x 24 ft. spacing)
A
50
0
a
nc
fr a
Vi
lla
re
sa
ri
Te
of
Sa
nt
a
im
no
Pr
Fi
io
49
on
sb
o
er
m
Li
Li
m
on
ei
on
ra
Fe
8A
m
m
Li
in
el
lo
ci
pa
ka
or
C
re
on
C
oo
k
Li
sb
re
er
s
C
av
de
ca
as
Eu
ka
a
Eu
Be
rn
no
ci
an
Ar
C
Al
le
n
Eu
re
ka
0
Selection
December 7, 2004 Harvest
Figure 2. 2004-05 Yield of thirteen lemon selections budded to C. macrophylla rootstock, separated by harvest time.
Bars are significantly different if the lowercase letters above them are different.
Cultivar
Cavers Lisbon
a
b
Femminello
ab
Limonero Fino 49
Primofiori
Santa Teresa
ab
c
ab
ab
bc
ab
10
abc
a
abc
ab
bcde
0
20
30
75
95
115
140
165
200
a
bcde
Limoneira 8A Lisbon
abc
abc
e
Villafranca
c
b
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Packout (%)
Figure 3. Packout of 13 lemon selections on C. macrophylla rootstock for the 12-7-04 harvest. Bars of the same
shade are significantly different if the lowercase letters within them are different. Bars of different shades
cannot be compared.
Table 1. Selected interior fruit quality parameters for 13 lemon selections on C. macrophylla rootstock.
Total Acids
Peel thickness
Juice pH
TSS:TA
Selection
(%)
(mm)
Allen Eureka
2.83 abcz
4.74 bcd
1.58 ab
3.92
Arancino
2.85 abc
4.73 cd
1.56 ab
5.24
Berna
2.82 abc
4.90 abcd
1.60 a
4.69
Cascade Eureka
2.93 ab
4.82 abcd
1.57 ab
4.62
Cavers Lisbon
2.77 abc
5.05 abcd
1.44 ab
5.00
Cook Eureka
2.71 bc
4.60 d
1.60 a
4.04
Corpaci
2.85 abc
5.07 abcd
1.50 ab
4.08
Femminello
2.75 abc
5.26 ab
1.46 ab
4.48
Limoneira 8A Lisbon
2.73 bc
5.23 abc
1.41 b
4.00
Limonero Fino 49
2.80 abc
5.27 a
1.44 ab
3.61
Primofiori
2.86 abc
4.90 abcd
1.56 ab
5.02
Santa Teresa
2.67 c
5.09 abcd
1.48 ab
3.64
Villafranca
2.97 a
4.79 abcd
1.58 ab
4.51
z
Me
a
n
ss
e
pa
r
a
t
i
oni
nc
ol
u
mn
sbyDu
n
c
a
n
’
sMu
l
t
i
pl
eRa
n
g
eTe
s
t
,5% l
e
v
e
l
.
300
200
315
252
150
189
100
126
50
63
0
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
Harvest Year
Figure 4. 2001-02 through 2004-05 yield of seven lemon selections budded to C. macrophylla rootstock.
Approximate Yield in
Field Boxes per acre
(based on 24 x 24 ft. spacing)
Yield (lbs. per tree)
250
378
Taylor Eureka
Monroe Lisbon
Dr. Strong Lisbon
Genoa
Lapithiotiki
Walker Lisbon
Limoneira 8A Lisbon
Block 14 Lemons 2004-05 Yield
300
October 7, 2004 Harvest
January 19, 2005 Harvest
Yield(lbs. per tree)
250
200
a
a
ab
a
a
150
100
a
a
50
bc
ab
b
b
a
a
c
c
i
ik
pi
th
ot
La
ur
e
ka
e)
Selection
Figure 5. 2004-05 yield of seven lemon selections budded to C. macrophylla rootstock.
Ta
yl
or
E
oa
en
G
M
on
ro
e
(O
ld
Li
s
Li
n
bo
n
n
sb
o
Li
tr o
ng
r.
S
D
Li
m
on
ei
ra
W
al
8A
ke
rL
Li
is
b
sb
on
on
0
B
Walker
C
Limoneira 8A
C
Selection
Dr. Strong
A
A
A
AB
A
A
B
B
B
A
Monroe BC
B
B
B
BC
A
ABC
A
75
Genoa
B
Taylor
AB
B
C
Lapithotiki
10
20
30
40
50
B
A
A
A
A
0
B
C
A
C
D
60
70
95
115
140
165
200
235
285
80
90
C
100
Packout (%)
Figure 6. Packout of seven lemon selections on C. macrophylla rootstock for the 10-7-04 harvest. Bars of the same shade are significantly different if the
lowercase letters within them are different. Bars of different shades cannot be compared.
Walker
C
Limoneira 8A
C
A
A
Selection
Dr. Strong
A
A
A
B
B
Monroe
ABC
C
CD
A
C
A
AB
75
Genoa
B
Taylor
D
B
A
C
Lapithotiki
BCD
A
0
10
20
30
BC
AB
E D
C
40
50
60
70
80
95
115
140
165
200
235
285
90
100
Packout (%)
Figure 7. Packout of seven lemon selections on C. macrophylla rootstock for the 1-19-05 harvest. Bars of the same shade are significantly different if the
lowercase letters within them are different. Bars of different shades cannot be compared.