1995
USDA-ARS
Hop Research Data Summary
%
#
#
1995
Annual Research Summary
HOP BREEDING, GENETICS, CHEMISTRY
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Oregon State University
Department ofCrop and Soil Science
Alfred Haunold, Research Geneticist
USDA-ARS, Project Leader
Gail B. Nickerson, Chemist
Oregon State University
Ulrich Gampert, Research Assistant
Donna Kling, Research Assistant
These are preliminary data. Not for publication without the author's permission
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
HOP PRODUCTION STATISTICS
Hop Growers of America, Statistical Report, 1994-95
US Hop Production by State and Variety, 1991-95
US Hop Acreage and Yields, by State and Variety, 1991-95
1995 US Hop Productionby Variety
US and German Alpha Acid Production, 1980-95
Alpha Acid Percentage by Variety, 1995 US Crop
US Hop Yields, 1978-95
US Hop Acreage by Variety, 1986-95
US Average Hop Prices, 1980-95
US Hop Sold-Ahead Survey
Hop Seed, Leaf and Stem Content
1
3
4
5
: 6
6
7
8
9
10
11
Disposition of US Hop Production 1980-95
US Brewery Hop Usage
US Hopping Rates
US Brewery Hop Consumption and Export
US Hop Stocks September 1
US Hop Exports
US Hop Imports
13
13
14
15
16
17
20
BREWING STATISTICS
Major US Brewers in 1995
IHG Economic Report, 1995, Hop Acreage Production and Alpha
European Union Hop Growers, 1992-94
22
23
25
European Hop Variety conversion Program
27
German Aroma Versus Bitter Hop Acreage, 1985-95
*
27
World Hop Acreage andProduction
28
World Beer Production, 1987-94
29
Top Twenty Brewers World Wide
30
HOP BREEDING
Memorandum of Agreement, USDA-Busch Agricultural Resources
for USDA 21660, 21662 and 21663
1995 USDA Hop CRIS Report, Hop Genetics,Production,and Utilization
1995 CRIS Report for Prosser, WA (Molecular Markers ofhops)
1995 UDSA-OSU Main Hop Yard, Location Map
1995 Oregon Commercial Off-Station Plots, Map
Annual Report for 1995, ARF Project 3618, Hop Research Council
31
33
34
35
36
37
Annual Report for 1995, ARF Project 3625, Oregon Hop Commission
Annual Report for 1995, ARF Project 3534, Miller Brewing Company
38
39
Annual Report for 1994, ARF Project 4520, Miller Brewing Company, Hop Chemistry
Annual Report for 1995, ARF Project 4522, Hop Research Council, Hop Chemistry
40
41
OSU-USDA Hop Research Facility, East Farm
42
EXCHANGE OF GERMPLASM AND PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
Hop Germplasm and Cone Samples Distributed in 1995
Hop Germplasm and Cone Samples Received in 1995
New Hop Accession Numbers Assigned in 1995
Hop Genotypes Discarded in 1995
43
48
'..49
52
INTERMEDIATE AND ADVANCED EVALUATION
Potential New Hop Varieties
Information Sheet USDA 21662
1995 Crop, Extra Bales from Experimental Plots
1995 Off-Station Samples
53
54
56
""'"'"'"""57
Aroma Selections and Foreign Introductions for Pilot Brewing, 1995 crop
1995 Off-Station Experimental Varieties Grown in Washington, Oregon and Idaho
60
62
High Alpha Plus High Beta Selections
High Alpha Acid or Kettle Hops
Important Aroma Hops World Wide
Sensory Analysis, Bitterness Quality in Beer
OSU Pilot Brewery Proposal
63
64
65
66
67
HOP CHEMISTRY
1995 Females, Bale and Five Cone Analysis
1995 High Alpha Lines, Bale Analysis
68
83
1995 Male Hop Analyses
86
HOP PATHOLOGY AND PLANT PROTECTION
Hop Nematodes in OSU Hop Yards, SouthAfrican Breweries Inquiry
1994 Oregon FertilizerTrials in Commercial Hop Yards (Christenson)
Hop Quarantine for Oregon (Powdery Mildew)
88
92
94
Hop Powdery Mildew Life Cycle
Recent Foreign Hop Importation into Oregon
Suitability of Ridomil for Control of Hop Downy Mildew in Oregon (Dr. Klein)
Chemical Residue Analyses for Hop Pesticide Registration
1994-95 Hop Residue Projects
Pesticide Residues in Hop Matrices (ProjectProposal, WSU, Pullman, WA)
96
97
98
99
100
101
1995 US Hop Pesticide Tolerances
104
Hop Pesticide Registration Efforts in 1995
Hop Pesticide Re-registration under FIFRA
US and International Hop Pesticide Harmonization
Hop Petiole Sampling to Determine Nitrogen Needs (Gingrich)
Hop Pesticide International Harmonization Update (W.L. Bryant)
106
109
112
114
117
MISCELLANEOUS
1994 English Hop Crop and Alpha Acid Content by Variety
Parentage of Major English Varieties, Diagram
Five New EnglishHop Varieties
US Patent Office Inquiry Regarding Columbus Hop (Hop Union)
Oregon Business, January 1995: The Pop of Hops
Haunold Hops: a Legacy of Good Taste
Tops in Hops
Hop Researcher Leaves Big Hole
Czech Brewers Switch to Cheaper Grains
Willy Buholzer Retiring
121
122
"..123
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
Hop Growers of America, Inc.
1994 -
1995
ANNUAL STATISTICAL REPORT
Presented:
January 26, 1996
40th Annual HGA Convention
Portland, Oregon
% Dirr.
o
1222
1994
1995
'94 vs '95
74.6
78.8
5.6%
Hop Production (million lbs.)
U.S.
76.1
Germany *
93.6
62.7
76.5
22.0%
World *
304.6
262.1
283.6
8.2%
Hop Yields (lbs. per acre)
U.S.
1,767
1,758
1,826
3.9%
Germany *
1,646
1.156
1,414
22.3%
World *
1,326
1,191
1,281
7.6%
U.S.
43.100
42,412
43,189
1.8%
Germany
56,875
54,189
54,078
-0.2%
World *
229,595
219,851
221,326
0.7%
Hop Acreage
CO
•a
U.S. Crop Quality (weighted average)
Leaf & Stem Content
0.79%
0.75%
0.80%
Seed Content
0.91%
0.54%
0.62%
U.S.
7,767
7,086
7,086
0.0%
Germany *
5,970
2.335
2,368
1.4%
20,946
16,530
n/a
17.416
17,315
17.264
-0.3%
201.8
203
199.1
-1.9%
1,013.0
1.041.0
1.057.0
1.5%
-
Alpha Acid Production (1,000 lbs.)
!33
World *
Alpha Acid Consumption (1,000 lbs.)
World*
Beer Production (million barrels)
U.S.
World *
U.S. Hop Exports (1,000 lbs.)
Germany
9,259
5.306
7,629
43.8%
Brazil
5,823
6,575
9,739
48.1%
Mexico
6,020
8,242
5,567
-315%
43,785
42,812
51,084
19.3%
Germany
3,794
7,888
7,579
-3.9%
Czech Republic
1.817
1,984
1,901
-4.2%
Total Exports
U.S. Imports of Hops (1,000 lbs.)
♦1995
China
1,102
0
42
Total Imports
9,-264
13,185
12.767
figures are estimates.
-3.2%
U.S. HOP PRODUCT["ION BY STATE AND VARIETY 19 91 -1995
STATE
& VARIETY
HOP PRODUCTION - (Pounds)
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
IDAHO
Aquila
Banner
155,500
265,400
165.200
•
331.900
*
*
690,700
1.302,800
Galena
567,300
1,504,700
793,100
905,900
258.900
480.200
1.457.400
984.200
Other Varieties
2.144 am
2-149.900
2.264.000
2.346.800
Total
2.759.300
5.430,800
5,546.400
5.444,700
6,164,600
5,969,000
Chinook
Cluster
249,200
648.800
1,816,100
1,103,700
*
563,000
1,664,300
982,400
OREGON
Chinook
Fuggle
Galena
Mt. Hood
Nugget
*
•
•
*
-
96,000
375,000
201,000
353,400
130,000
125,000
136,000
71,900
82,800
288.000
475,700
413.300
3.042.500
4,736,300
4,361.000
5.488,000
6.125,600
455.700
601.600
634,500
*
Perle
171,700
376,200
Tettnang
451.500
249,400
264,900
732,800
425.500
605,000
841,700
780,800
5,014,400
4,968,000
5,119.800
5,408.600
4,948.800
IMfim
611,800
444.000
10.173,900
11,684,000
11.850,000
519,100
13,720,100
13,782,400
865,000
841,800
2,542,000
834,200
858,900
152.900
475,000
2,772.000
3,095,400
2.574,600
3,780,500
13,020,700
4,626,000
5.050,000
12,171,100
4,356,500
4,622,300
13,157,200
11,253,000
Willamette
Other Varieties
Total
...
518.500
WASHINGTON
Aquila
Banner
Cascade
Chinook
Cluster
*
*
*
*
2,436,500
Eroica
827,800
922,800
944,200
842,900
Galena
10,543,200
979,000
15,332.300
16.760,900
16.672.700
16.173.900
16.465.300
Liberty
Mt. Hood
Northern Brewer
*
877,400
*
1,573,400
*
•
2.239.800
*
•
111.900
167,000
2.418.700
1,772,900
11,379,800
Nugget
Olympic
6.678,300
667,300
8,070,800
595,900
8,964.600.
550,600
101,500
8,264,600
393,800
Perle
1,023,300
937.400
1,071.500
401,100
339,800
2.135,800
4,649,300
2,354,400
4.136,200
2,596,900
4,699,000
Tettnang
2,727,300
1,542.500
Willamette
4,055,300
4,116,200
Other Varieties
128.200
326,400
311,700
338.100
676.100
1.291,900
2.644.700
Total
53,550,700
57,106,300
58,849,000
54,675.000
59,101,000
UNITED STATES
69,155,400
74,336.700
76,143,700
74,559,700
78,852,400
SOURCE: U.S.D.A. Prepared by Hop Growers of America. Inc.
* Included in the category "other varieties" to avoid disclosure ofindividual operations.
Page 1
U.S. HOP ACREAGE & YIELDS BY STATE AND VARIETY 1991 -1995
STATE
& VARIETY
ACRES HARVESTED
VELD (lbs/acre
1991
1992
Aquila
103
103
Banner
145
162
137
138
Chinook
465
451
318
351
341
1993
1994
1995
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
IDAHO
«
*
•
*
•
1.510
1.830
2,050
1.890
1.806
*
1.530
2.080
1.770
1.510
1,848
1,651
2,100
2.212
2.015
1.550
1.792
1,616
1.600
*
*
Cluster
734
627
694
821
826
Galena
517
512
635
616
608
1,220
2,050
1.530
Other Varieties
2.154
2.145
2.177
2.111
2.152
910
1.000
1.040
1.112
1.278
Total
4,118
4,000
3,961
4,037
' 3.927
1,319
1.387
1.375
1.527
1,520
OREGON
Chinook
•
•
*
*
Fuggle
487
570
465
470
Galena
99
100
85
80
Ml. Hood
47
90
240
265
Nugget
*
60
547
*
•
*
1,600
770
620
980
1,280
2.030
1.300
1,470
1.700
287
1,530
920
1,200
1.795
1,440
*
1.160
*
1.695
2.300
2.450
2,450
3,025
1,790
2,060
1,780
2,240
2.025
Perle
177
285
272
175
154
970
1.320
1,660
1,425
1.720
Tettnang
577
575
545
655
976
740
1.110
1.285
800
3.590
3.600
3,482
3,570
3,260
1.270
1.400
1,380
1.470
1,518
518
380
361
335
332
1,090
1,610
1,230
1.515
1,549
7.190
7.900
7,900
8,000
8.641
1,415
1,479
1,500
1.715
1,595
Aquila
346
344
72
*
*
2,500
2.430
2,120
»
Banner
366
363
182
•
•
•
1,240
1.261
1,365
Willamette
Other Varieties
Total
1.562
WASHINGTON
Cascade
1.334
1,128
2.300
2,370
2.610
2.050
2,200
2.270
1,930
*
•
2.160
Chinook
2.112
2.179
2,427
2.305
2.277
1.790
2.120
2.080
1.890
2.030
Cluster
6.230
6,452
5.983
5.308
5.143
2.090
2.040
2.030
2.120
2,050
Eroica
Galena
Liberty
Ml. Hood
Northern Brewer
Nugget
Olympic
Perle
398
373
446
446
443
2.080
2,470
2.120
1.890
2,210
7,628
8,356
8,464
8,252
8.358
2.010
2.010
1,970
1,960
1.970
119
138
'*
940
1.210
1.805
1.115
1.230
1,340
1.590
57
58
1,780
2,210
*
820
*
*
1,429
*
*
1.828
*
*
1.070
*
*
1,100
*
*
2,955
3,606
4,060
4,541
5.149
2.260
2,240
2,210
1,820
2.210
337
291
261
225
160
1.980
2.050
2,110
1.750
2,040
1.370
1,140
758
725
670
382
248
1.350
1.290
1.600
1.050
Tettnang
2.254
2,190
2.160
730
980
1.090
2,583
2,843
2,776
2.278
2,797
1,210
Willamette
2,127
2,627
1.570
1.570
1.640
1,490
1.680
218
233
448
665
1,32?
1.430
1.450
1.510
1,940
1,990
Total
28,245
30,366
31,239
30,375
30.621
1.896
1.881'
1.884
1,800
1.930
UNITED STATES
39,553
42066
43.100
42,412
43,189
1,748
1,759
1.767
1,758
1,826
Other Varieties
SOURCE: U.S.D.A. Prepared by Hop Growers of America, Inc.
* Included in the category "other varieties" to avoid disclosure of individual operations.
Page 2
1995 U.S. Hop Production by Variety (from HGA Statistics)
Total
State
Variety
WA
Cascade
1128
Chinook
2277
Cluster
5143
Eroica
443
Fuggle
--
138
—
1115
287
58
—
5149
3025
Yield
Production
US crop
lb/acre
lbs
2,436 500
3.09
341
2678
1972
5,281 300
6.70
826
5969
2045
12,207 500
15.48
443
2210
979 000
1.24
547
1160
634 500
0.81
8964
1946
17,447 700
22.13
138
1210
167 000
0.21
1402
1559
2,186 200
2.77
58
2210
128 200
0.16
8174
2142
17,505 400
22.20
160
2040
326 400
0.41
402
1504
604 700
0.77
3254
1038
3,377 700
4.28
6059
1592
9,647 800
12.24
~
*
%of
2160
547
Liberty
Nugget
60
Harvested
Total
1128
„
~
8358
US No. Brewer1
ID
~
Galena
Mt. Hood
OR
Acres
—
608
--
~
—
—
Olympic
160
Perle
248
154
Tettnanger
2278
976
Willamette
2797
3260
Other2
1329
332
2152
3813
1553
5,922 500
7.51
Total
30621
8641
3927
43189
1826
78,852 400
100.00
~
~
—
—
~
* Included in "other" to avoid disclosure of single operation.
mixed rootstock including Cluster, Fuggle and others.
includes northern Idaho (about 1400 acres Saazer, 500 acres Hallertau mittelfruh, 4
acres Saazer)' about 20 acres Crystal in OR, Tettnanger- and Saazer-type experimental
selections, and probably/Chelan and Columbia in Washington.
1 \,.
\':;.
f.
U.S. / GERMAN / IHGC ALPHA ACID PRODUCTION 1980 - 1995
(1,000 pounds)
Crop
Year
United States
Average
1980
5,302
7.0%
1981
5,556
7.0%
1982
5.893
5.525
7.5%
8.1%
1983
Crop
IHGC
Total
Axsxage.
Other
IHGC
3,397
5.7%
4.707
13.406
4.451
6.0%
5,732
15.739
4.824
5.1%
5,957
16.674
3,397
4.2%
5.141
14,063
Germanv 1/
4,718
3,926
8.4%
5,068
6.5%
5,836
15,622
1985
7.9%
4,178
5.3%
4,769
12,873
1986
4.755
9.7%
4,407
5.9%
4,381
13,543
1987
4,630
9.3%
4,403
6.5%
4,769
13,801
1988
4.850
5.260
8.9%
3,574
5.4%
4,795
13.219
1989
8.9%
4,114
5.9%
4,418
13,792
1990
4,958
8.7%
3,232
4.8%
3,657
11,848
1991
6.277
9.1%
5,042
6.3%
5,084
16,402
3.053
5.970
4.8%
3.979
13.986
6.4%
18.616
15.507
1984
1992
6,953
9.4%
1993
7.767
10.2%
1994
7,086
9.5%
2.335
3.7%
4,879
3,887
1995 V
7,387
9.4%
4,012
5.3%
4.107
13,307
Source: U.S. hop merchants; IHGC report - November 1995. Prepared by Hop Growersof America, Inc.
1/ 1980-1989 German alpha figures reflect West German productiononly.
II 95 U.S. alpha tonnage measured at harvest (ASBC Spectrophotometric). *95 German and IHGC figures are estimates only.
ALPHA ACID PERCENTAGES BY VARIETY - 1995 U.S. HOP CROP
Varietv
Average
Alpha *
Cascade
4.20%
Mt. Hood
3.50%
Tettnang
3.60%
Willamette
4.40%
Cluster
6.90%
Chinook
11.60%
Galena
11.75%
Nugget
12.60%
1995 U.S. Hop Crop: Alpha Acid Percentages
Ml Hood Teunang
Cascade Willamette Cluster
Source: U.S. Hop Dealer's Trade Association.
* Figures represent alpha percentages asof December 31,1995 (ASBC-Spcctrophotometric).
Page 3
Chinook
Galena
Nugget
U.S. HOP YIELDS 1978- 1995
(pounds per acre)
Year
Oregon
Washington
Idaho
United States •
1.510
1.790
1.782
1,540
1,710
1.727
1,960
2,037
1,650
1,836
1978
1.880
1979
1981
1.800
2.080
1,900
1.960
1,720
1982
2.070
1,800
1,730
1.984
1983
1.930
1,590
1.740
1984
1,846
1.920
1,870
1,420
1,750
1.824
1985
1,470
1,620
1.764
1986
2,040
1,664
2,000
1,968
1980
1987
1,860
1,470
1,750
1,770
1988
1.721
1.470
1,400
1989
1,638
1.782
1.600
1.461
1,717
1990
1.634
1.530
1.500
1.603
1991
1,896
1,415
1,319
1.748
1992
1,881
1,884
1.800
1.930
1.479
1.387
1,759
1.500
1.375
1.527
1,758
1,520
1.826
1993
1994
1995
1.715
1,595
1,767
Sources: U.S.D.A., U.S. Hop Administrative Commiuee. Prepared by Hop Growers ofAmerica, Inc.
•U.S. figures include California acreage yields (1978-1987).
US. Hop Yields 1991 -1995
1991
1992
Idaho
1993
Oregon
Page 4
1994
Washington
1995
U.S.
U.S. HOP ACREAGE BY VARIETY 1986 - 1995
(Acres Harvested)
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
Alpha Varieties
Galena
4,396
4,740
5.570
6.424
6,788
8.244
8.968
9.184
8.948
Nugget
2,951
2.850
3.270
3.519
4.220
4.650
5.906
6.510
6.991
8.174
231
980
1.220
1.489
1,746
2.577
2.630
2,745
2,656
2.678
443
Chinook
Eroica
8.966
1,470
1.170
1,070
822
756
641
373
446
446
Olympic
218
230
270
279
280
337
291
261
225
160
Other
199
109
334
363.
265
529
352
597 .
634
763
9,465
10.279
11,734
12.896
14,055
16.978
18,720
19,900
21.184
SubTotal
Cluster
1/
Total - Alpha
19.743
9.419
10.410
8,440
6.864
6.614
6,964
7.079
18.884
20.689
20,174
19,760
20.669
23.942
25.799
26.420
26.029
27.153
2.114
2.745
5.880
6,299
6.463
6,173
6,227
6.325
6.346
6.057
650
2.670
2.941
2,980
2.831
2,702
2.735
2.815
3,254
560
867
1.519
2,068
2.070
1,402
1.128
6,677 .
6.129 '
5.969
Aroma Varieties
Willamette
Tettnang
-
Mt. Hood
•
Cascade
Fuggle
-
1.650
920
1.297
1.270
1.240
1.261
1,365
1.334
967
920
850
801
608
487
570
465
470
547
410
910
1.064
932
935
1.010
942
557
402
119
138
340
466
468
511
525
319
320
466
451
449
447
72
-
Liberty
•
•
Banner
-
•
Aquila
-
-
Total - Aroma
US TOTALS
-
2.241
Perle
Other
-
.
-
.
794
1,23ft
1.336
1,454
1,062
7.118
2.206
6.116
7,611
13.226
14.788
14,794
15.611
16.467
25,000
28.300
33,400
34.548
35,463
39.553
42.266
.
2,38? _
138
.
.
.
2.534
3,108
16.680
16383
16,036
43.100
42.412
43.189
Source: U.S.D.A., U.S. Hop Administrative Committee reports. Prepared by Hop Growers of America. Inc.
1/ 1986 Cluster acreage totals includethe variety Talisman.
VS. Hop Acreage by State 1981 •1995
1995 U.S. Hop Acreage (% of total)
Acres Harvested
Wash.
Oregon
Idaho
U.S. »
43.100
1981
31.300
7,200
3.400
1982
28.100
7300
3.700
39.600
1983
27.000
6,300
3,600
36.900
1984
22.700
4,900
3,100
30,800
1985
19.500
5,500
3.100
28,100
1986
17.400
5,100
2.500
25.000
1987
20.100
6.000
2.200
28.300
Other (13%
(21%)
Cascade (3%
Mt. Hood (3%t
Chinook (6%):
1988
23.100
33,400
24.336
7.500
7.412
2,800
1989
2,800
34.548
1990
25.663
7,100
2.700
35,463
1991
28.245
7,190
4.118
39.553
1992
30.366
7,900
4,000
42.266
1993
31.239
7,900
3,961
43.100
1994
30.375
8.000
4,037
42,412
1995
30,621
8.641
3.927
43.189
Source: U.S.D.A., Hop Administrative Committee reports. Prepared by Hop Growers of America. Inc.
> U.S. totals include California acreage (1981-1987).
Page 5
get (19%)
Willamette (14%)
U.S. HOPS:
Mktg
SEASON AVERAGE PRICES &TOTAL CROP VALUE
SEASON AVERAGE PRICE
Year
WjisL
Oregon
Idaho
US.
(S / pound)
1980
$1.54
1981
$1.50
1982
$1.60
1983
S1.80
1984
$1.99
1985
$1.80
1986
$1.59
1987
$1.32
1988
S1.36
1989
S1.33
1990
$1.44
1991
$1.68
1992
$1.72
1993
$1.72
1994
1995
1
Source: U.S.D.
U.S.
Total Crop
Production
Value
(1,000 lbs)
(x 1,000)
$114,194
$1.44
$1.47
$1.97
$1.42
$1.65
$2.48
$1.51
$1.51
$1.74
75.560
79.144
78.550
$2.15
$2.10
$2.36
$2.08
$2.62
$2.92
$3.18
$2.59
$1.93
$2.10
$2.03
$1.78
68,111
56,167
49,713
49.062
$1.78
$1.64
$1.58
$1.63
$1.71
$2.74
$1.09
$1.26
$1.50
$1.59
$1.51
$1.40
$1.38
$1.48
$1.68
50,048
54,696
59,326
$119,220
$136,884
$131,483
$117,701
$98,433
$87,087
56,855
69,155
$1.77
$1.86
$1.95
$1.96
$1.69
$1.77
$1.79
$1.74
$1.76
$1.81
74,560
$1.70
$1.90
$1.73
SI 74
78,852
74,337
76,144
$129,096
$133,965
$134,701
1
$136,985
A., Hop Administrative Committee reports. Prepared by Hop'Growers of America, Inc.
S2J50
f i
§ i
i
i
i
P»qc6
i
i
i
t
$75,578
$76,415
$81,583
$84,178
$115,997
£ $ g * g
&
i
i
i
[
f
10
1995 U.S. SOLD AHEAD SURVEY 1/
Year
Pounds Contracted
% or Crop Sold V
1995
68.074,883
91.3%
1996
59.624.593
80.0%
1997
40,942.276
54.9%
1998
33.431.262
44.8%
1999
14.825,036
19.9%
2000
10.197.151
13.7%
Source: U.S.D.A. Prepared by HopGrowers of America. Inc.
1/ Survey based on responses from 72% of U.S. hop growers, representing 70% of the 1995 acreage strung for harvest.
2/ %of aop sold =pounds contracted divided byaverage U.S. hop aop over the last 5 years (1991-1995).
IHGC SOLD AHEAD SURVEY 1995- 1999
Average Crop
Countrv
Production 1/
1995
1996
1227.
1998
1999
(x 1,000 lbs.)
USA
74,600
91%
80%
55%
45%
20%
Germany
75.500
71%
54%
n/a
n/a
n/a
Czech Republic
20.500
70%
60%
43%
32%
27%
United Kingdom
11.000
55%
30%
23%
8%
8%
Slovenia
7,500
60%
47%
29%
17%
14%
Poland
5,700
87%
77%
67%
67%
58%
Ukraine
5.500
8%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
France
2,500
95%
95%
77%
32%
24%
Slovakia
2,200
60%
50%
50%
40%
35%
New Zealand
1,600
93%
93%
64%
29%
23%
Belgium
1,200
43%
14%
11%
9%
4%
Source: IHGC report - March 1995; U.S.D.A. Prepared by Hop Growers of America.
1/ Average crop production =current acreage x average yields over thelast 5 years (1991-1995).
Page 7
cs
(0.78)
(0.96)
(0.71)
(0.62)
267.705
291.526
293.215
268.326
297.225
1990
1991
1992
1994
(1.62)
(1.16)
(1.12)
(1.02)
41%
43%
12%
47.831
lDJiOD
10.233 (16)
34.563 (12)
12>
3%
11.129
a
4,815 (7)
6.267 (2)
3%
1%
2,970
1
1.849 (3)
1.118
4%
0%
lfc
72%
16%
63.356
* Bale weight equals 200 lbs. or 90 kilograms.
% of Total
281.782
Q
2^832(100)
iriaho
Total
17.655 (20)
45.701 (15)
22.032 (33)
230.911 (78)
Oregon
Washington
5%
17,696
Q
5.690 (9)
12.006 (4)
23k
2%
9,143
Q
4,070 (6)
5.073 (2)
3%
2%
5.906
Q
4,522 (7)
1.384 (1)
43k
TABLE 3 : 1995 Number of Bales * in Each Seed Category (Percent of Total in Parenthesis)
% of Total
169.305
4J£Z(14)
160,313
23.121 (35)
2L622(75)
25.741 (39)
Idaho
124.487 (42)
i%_
Oregon
23,
130.515 (44)
Total
59.718
60.686
66.741
66,211
(1.28)
(0.63)
(1.35)
(1.39)
Orreon(%)
55.716
63.000
56.859
52.811
(0.99)
(0.97)
(0.87)
(1.02)
(111)
(0.35)
(1.20)
1%
2,691
Q
2.072 (3)
619
5%
-
425
Q
272
153
5%
28.839
30,822
26.340
27.732
25.371
19.033
19.881
(101)
IdaluLiSa
18.992
1995 Number of Bales * in Each Leaf & Stem Category (Percent of Total in Parenthesis)
1995
(0.73)
(0.96)
(1.01)
216.188
212.271
1989
1993
(0.92)
200.584
1988
Washinstonf%>
ToUl Number of Bales * Inspected (Weighted Average of Leaf & Stem in Parenthesis)
Washington
TABLE 2:
TABLE 1 :
on Service
1995 U.S. HOP INSPECTION REPORT
Prepared bv U.S.D.A. Federal Grain Inspect
6%
1%
2.588
Q
2,247 (3)
341
6%
-
302
0
180
122
(0.93)
(0.79)
(0.75)
(0.80)
(0.95)
(1.09)
(0.85)
(100)
2%
9,113
Q
7.923 (12)
1.190
7%t
-
0
Q
0
0
7% +
392.275
365,889
380.241
378,976
345.887
288.163
299,069
275.327
Total U.S. f%>
Ifital
100%
392.275
2M32(I00)
66.211 (100)
297.225 (100)
Total
100%
392.275
2L8J2(100)
66.211 (100)
297.225 (100)
12
U.S. HOP INSPECTION REPORTS 1976-1995
LEAF, STEM & SEED CONTENT (%)
WASHINGTON
OREGON
IDAHO
Xm
Leaf & Stem
Leaf & Stem
Leaf&St<-m
Leaf & Stem
SeedConirm
1976
1.23
1.43
1.16
1977
1.46
1.91
1.15
1978
1.38
2.19
1.34
1.24
1.49
1.48
1.18
1.52
0.98
1979
1.92
2.32
1.38
1.93
1.07
1.40
U.S. AVERAGE*
1980
2.57
2.19
1.84
2.43
1981
1.93
2.49
1.60
2.01
1.55
1982
1.13
1.80
1.24
1.26
1.38
1983
1.25
1.44
1.20
1.28
1.02
1984
1.07
1.77
1.27
1.18
1.12
1985
1.25
1.56
1.16
1.16
0.67
1986
0.95
0.92
0.73
0.93
1.52
1987
1.14
1.55
1.28
1.23
1.15
0.89
1988
0.92
1.28
1.01
1.00
1989
0.96
0.83
1.20
0.95
1.12
1990
1.01
1.35
1.11
1.09
0.74
1991
0.78
1.39
0.35
0.85
1.15
1992
0.96
1.62
1.02
0.93
0.67
1993
0.71
1.16
0.87
0.79
0.91
1994
0.62
1.12
0.99
0.75
0.54
1995
0.73
1.02
0.97
0.80
0.62
Source: U.S.D.A. Federal Grain Inspection Service. Prepared by Hop Growers of America, Inc.
* U.S. Averages includeCaliforniaaop figures 1976-1986.
U.S. Leaf, Stem & Seed Content 1986 -1995
1.6%
1.4%
\
L
Leaf & Stem Content
—fj— Seed Content
N
\^
1.2%
1.0%
. <±><
—t^N
<!p"
1
A
- ^i
y
yT
0.8%
\
/
<v\
V
-s
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Page 9
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
13
DISPOSITION
OF
PRODUCTION
SALABLE HOP PRODUCTS (1,000 lbs.)
Exports
(+)
Increase (Decrease)
Net Domestic
Plus (minus)
Usage of
U.S. Hops*
Unaccountable
(+)
Difference
Domestic
Stocks
(+)
1.520
74,411
(100%)
78,926
(100%)
14.050
7,016
2.364
78,145
(100%)
41,965
28.346
43,725
24.493
1982-83
34,733
1983-84
32,181
1984-85
31,352
26.689
29.195
26,691
1985-86
26,091
22,168
866
1986-87
28,380
1987-88 1/
30.155
41.660
-8,239
-2,055
-8,009
-10.630
1988-89 1/
29.159
32,578
29,283
1989-90 1/
42,878
24.274
-8,016
1990-91 1/
31,300
21,810
1,435
1991-92 1/
48.493
22,997
-4,385
1992-93
43,786
31,227
1993-94 2/
42,812
51,084
1994-95
2,673
Product
12.600
1980-81
1981-82
2,580
-1,892
Salable
(=)
67.990
(100%)
56,053
(100%)
490
49,615
- (100%)
-320
48.980
50.048
(100%)
(100%)
-8,300
54,634
(100%)
190
59.326
(100%)
2.310
56.855
(100%)
2.050
69,155
(100%)
-2,486
1.810
74,337
(100%)
27,555
836
4.940
76.143
(100%)
32.934
-2.358
-7.100
74,560
(100%)
-402
-4,354
Source: U.S.D.A. Hop Market News, FAS. Prepared by Hop Growers of America, Inc.
* Total usage less imports, adjusted for year end inventory changes.
1/ 1987-92bop extract ratios were revised: domestic extract = 4 lbs. hops to 1 lb. extract; extract shipped overseas = 3.1
11 1993-94export figures were revised down from 51 million lbs. to 42.8 million lbs.
to 1.
U.S. BREWERY USAGE (1,000 lbs.)
1982-83
1983-84
1984-85
1985-86
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
Net Usage
Net Usage
U.S. Hops
Foreign Hops
26,689 (65%)
29,195 (65%)
26,691 (64%)
22,168 (55%)
29,159 (67%)
32,578 (75%)
29,283 (70%)
24,274 (58%)
21,810(51%)
22,997
31,227
27.555
32.934
(55%)
(77%)
(68%)
(72%)
14,349 (35%)
15,672 (35%)
14,774 (36%)
18,039 (45%)
14,626 (33%)
11,138 (25%)
12.302 (30%)
35.000
Hop Usage by U.S. Brewers 1985/86-1994/95
^s
30,000
25.000
"V
i 20.000
\ 15.000.
10.000
/'
\
*s s n
X
h>
/ V
V
N~ V
V
X
J
/
\
VV
s - -F
17,243 (42%)
20,974 (49%)
5.000
18,946 (45%)
9,264 (23%)
13,186(32%)
12.767 (28%)
-t*- U.S.Hops
Source: U.S.D.A. Hop Market News
Page 10
/
—F— Foreign Hops
14
SUPPLY AND DISPOSITION 1986/87-1994/95 (1,000 lbs.)
SUPPLY:
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
Carry-in Stock 1/
70.950
70,630
60.000
51,700
51,890
54,200
56,250
58,060
63,000
Salable Product
48,980
50,048
54,634
59,326
56,855
69.155
74,337
76.143
74,560
Imports
14.626
11.138
12.302
17.243
20.974
18.946
TOTAL
134,556
131,816
126,936
128,269
129,719
142.301
1990-91
13.186
12.767
139,851
147,389
150,327
45,701
DISPOSITION:
Brewery Usage 2/
43,785
43,716
41,585
41.517
42,784
41,943
40.491
40,741
Exported 2/ 3/
28,380
30,155
41,660
42,878
31.300
48,493
43,786
42,812
51,084
Carry-out Stocks 1/
70.630
60.000
51,700
51,890
54.200
56.250
58.060
63,000
55,900
Balancing Item
^222
-2.055
-8.009
•8.016
1.435
-4.385
-2.486
134,556
131,816
126.936
128.269
129.719
142.301
139.851
147,389
150,327
0.224
0.233
0.220
0.207
0.210
0.207
0.201
0.201
0.214
TOTAL
HOPPING RATE: 4/
-2.358
Source: U.S.D.A. Hop Market News. Prepared by Hop Growers of America. Inc.
1/ Brewer, dealer andgrower stocks as of September 1.
2/ 1987-92 hop extract ratios were revised: domestic extract =4 lbs. hops to 1lb. extract; extract shipped overseas =3.1 to 1.
3/ 1993-94 exportfigures wererevised downfrom 51 million lbs. to 42.8 million lbs.
4/ Hopping rate = pounds of hops used per barrel of beer.
48,000
Comparison of U.S. Hop Usage vs. Hopping Rates 1986/87-1994/95
46.000
44,000
, 42.000
"•
£ 40.000
y\
—»-""
'
S
~~~~«—i —*"
§ 38.000
~ 36.000
34.000-1
"
-•-
Total Hop Usage
32.000
i
30.000
i
.24
^
.23 -g
^4 '
•7")
c
-0
70
i 1
~
•» I
18 %
—r— U.S. Hopping Rate
17 §
n
|
86-87
16
15
87-88
88-89
89-90
90-91
Page 11
91-92
92-93
93-94
94-95
o
to
5.955
5.906
4,365
3.983
4.785
4.162
3,438
4,997
5,293
41.839
41.038
41.372
41,465
40.207
43.787
43.716
7.195
6.562
6.294
6.014
5,590
7.567
6.822
34.644
34.476
35.078
35.451
34.617
36.220
36,894
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
3.1-1
4.4-1
5.0-1
5.1-1
4.7-1
5.6-1
6.6-1
4.0-1
1981-82
1982-83
1983-84 V
1984-85
1985-86
1986-87
1987-88
12.412
10.933
11.288
9.319
15.212
4.902
2.725
5.589
5.769
4.403
5.494
41317
42.785
41,943
40,491
40.741
45.701
7.032
7.318
7.749
8.436
8.723
9.148
34.485
35.467
34.194
32,055
32,018
36.553
3.1-1
3.1-1
3.1-1
3.1-1
3.1-1
3.1-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.0-1
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94 4/
1994-95
1/
21
3/
4/
1987-92 hop extract ratios were revised: domestic extract =4 lbs. hops to I lb. extract; extract shippedoverseas= 3.1 to 1.
1980-81 figures include 5 million poundsminus adjustment to reflect more accurateexport extract figure.
1983-84 includes 3.5 million pounds minus adjustment to reflect more accuratedomestic extract consumption figure.
1993-94 export figures were revised down from 51 million lbs. to 42.8 million lbs.
Source: U.S.D.A. Hop Market News. Prepared by Hop Growers of America, Inc.
16.535
4,310
41.585
7.244
34.341
3.1-1
16,977
6,705
-
-
-
4.0-1
-
-
-
1988-89
42.947
7.616
35.331
4.0-1
3.5-1
1979-80
-
-
1980-81 2/
-
6,883
35.582
-
39.953
42.465
7.321
32.632
4.0-1
4.0-1
4.4-1
1978-79
48.493
43.786
42.812
51.084
26.729
29.090
30.378
17,057
20,706
13,722
31.300
16.163
31.971
15.137
41.660
16.522
21.437
21.287
42.878
28.380
30.155
19,400
18.157
8.980
11.998
21.441
26,091
18.288
7.803
20.373
32.181
16,817
10.740
31,352
34,742
17.925
21.713
21.284
43.725
22,012
19,605
10.068
41.965
22.360
17.045
21,441
32.543
36.737
15.207
19.692
17.336
Total
Exports
Extract
(Hop Equiv.)
Pellets
Eellcu
Total Hops/
Cones
Total
Consump
Extract
Cones/
(Hop Equiv.t
U.S HOP EXPORTS
Edicts
US BREWERY CONSUMPTION
4.4-1
Eipoa
Domestic
Icar
Marketing
EXTRACT CONVERSION 1/
BREAKDOWN OF BREWERY CONSUMPTION AND EXPORTS OF U.S. HOPS (1,000 lbs.)
16
SEPTEMBER 1 U.S. HOP STOCKS 1976 - 1995
(1,000 lbs.)
Br_ewer
Dealer
Grower
TOTAL
1976
48.050
1,960
390
50.400
1977
48.520
1.580
380
50.480
1978
45.430
380
47,540
1979
0
38,200
0
32,800
1981
35,270
31.420
32.240
1,730
2,930
1,380
1,950
240
34,430
Year
1980
1982
43,740
2,090
1,200
47,030
1983
56.700
3,000
1,380
61,080
1984
60.480
6.256
1,360
68,096
1985
58,130
10,930
1,400
70,460
60.630
8.930
70,950
1987
62.430
6.580
1,390
1,620
1988
49,090
9,160
1.750
60,000
1989
43,200
46,810
8,500
51,700
5,080
51.890
1991
45.200
9,000
54,200
1992
9,980
12.540
56.250
1994
46,270
45.520
47.070
15.930
63,000
1995
42,800
13,100
55,900
1986
1990
1993
70,630
58,060
Source: U.S.D.A. Prepared by HopGrowersof America. Inc.
1/ Included in dealer stocks to avoid disclosure of individual operations.
September I U.S. Hop Stocks 1980 -1995
80,000
T
1980
1981
1982
1983
Grower
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
| | Dealer
Page 13
1989
1990
r
1
1991
1992
1993
/// Brewer
1994
1995
17
U.S. HOP EXPORTS: September 1994 • August 1995 (pounds)
Extract
Country / Region
% of Total
Cones
Pellets
Canada
149,912
3,046,758
75.178
3,271.848
6.4%
Mexico
416.669
134,480
5,016.349
5,567,498
10.9%
566,581
3,181038
5,091,527
8^39346
173%
NORTH AMERICA
Honduras
(Hop Equiv.)
Total
Exports
6.614
0
703.929
710,543
1.4%
Guatemala
0
0
136.685
136,685
0.3%
Costa Rica
0
0
136,685
136,685
0.3%
Nicaragua
0
77,162
0
77,162
0.2%
22.046
4,410
82,011
108.467
0.2%
28,660
81,572
1,059,310
1,169,542
23%
Other Central America
CENTRAL AMERICA
Dominican Republic
0
138.890
314.377
453.267
0.9%
112,435
0
0
112,435
0.2%
Other Caribbean
0
6,615
198.203
204,818
0.4%
CARIBBEAN
112,435
145405
512,580
770.520
1.5%
Brazil
372.577
6.236.711
3.130.089
9,739,377
19.1%
Colombia
180,777
961,205
2.925.067
4,067,049
8.0%
52,910
66.138
806.443
925,491
1.8%
0
0
300,706
300.706
0.6%
Jamaica
Peru
Chile
Argentina
Other South America
SOUTH AMERICA
Germany
United Kingdom
Belgium
Netherlands
Ireland
Other: Europe
EUROPE
Togo
South Africa
Other: Africa
AFRICA
0
103,617
478,401
182.981
498,903
582,018
728,181
1.1%
46,297
652,561
7,550,652
8,139,609
16342,822
32.0%
2.442.697
921.522
4,264,580
7,628,799
14.9%
921,524
892.862
1.715,404
3.529,790
6.9%
0
401.237
1.113.985
1,515.222
3.0%
2,205
94,798
1.353.181
1.450.184
18%
1.4%
0
39,683
847.450
887.133
1.7%
213,846
271.167
1,421.533
1,906.546
3.7%
3,580,272
2.62U69
10,716.133
16.917,674
33.1%
0
0
109.349
109.349
0.2%
30,864
0
0
30.864
0.1%
2,205
0
27,339
29,544
0.1%
33,069
0
136,688
169,757
03%
Korea
103,617
30.864
4.4%
324.075
996.479
2.125.453
293.874
2.259,934
Japan
Philippines
Hong Kong
1,614,428
3.2%
0
116.846
888.460
1,005.306
2.0%
8.818
315.257
444,230
768,305
1.5%
8.818
110,231
47,839
166.888
0.3%
74,959
41,888
293,879
410,726
0.8%
520,287
1,611,565
4,093.735
6,225,587
0
19.841
628.750
648.591
1.3%
5,493,865
15,211,642
30378,332
51,083,839
100%
China
Other Asia
ASIA
All Others
GRAND TOTAL
Source: USDA Hop Market News. Prepared by Hop Growers of America. Inc.
Page 14
123%
18
1
SUMMARY OF VS. HOP EXPORTS BY COUNTRI1ES&RE GIONS ( x 1.000 lbs.)
'85-86
'86-87
87-88 «
88-89 •
89-90 •
90-91 *
91-92 •
92-93
Canada
2.071
2,005
2,797
9,779
4,191
2,782
Mexico 1/
3,092
2,842
5.028
6.555
5.369
6.781
3.051
5.251
8360
8,166
5.897
15,676
10,972
5333
8343
NORTH AMERICA
7,099
8362
'93-94
94-95
3,016
3,272
8.242
5.567
11,258
8,839
Belize
12
0
0
6
0
0
2
20
11
4
Cosu Rica
36
88
90
68
0
41
82
71
144
137
33
40
115
0
0
44
55
44
84
139
49
15
no
121
121
131
278
230
212
137
711
El Salvador
Guatemala
Honduras
70
0
0
40
Nicaragua
50
48
61
48
178
0
0
0
0
46
51
233
79
64
77
21
1M
41
1±
52
Q.
322
a
a
327
ill
362
309
276
315
711
492
864
55.
1,170
Bahamas
0
28
8
22
25
27
34
21
41
7
Barbados
7
16
13
9
6
4
7
14
0
7
197
179
365
329
536
283
644
618
251
453
84
79
219
323
117
130
332
250
75
112
4
8
8
28
28
139
30
14
9
64
17
48
44
40
70
16
27
48
99
66
5
IS
21
21
61
£2
769
816
636
1,095
22
1,058
543
771
582
Panama
CENTRAL AMERICA
DominicanRepublic
Jamaica
Leeward & Windward
Trinidad- Tobago
Other
Q
CARIBBEAN
309
366
665
Argentina
700
709
222
0
186
303
554
437
789
13
70
220
108
40
34
264
187
168
4,848
157
6,012
7,104
7.985
9,732
7,566
5,659
5.823
6,575
9,739
413
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Ecuador
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
247
304
582
431
543
567
670
459
5,411
2358
2,914
2.865
3.893
555
972
2.118
498
577
223
0
272
394
112
117
150
52
52
28
47
102
34
123
127
175
18
656
848
589
643
754
226
484
636
425
925
711
301
4.067
368
49
92
103
45
56
81
88
120
177
40
487
887
202
257
501
451
433
1.088
1.081
119
1
12,962
24
25
31
22
16,182
10396
21
9386
22
12362
52
12,433
125
11,933
11,141
10.695
16343
Belgium
Bulgaria
77
144
108
589
962
1,601
2,000
1.235
1,532
1.515
8
0
0
0
0
0 '
0
0
Denmark
271
4.0
0
0
0
0
0
2
124
Finland
123
7
35
0
0
28
6
2
9
4
France
82
41
43
0
0
34
0
2
499
0
Greece
68
27
513
0
0
0
0
0
0
,0
0
64
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ireland
82
236
0
456
516
921
1.182
575
869
64
156
887
Italy
0
37
15
0
0
22
55
86
59
97
834
996
1.203
1.675
1,417
1367
2,092
1.999
•2,392
1.450
Venezuela
Other
SOUTH AMERICA
Hungary
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Germany
m
0
0
0
15
66
49
0
157
109
170
220
0
56
74
136
367
516
519
267
182
0
124
0
0
0
22
31
79
33
99
103
546
688
655
445
892
1.968
2.650
2,418
3.530
1,020
797
1.687
4,200
5.076
5,619
10,137
9,259
5.306
Russia
7,629
0
0
0
661
1.265
0
3.743
0
44
Other
447
P.'
2
3,100
21
4370
Q.
222
8.796
10323
112
11,043
lfl
21349
fiS
16389
EUROPE
2362
• 1987-92 export figures were revised to reflect an extract ratio of3.1 lbs. ofraw hops to 1lb. ofhop extract.
1/ 1993-94Mexico exports were revised.
Faqe 15
6.
12314
45.
16,918
19
SUMMARY OF VS. HOP EXPORTS BY COUNTRIES & REGIONS ( x 1,000 lbs.)
'85-86
M£L
'87-88*
-88-89*
'89-90*
'90-91»
'91-92'
92-93
'93-94
'94-95
Cameroon
0
272
233
211
174
147
110
93
0
21
Ghana
0
116
158
62
16
14
75
0
15
0
Nigeria
980
980
828
786
201
24
248
242
161
7
South Africa
160
196
55
150
51
108
160
153
106
31
109
Togo
0
0
102
22
34
154
62
0
116
Zaire
40
28
34
0
0
55
0
0
0
0
Other
&
1340
22
1,615
2a
2
129
a
£2
2
1312
6
1,237
546
511
784
488
486
170
Bangladesh
2
28
9
0
0
2
7
0
0
0
China
0
0
0
13
0
77
53
38
_7
167
205
271
136
71
50
95
158
336
341
768
0
52
47
56
19
82
27
62
50
50
683
1.069
639
333
364
287
426
1.136
1,474
1,614
2,260
AFRICA
Hong Kong
Indonesia
Japan
m
Korea
119
77
52
94
35
79
2.366
1,763
1,167
Malaysia
Philippines
Singapore
220
192
177
161
31
169
118
43
62
107
329
596
1.235
1.247
2,337
920
1,989
923
1,484
1,005
292
80
124
171
180
172
175
206
49
61
0
0
9
150
0
571
617
448
397
23
a
1,850
a
2365
0
a
a
7
a
2396
2,454
5,943
4,955
26
5,067
na
2.428
24
3,050
6,225
Australia
16
64
0
6
28
14
89
283
588
234
Pakistan
31
30
22
22
23
9
9
26
29
0
Papua New Guinea
0
0
0
96
129
89
41
55
103
62
Sri Lanka
0
0
0
7
7
0
11
15
0
0
Thailand
0
12
51
7
0
0
386
0
41
332
Taiwan
Other
ASIA
Other
AUST-OCEANIA
a
&
a
a
a
a
2
22
102
11
47
114
73
138
187
112
543
401
866
639
0
Iraq
0
0
317
0
26
0
0
0
0
Israel
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
7
Egypt
0
0
0
0
0
0
137
0
219
0
Saudi Arabia
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
MIDDLE EAST
0
0
317
6
26
0
139
0
219
9
26,091
28380
30.155
41,660
42.878
31300
48,493
43.786
42,812
51.084
GRANDTOTAL
i
A
Source: U.S.D.A. Hop Market News. Prepared by HopGrowers of America, Inc.
* 1987-92 export figures were revised toreflect an extract ratio of 3.1 lbs. of raw hops to 1lb. of hop extract.
Top 5 Regions for VS. Hop Exports
94 vs.'95
Top 5 Regions for U.S. Hop Exports 1994/95
% of total V.S exports
Region
Europe
93/94
94/95
30%
33%
2. South America
25%
32%
1.
3. North America
26%
17%
4. Asia
12%
12%
5. Central America
2%
2%
Central America (2%)e=°^L(4%)
Asia(12%)>
"'
"""
(33%)
North America (17%)
•South America (32%)
?a%c 15b
i
0)
C. 3
O
(.
tJ c e?
O
IO
0>
f-
LA
to
DO
U
IO
L*J
o
sO
so
ro
so
U
-J
so
to
so
00
<J W
00
SO
0>
O
la
*-
•—
O
5
vfe
O
sO
s
-
—. ..
IO
so
O
~~
-o
•—
-J
so
SO
—
Ln
O
•—
^
-J
00
o
KJ
OO oo
0>
Vj K> Ul O '
^
Os
o
tk l^i LA
*fc
—
OO
o»
—
Ui
ON —
C> 0\
to
O
^
O
^
OO -J
Ui
^
o>
U
v*> SO
^- IO **
sj 00 -
T*
ON **.
S> tO K>
—
OO
•—
La
O
oo
I
.J
~j o
OO O
*- o
-jON*h.
ONOOON
On4*L*JIOOOO^sO|
Xi.'OOO'-^tOUJ
*-o t- io 'so "so Vj 1>j •— on o
K) U *£> 00 O ^J »0 *— *» O0 I
rJLAO O O O O s * * S > ^ l
to
—
-
O
__
OJ
LA S> W
*- OO oo
ON IO ON
o
I
— I
^OtO~JK»>©SK><-»'li
OK>K> *- o
!
OO
OO
00
o
.
to
oo (j R
>o
-o
on
K — o
oo £
OOOOOOOOOsoR
OOOOOOOOOOF3
ooooooooool
ooooooooooF-..
— *- o
I
»o
O
L*J
-J
t*>
tJ
*»•
—
_
—
ro »o
LA OJ 00 O0
^O00>«—
IO sO *^- O
•—*—•-" "
I
aWOtO'W^rJOOOl
-OUJ-OON —
*^» O
K»00000**-0\ — UA I
OOOOO-JUJOOOOO
s*J
^j^-sOK»-JtOK)OK>OI
LA
OOOOOOOOOO!
o o o s o — la o
W^-OWrJslOOWNlft
D
R
OOn£So*.OOoEoOR ^j
— ^—
s/i
^jooooooooors ^
la
,oi>J-J*.OOOto~JOOf
•**•
^- -^
P*
KJOO^OOOOOOIa
*f>f>00>JUrJIJ-fU'E
L
g r*
r»
5
oooooooooool
oooS
%o o o o * . o '
*kO>ot**o\cRo--JOOl
sOsOsOsOsOsOOOOOOOOO
LA.t*.l*>K» —
OsOOO-OON
^WK)'-p,000,jJ<p<yi
sOsOsOsQsOsOsOsOsOsO
SO sO SO sO sO 00 00 00 OO OO
mW
kj
oooooooooor* c
R
OOOOOOOOOOfcrjg
B' ?j
ooooooooooE
3
oooooooooooE"
oooooooooo!
OO
SKI
sO
oooooooooo
sO
s
sO
sO
sO
sO
00
oo
oo
6 »p oo >j o* yi
t. ui k> -
vOsOsOsOsOSOsOsOsOsO
vO sO sO vO sO OO OO OO 00 OO
oo
e*
o
VO
vO
oo
~J
•OCNLHOOU*L*Ol*J'©**
o
*•
— Ui
0O
-J
o
IO
IO
o
OJ
oo
>o
X5
oo
oo
so bo 1a OJ Ul «J '- W Vl
l/i bo o
-J
S
o>
w
w
w
w
^
Ia u>
o
to
—• .**• y
.
o
«o
>o
oo
*S>
OX
•—•
sO
U
— _~ — *-
Ov
2
Jk. LA ON A
LU
sO
K»
^
sO
K»
w
SO
sO
sO
sO
~
<*
^
O0
to w
** On
SO
*-
*—
OO
CT
s!
00
_
_>
q
;~ y* i°
_
Ni
ON
0\
OO
<-A LA
Jk
ON sO
tk LA ( /
O
^
"w «o b
o
o
o
o--jo
"o o
"^- '^- o
o
"-j Vj
OsOsOOO-OLALOtOONtOl
sOONtOUJUJOOsOsOON^-
"— b
O— -JONsOONt— 0^>J"~J|
K)
oSooSl
—
OLAOOOOO»--J—
o
(OOO^-OsO
^->JK)*5tOLAfe
SUiOOlALAOWOf
OOOUtOOOOOOOl
soOOKJK
b» w Vj 'sj w 'a
OOOsOOLA —
«
LA ON K>ONsO»— pOOOj-41**
K)
OO
*-J
Sj
O
*-
bo Vj bo w w U ^i *— o -J I
— •— -
O
OO
»0
00
00 -J ON l>
vO vl LA *^l |
W
lo
& V
_
o
sO
OO
sO sO
00 00
00 nJ d\ Lft
OON>*OCa*JOOOOI
O0
N)
o
ON
o
o
^
l» sJ
%i o t a
o
—i
»-
to
1 / 0>
u
k)
o
o>
«
SO so sO
00 00 00
" £ o
_
sO
S o \ to •— _
S)
Ul
sO
sO
^. W K)
sO
sO
o
X
H
PI
TJ
X
o
m
r
r
w
H
*TJ
c«
X
o
o
(/)
»
H
o
s
c
21
VALUE OF IMPORTS AND U.S. HOP EXPORTS 1974 Year
1995
Value of
Value of
Net Favorable
Hod Imports 1/
U.S. Hop Exports 71
Trade Balance
1974-75
$17,718
$25,920
$8,202
1975-76
$16,616
$15,522
$12,754
$16,969
$26,625
$29,591
$27,008
$34,147
$10,009
$37,065
$34,240
$36,944
$51,365
$102,669
$72,456
$62,755
$58,191
1976-77
1977-78
1978-79
1979-80
1980-81
1981-82
1982-83
$33,842
$37,280
1983-84
1984-85
$37,611
$47,909
1985-86
$14,069
$14,254
$17,178
$14,300
$68,429
$35,512
$28,913
$20,911
$54,150
$16,539
S5.642
$18,379
S53.551
1986-87
$36,416
$54,795
1987-88
$21,891
$61,704
S39.813
1988-89
$27,960
$84,446
$56,486
1989-90
$31,557
$80,643
$49,086
1990-91
$39,787
$41,226
$23,661
$73,852
$103,914
$34,065
1991-92
1992-93
$108,275
$62,688
$84,614
1993-94 *
$40,668
$98,400
$57,732
1994-95
$41,415
$126,400
$84,985
Source: U.S.D.A. Hop Market News. Prepared by Hop Growers of America, Inc.
1/ Import price is defined generally as market value in foreign country excluding import duties, ocean freight and
marine insurance.
II Export price is value ofexportation based on selling price, inland freight, insurance and other charges to port.
* Valueof 1993/94 U.S. hopexports was revised from SI03.8 to S98.4 million.
U.S.
90.000 -,
Hops: Net Favorable Trade Balance 1974/75 • 1994/95
f
R
80,000i
70,000-
A
60.000-
H
'
g 50.000-'40.000-
A
V
^
30.000-
/
•«-
•s
20,000-
^.
^v
10.000-
V
0-
/
/
-
/
J
/
*•—
^
\
A
/
v
TT
/
V
•-—1
w>
vo
r»
oo
o\
r-
i—
r-
r-
r»
in
r-
>o
r-
r~
r~
o
oovo
r-
i
i
i
i
o-"fNf*iTj-in<or~ooo\o
—
ooooopooooooopooopoSSov
—
rJrArriAvirioocAii
faqc 17
5
—
ooooooooooooooooooooSKc*
C^
9,
0\
22
Major U.S. Brewers:
TOP U.S. BEER SUPPLIERS IN 1995 1/
Shipments (barrels x 1,000)
Company
1994
1995
Change 94 vs. '95
Market Share 2/
Barrels
Percentage
1993
1994
1995
Anheuser-Buscb, Inc. 3/
88.529
87,750
-779
-0.9%
44.1%
44.4%
44.1%
Miller Brewing Co. 4/
45,200
45,000
-200
-0.4%
22.2%
22.6%
22.6%
Coors Brewing Co.
20.200
20.100
-100
-0.5%
10.1%
10.1%
10.1%
The Stroh Brewery Co.
11.850
10.780
-1.070
-9.9%
6.4%
5.9%
5.4%
G. Heileman Brewing Co.
8.315
7.635
-680
-8.9%
4.5%
4.2%
3.8%
Pabst Brewing Co.
6,630
6.550
-80
-1.2%
3.5%
3.3%
3.3%
Heineken N.V.
2,775
2.900
125
4.3%
1.3%
1.4%
1.5%
Labatt USA 5/
1,865
2.275
410
18.0%
0.9%
0.9%
1.1%
14.222
15.840
1.618
10.2%
6.0%
7.1%
7.9%
199.586
198,830
-756
-0.4%
Others
TOTAL
<minus> U.S. Exports
U.S. MARKET
7.300
8.600
1.300
15.1%
192.286
190.230
-2.056
-1.1%
Source: Beer Marketer's Insights.
1/ 1995 figures areestimates only.
2/ Market share figures for major brewers include exports while import shares include U.S. shipments only.
3/ A-B's 1994-95 figures include contract-brewed Kirin Ice.
4/ Molson USA shipments included with Miller's 1993-95 figures.
5/ Labatt USA figure for 1994 excludes Wisdom brands.
U.S. Brewers' Market Share 1970 -1995
1970
Anheuser-Buscb
1980
1990
Other 4 Top Brewers
Page IS
1995
All Others
CD
O
to
eo
-T5
21,929
54.078
24,883
24.636
742
21,929
8,540
169,394
169,545
-151
-0.1%
v 63,223
62,336
887
1.4%
106,171
107.209
-1,038
-1.0%
95IHGCToUb
94 IHGC Totals
Diff. "95 vs. -94
% Diff. -95 vs. "94
206,176
97.904
10.566
10.8%
108.272
13,259
12.2%
1/1994 acreage totals.
-0.3%
-521 2/
169,394 1/
168,873
1,470
902
1.483
877
2,471
161,670
1.740
2/'Difference "94 acreage vs95 acreage ests.
-79
-0.1%
-442
63.223
63,144
-0.4%
106,171
105,729
964
717
828
687
-
59.949
208
3.385
2,602
3.385
6,304
2,385
12,437
1,008
988
135,203
5.856
7.413
24,636
53,868
* 1995 production figures are estimates only.
f "95 US alpha acid figures were not available when this report was compiled. The 7.05 mill. lbs. represents "94 totals.
A Member country did not submit a report, so data was taken from previous year.
14.6%
1,928
13,247
507
185
655
190
2,471
101.721
1.532
-
217
5.295
TpUl
43,430
Source: IHGC Economic Committee meeting - November 15,1995.
11.6%
23.825
230,001
108,470
121,531
15,175
71
1,032
305
1,470
964
507
828
727
1.277
Bulgaria A
114
1,545
1,108
268
195
Belgium
924
655
Yugoslavia A
687
1,483
190
New Zealand A
729
71
62
2.205
14,641
91
365
216
877
.
221.957
2,445
4,564
1.688
2,205
2,718
104,025
327
4,564
1,575
117,931
2,118
161,922
1,658
-
1,333
_
60,016
195
3,385
355
2.718
101,907
1.463
-
467
Slovakia
Top 10 Producers
France
Spain
Australia A
3.385
2,385
217
611
5.968
5,916
52
2.602
7,197
11.448
257
336
8,343
705
5,933
885
5.048
1,342
7.637
5,855
12,437
988
11,448
Ukraine
Poland
Slovenia
51,975
83,228
12,982
193,440
91,171
102,269
135,907
52,178
5.634
83,730
222
Top 5 Producers
3,954
3.459
357
5,634
8,400
4,783
3.756
8,042
3,583
7,660
U.K.
-
20,418
27,381
Alpha
471
-
702
5.856
-
33.450
7,055
78.096
4,012
Aroma
'96 Acreage Estimates
76,476
ajmu&i
Alpha Acid *
16,049
ToUl
222
24,883
Czech Republic
55,226
22,870
45,671
43,430
27.381
20.497
30,805
Alpha
Aroma
Alpha
ToUl
1995 Production (1,000 lbs)*
4.077
16.049
33,581
USA t
Aroma
Germany
Country
1995 Hop Acreage
November 15, 1995 • Numbcrg,Germany
INTERNATIONAL HOP GROWERS CONGRESS - ECONOMIC COMMITTEE REPORT
oo
24
C*f*tr»QoofNjmoONom
0\mNinnoo«no\
00
^~
00
"n
wi
-
m' \D in in n
00
00
oo
00
on
00
m
M oo »q «# ** *o r*t o
n
c-j m
**i
fN
no
i m
f> no
So m
oo o
c* — ^
no oo <*
no r- on
oo
<n
fs
m
o
no
m, i
o
^
«
fN
on
r-
m
oo
r*oo
OH
3
|§88!§SK5S2S
© fn en m *
m
fN o
v
—
8RK
v
i
f> r«S i
!*• iO
m
—«
9h
Ov v
no
vor*f**f**f**m"r"'r*ONo"
-
irt h
-
*
imr-rnfNfiONf-ONfnvO
wiO^TooooQ^r-oOfo
v
m
^F^rmmmf-r^r^NONO
' ?P
v
o
NONommmNON&ONONO
r> o* a
8 31 a. 9 3
«
«
2 S. R 8 je 9 8. $ 3 2
-' -
00
oo
r^ o. oq r-; r-; **>.©*"** « 0\
—
I m* oo* m V m" o" cJ rf rsT m*
m" >d no* no* no*
fNfNmmfnm^^^^
S o n - • —• m
m
r-
v
in
op
fNr-CT*m©c>^fN**
^
") ff> AC
-
—-
O
—
—
©
o
©
m
IO
—
m
—
fN
o
JQ 9°. to
00
fr 001 ^f m — fN V ^ IN
oo* r-" (•** 0
*o
«—
m
fNrtfifnrnf^^rr^r^oo
a
O
—
ONfNfNr-^oONNONOOO
ir". **•*. *°. T ^ "1 <-£ •"". °. H
jm" m in m* in wi m' in' m* m*
—
ri
O
m
o
o
c
o* no* no* no* no* no"
mr^ooooNm^T
—
O So oo m -v in cr> P o>
o' in m m" m" m" m m" m"
w
r*-— m m ^ o o r i
C T > r * m o p o i n o o ^ in
cm
O
o
O
<o
r*i
r-
vn
r-
|f*i —
m
^
fnfNr»oof>opmf^
oo
h
in
N
00
t+i
O^
N
ifl
W
oo
^
oo
r
t
^
m
r-
r-
r-
ooofNror^wmoo
op oo p
5
-
5000mm
00
fN
q
*n
m
m
m
m
00
00
00
00
00
f\
en
t*y
t*\
f*V
00
00
h
h
^mfN?Sfn'*mooo
0
DC
|r»Tro\tNr»©oo©o
iONTT©minininmm
mmofioooooooooooo
—
ONONOOmmr'irof'if'i
<
I ^
<
M
rn
f^
f^
fO
M
M
m
fN m 5 o^
O On 00 in.
(^
2
O
QC
<
—
w
u
Ir^oor-'^oofn^'rNfNr*
(N rs — *r op m
r- on r-
ortoONr-vor-oo
a
o
in r- — m m
on m o no in ¥ no —„ *n ©,
m* m* m m* m' m m* m V
s
gjoomooo
N
C
in ^
(N 6
—
v^rfiON
00 -
vQ vO O
—
O
V
r*
i
OJOOOOOOOOOO
r*
fn
o
m
5
00
-v —
05
O
ON
ON
o*
fN
00
•» 00 m, fN m
00
0
o
eomooo-tt^osp"
fNOfNQOO
m m in \q \q vq — vq
iq *
in in, n
—
NONONOQ
i<> *
«
—. \o
OnONOnONOnOOOOOOOOP-
NfNfNfN.fNfNfNfNfNfN
NrNrNNNNNNNN
U
>*\Ooor^inr-*minr'ioo
—
oor-^moovoop —
—
oo
OfNfNm-vmiNOom
r-00O— <N<NV^fr^m
>•
1 ?»
s a
rm
m
m
q>
©
o
o
rN Jfs t
v
—
v
fN —
on i--
-
m
r*>
o
v
fi
fN
m
fN
fN
©
©
fN
fN
IN
fN
fN
fN
fN
fN
—
—
oo
..
^
^
w
—
^
MONNO^QvomoNmosoo
gom —
o050ot*-r*oor*
g % m \q r». «*» t* vq oo, — o
9 V fW V V m m no vo V V
Hmmmmmmmmmm
i
d
l©o\or-r-r*fNinmr-
—
sOvON0o©mm\o©NO
[ri — —'OOooooooNOvom
I h •; ". "
^fO*-\09»NN»m
T. ^
n. o. ©. °*
r^'«r,vmooo^'oooNON
©sO — NOr*mONNOmfN
— r-r-Otn\ONor-r-r-*
---rtnNconoeo*
oo^Vmompn —
ONr^
mfnf^OfnfNCNr-m^
r4 IN* fN* IN* fN' fN* fN* -' -
-
|NOooriNp<Nr-NOOr*'*
fNl^f^^ — O h - ^<n
^OOOnOnONOnOOnOn
3
•^
vo
on
m
oo
*n do on r- m
m
no
r*
—
JJOOOOWOOf/iJiwyJirji
oo>eor*m-^nftin
ONM(NO*»hlONCO
oo oo m no m no vq r^ so r*\
— —* fN fN fN fN fN fN IN fN
3oooooooo^g\ONON^ON
JONO>^0*0»l/>ff>vv»Ov
?&& 20
NOooPmooSm — onq
00 00 vq r* o, r», 00 on t\ ^
I ^' M* fN N
fN fS (N fN (N N
}3Q0000OQO$£d>ON2iON
£30nOnOnOnOnOnOnOnONON
25
EUROPEAN UNION HOP GROWERS 1992 -1994
Number of Growers
Total Hop Acres
% Diff.
Acres / Grower
Country
J222
1221
1994
93 YS 94
1222
1222
1994
1992
1222
1224
Germany
3.794
3,613
3,282
-9.2%
56.680
56,870
54,189
14.9
15.7
16.5
France
161
157
153
-2.5%
1.579
1.656
1,656
9.8
10.5
10.8
Belgium
105
103
90
-12.6%
974
1,011
949
9.3
9.8
10.5
United Kingdom
220
215
211
-1.9%
8,434
8.226
7,801
38.3
38.3'
37.0
2
2
2
0.0%
30
32
32
14.8
16.1
16.1
1.549
1,498
1,447
-3.4%
2,837
2,822
2,856
1.8
1.9
2.0
Portugal
33
31
31
0.0%
225
237
247
6.8
7.7
8.0
Austria
n/a
n/a
81
n/a
n/a
588
n/a
n/a
7.3
5.864
5.619
5,297
70.757
70,853
68.318
12.1
12.6
12.9
Ireland
Spain
European Union
.
-5.7%
Source: Repon of the European Council, June 1995. Pr epared by 1•lop Growers of America. Inc.
European Union: Average Hop Acres Per Grower
Germany
France
Belgium
U.K
Paqc 21
Ireland
Spain
Portugal
EU
Cvl
O
H
H
22
t/>
o
as
O
cu
Z
O
2
z
o
z
eu
O
fltf
u
&
ON
ON
oe
—^
>n
r-
—
oo
roo
r—
VO
r»
WO
—
«o
o\
on
*to
tO
cs
to
oo
>o
fN
to
to
£
CO
u.
«
a
'o
H
ffl
w.
o
n
3
u.
3
c
Q
O
OS
a.
a.
O
X
op (J,
f;
^
P
£
OO
{£ ^
Ol
£
"l
—t
*
vg
F—•
0
Z'
l
£
•»
to
to
vo
wo
n
WO
ro
vo
rl
ro
r—
ro
ro
r—
<N
to
cn
.9
5^
o
C
Ou
5
a.
«
co
S_>
<
Ou
0
z
O
X
§
3
0
u.
S.
</i
c3
"O
^
O
#
j3
rl
—
js
{£
I
5
u
on
0
rl
H
O
a
3
OS
0
a.
_J
-J
3
u.
^^
n
<N
ro
O
fN
en
CN
fN
WO
3
ro
ro
o
n
•<*
to
rl
to
ro
00
o
r»
«o
to
ro
ro
ON
OO
op c»»
5
o
00
_:
ro
On
ro
3
r•*
5
o
rO
0
00
to
«o
—
00
v->
ro
ri
r—
•**•
(A
o
ri
00
r—
3
00
3
3
r-
3
0
s
tO
Z
O
ro
<N
<N
ro
OO
0
•a
D
CO
0
ro
5
3ro
3
3
ro
5
nO
On
On
w
0
ro
vo
ro
no
rs
•*t
—
£
—
to
£-
fN
Tf
a
ro
to
1
c
oa
o
6
(A
wo
t*
ro
to
ro
<
w
os
•—
U
o
a i 8 .§ "8
to
on
to
on
vO
on
on
ro
vo
0
r—
D
ON
CO
c3
m
X
co
3
tO
z
0
tO
o
<n
0
on
—
S3
to
00
tO
UJ
•c
E
tO
•s
o
<o
—
•5
vo
•0
O
Z
*
D
o
O
X
a.
£
oo
n
3
I*
to
F-H
to
0
U
to
X
to
a
>
•s
^
</3
f>
CJ
a
c
r
0
U
f-
ri
O
00
r-
O
ro
"1
to
o>
V)
ON
rs
•»
ro
ri
06
r-
•^
vo
fN
to
o\
OO
vq
to
fN
2
ro
O
00
CN
O
ro
r»
ri
Tf
r-; r-;
ri ri
to
3
to
ro
vq
r>
to
ri
•>»
fcO
>o
to
>o
5
to
r-_
ri
fN
ri
ri
OO
fN
to
00
<r>
O
to
<n
m
0
r-
fN
vO
M
ON
to
ri
rs
3
fN
vO
r-
0
O
vO
ro
O
ro
to
fN
to
vo
ro
O
s
Ov
ri
to
ro
to
ro
>o
rl
00
ro
rs
</»
ro
>o
ro
(N
«->
•»
VO
ri
to
to
ro
vO
s
<N
to
00
8
</>
f>
00
r-
O
00
•O
ri
r-
^—
>n
o\
ro
c
J3
CJ
0.
CO
to
to
e
0
-0
CI)
c
3
2
T3
0
J
CQ
'_3)
6
M
to
U,
0
0
00
u
0
3>
vO
t?
O
On
On
—
^.
—«
u
a
>
u
u
r>
CO
e
•g
u
00 ^
3
to
-
U
UJ
o §
as
i2 «£
CX
4J
5 < <
0co -~ rl
-,
uj i> tf
*-
o 3I
££•§
u <^ s
c
VJ
vO
wo
in
00
v"»
r</)
ri
to
vO
rto
*o
r~
ro
00
^_
0
o\
to
3
Of
e
0
a.
OJ
CM
ca
O
27
Varietal Conversion Programs Submitted by EU Members (1995 crop)
TYPE OF VARIETY BEING CONVERTED TO:
Country
Aroma Varieties
AlDha Varieties
T°tal Conversions
Belgium
101
504
605
Germany
1,067
1.404
2,471
Spain
0
447
447
France 1/
0
0
420
Ireland
-
Portugal
0
-
-
247
247
United Kingdom
806
1.567
2.372
European Union
1,974
4,169
6,563
Source: Report of the European Council, June 1995. Prepared by Hop Growers of America. Inc.
1/ The EC report did not breakout France's acreage conversions by aromaand alpha varieties.
German Aroma vs. Bitter Hop Acreage 1985 -1995
35.000
30.000
5.000
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Page 23
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
-nJ
n>
to
o
(Si
13%
25%
14%
279.545
13%
281,291
12%
295.970
n/a
18%
1988
223,663
13%
28.211
n/a
15%
33.400
30%
68.051
13%
29.528
4%
9.859
24%.
54.614
1989
225.115
13%
28.169
n/a
15%
34.548
30%
68,333
13%
29.528
4%
9.686
24%
54.851
1990
224.188
12%
27,552
n/a
16%
35.463
30%
67.443
13%
29.281
4%
9.180
25%
55.269
1986
4%
11.133
29%
75.288
258.381
14%
36.266
n/a
19%
49.053
25%
64.595
1987
1988
4%
10%
259.594
15%
38.250
n/a
19%
50.045
25%
65.147
266.499
15%
40.675
n/a
21%
54.634
23%
60.407
13%
33.841
4%
26.235
10.803
25%
66.139
11.464
26%
68.453
1989
255.979
13%
33.731
n/a
23%
59326
19%
48.281
11%
27.117
4%
10.362
30%
77.162
1990
251,527
18%
44.326
n/a
23%
56.855
20%
49.961
9%
23.517
4%.
10.103
27%
66.765
1991
1992
1993
9%
6%
7%
10%
8%
268.678
304,568
7%
19.865
10%
20,598
29.762
25%
76.144
16%
49.564
8%
23,243
4%
12364
31%
93.626
1993
229.595
26.455
28%
74,337
19%
51.572
8%
20393
4%
11.084
24%
64.239
1992
236.067
14.977
8%
14.630
19.700
19%
43.100
25%
57.948
12%
28.663
4%
8.332
25%
56.875
19.700
18%
42.266
28%
65.696
12%
28,664
4%
8.431
24%
56.680
1994
262.056
5%
12.700
15%
38.500
28%
74.560
15%
40.258
9%
22.642
4%
10.709
24%
62.687
1994
219.851
7%
14.677
9%
20,000
19%
42.412
24%
52.541
13%
28.169
4%
7.863
25%
54.189
283.613
Production figures for tne categories "Europe (rest)" and "World (rest)" are pre-harvestestimates.
3/ 1992-1995 Chinese acreage and production figures are estimates.
5%
14.611
13%
36.000
28%
78.852
16%
45.000
9%
24.134
3%
8.540
27%
76.476
1995 2/
221,326
8%
17.100
9%
20.000
20%
43.189
1
23%
51,698
12%
27.601
3%
7.660
24%
54.078
1995 1/
2/ 1995 hopproduction figures for Gcnnany. England. Czech/Slovakia and USA were taken from the Dec "94 IHGC report and arc considered postharvest estimates. Production figures
287,298
16%
45.540
n/a
24%
69.155
19%
54.500
9%
24.471
5%
13.265
28%
80.367
1991
234.137
15%
35.140
n/a
17%
39.553
28%
66.025
12%
28.738
4%
8.896
24%
55.785
WORLD HOP PRODUCTION & PERCENT SHARE (1,000 Pounds)
213.380
11%
215.596
12%
n/a
13%
28.300
32%
68.320
14%
29.528
5%
9.946
25%
23.741
9%
49.714
1987
53.545
26.084
n/a
12%.
10%
69.225
39.352
n/a
20%
32%.
25.000
22,046
5%
14%.
69.989
28.219
36,266
36.707
n/a
23%
56.200 >
25%
68.123
22%
9%
69.115
9%
65.477
6%
23.920
6%
25.684
14.330
28%
78.705
1985
220.506
12%
26.882
n/a
13%
28.100
32%
70.586
13%
5%
29.528
5%
10.586
28.804
11.730
25%
54.409
1986
WORLD HOP ACREAGE & PERCENT SHARE (Acres)
SOURCE: U.S.D.A, IHGC, Lupofresh. Brauwelt and S.S. Steiner reports. Preparedby the Hop Growers of America, Inc
1/ 1983 - 1988 figures include former EastGerman acreageand production.
World Totals
World (rest)
China 3/
USA
Europe (rest)
Czech/Slovakia
17.416
18.739
28%
27%
England
78.374
1983
81.240
COUNTRY
1984
229.797
14%
244.920
29.010
34.925
n/a
13%
n/a
15%
32%
30.800
36.900
31%
13%
72,705
12%
75.090
6%
29.528
6%
29.281
13.457
14.500
Gcnnany 1/
I
World Totals
World (rest)
China 3/
USA
Europe (rest)
Czech/Slovakia
England
25%
24%
22%
1985
54.404
1984
54.297
1983
54.224
COUNTRY
Germany 1/
1
rv>
oo
29
WORLD BEER PRODUCTION 1987 -1994
J
(million barrels)
%Diff
Countrv/Region
1987
Germany
Great Britain
1988
1222
1990
1991
1992
100.3
99.7
100.6
102.3
100.6
51.1
51.3
51.2
50.8
51.8
Spain
21.3
22.7
23.2
23.3
Netherlands
14.9
14.9
16.0
17.0
1993
1994
102.4
98.9
101.1
2.2%
47.6
46.8
46.7
-0.2%
22.5
22.0
20.7
21.3
2.9%
17.0
17.6
17.4
18.9
8.8%
93 vs 94
Russia 1/
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
20.9
Czech Republic
18.7
-10.2%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
15.2
15.4
1.7%
France 11
17.0
17.0
17.8
18.2
19.5
15.8
Belgium
15.6
15.1
-3.3%
11.9
11.8
11.2
12.1
12.0
12.2
12.1
12.6
Poland
'4.2%
9.9
10.4
10.6
10.4
10.2
12.0
10.8
Italy
11.8
9.4%
9.5
9.5
8.9
9.5
9.1
9.3
10.0
10.3
3.4%
Austria
7.6
7.7
7.8
8.2
8.7
8.5
8.4
8.7
4.1%
Denmark
7.0
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.4
7.2
7.2
8.0
11.9%
47.7
42.6
42.6
42.6
20.4
19.9
(former) USSR
42.6
46.0
(former) Czechoslovakia
18.9
19.3
19.3
20.0
Other
5^8.
59.7
62.4
65.3
58.6
58.9
87.7
Europe ToUl
81.8
-6.7%
368.8
377.5
384.1
386.9
380.4
376.0
371.5
370.6
•02%
USA
195.4
197.3
199.1
203.6
202.2
202.2
202.2
202.1
-0.1%
Brazil 3/
40.5
40.7
46.9
49.4
55.4
48.8
48.6
53.3
9.6%
Mexico
26.8
29.1
33.0
33.8
34.7
36.0
37.3
38.5
3.2%
.
.
Canada
19.7
20.3
19.3
19.3
18.9
18.4
19.5
19.5
0.0%
Colombia
15.0
15.3
15.3
14.9
20.5
14.1
16.6
17.9
7.7%
Venezuela
10.3
11.1
9.4
9.4
11.0
13.6
13.2
Argentina
13.1
-0.6%
4.9
5.1
5.2
5.9
7.1
8.1
8.8
9.6
Other:
9.7%
22J
2X4
211
202
211
2&5_
25.4
25.5
0.6%
Americas Total
335.5
340.3
349.3
357.2
372.9
367.6
371.7
379.6
2.1%
China
42.6
46.9
51.1
59.7
68.2
76.7
104.4
Japan
119.3
14.3%
45.6
49.0
52.0
55.9
57.9
59.4
58.8
61.8
5.1%
7.5
8.9
8.9
10.8
14.0
12.5
13.0
14.6
11.8%
South Korea
Philippines
8.7
10.7
11.6
12.8
13.1
H.9
11.5
12.5
8.9%
Other
1U
11.8
12.7
14.8
11A
15.6
17.0
19.8
16.7%
Asia ToUl
115.7
127.2
136.4
154.0
166.6
176.2
204.7
228.0
11.4%
South Africa
15.3
16.4
17.9
19.2
19.2
19.2
19.2
20.0
4.4%
Australia
15.9
16.6
15.9
16.7
16.2
15.9
"15.4
14.9
Turkey
Nigeria
-3.1%
2.1
2.3
2.1
3.2
2.6
4.0
4.6
5.1
11.1%
6.0
6.2
6.0
6.8
7.1
5.5
5.7
4.7
-17.9%
Other
3JU
30.3
29.4
29.1
28.2
27.0
2L1
18.3
Toul
69.7
-12,9%
71.8
71.3
74.9
73.2
71.6
65.9
63.1
-4.3%
889.8
916.7
941.1
973.0
993.1
991.3
1,013.8
1,041.2
2.7%
WORLD TOTALS:
Source: Barth Report (1987-1995). Prepared by Hop Growers of America, Inc.
1/ Other sources listRussia's 1994 production as 14.8 million barrels.
2/ Other sources list France's production as 17.4 mill, barrels in 1994 and 17.8 mill, barrels in 1993.
3/ Brazil's 1993 production is estimated.
Page 25
30
TOP 20 BREWERS WORLDWIDE
(Millions of Barrels)
Shipments
Rank
Brewer
Headquarters
1992
% Diff.
1994 World
1993
1994
93vs94
Markel Share *
8.6%
1
Anheuser-Buscb, Inc.
USA
89.0
89.7
91.3
1.8%
2
Heineken N.V. 1/
Netherlands
45.8
47.7
51.5
8.0%
4.8%
3
Miller Brewing Company 2/
USA
42.8
44.7
46.1
3.1%
4.3%
4
Kirin Brewery Co., Ltd.
Japan
29.9
29.2
30.4
4.1%
2.9%
5
Foster's Brewing Group
Australia
28
28.2
29.4
4.3%
235.5
239.5
248.7
3.8%
ToUl Top 5
6
South Africa Breweries Ltd.
South Africa
21.0
25.1
28.6
13.9%
2.7%
7
Carlsberg Ltd. 3/
Denmark
18.1
23.4
25.7
9.8%
2.4%
25.6
14.8%
2.4%
2.2%
8
Companhia Cervejaria Brahma
Brazil
21.0
22.3
9
Danone Groupe (Kronenbourg) 4/
France
24.0
23.6
23.7
0.4%
10
Cerveceria Modelo SA
Mexico
18.7
19.9
21.6
8.5%
2.0%
338.3
353.8
373.9
5.7%
35.1%
ToUl Top 10
Santo Domingo Group (Bavaria)
Coors Brewing Company 6/
Colombia
20.0
20.0
21.2
6.0%
2.0%
12
USA
20.3
20.1
20.8
3.5%
2.0%
13
Guinness PLC 5/
U.K.
18.7
19.5
20.5
5.1%
1.9%
14
FEMSA (Cuauhtemoc) 11
Mexico
17.2
17.4
17.0
-2.3%
1.6%
15
Companhia Antartica Paulista
ToUl Top 15
Brazil
11
13.6
14.2
16.9
19.0%
1.6%
428.1
445.0
470.3
5.7%
44.1%
14.4%
1.5%
16
Asahi Breweries, Ltd.
Japan
14.0
13.9
15.9
17
Interbrew 8/
Belgium
14.3
13.7
14.2
3.6%
1.3%
18
San Miguel Corp.
Philippines
11.7
11.7
12.4
6.0%
1.2%
19
Strob Brewery Co.
USA
14.0
12.8
12.0
-6.3%
1.1%
20
Cerveceria Polar CA
Venezuela
11.7
12.0
11.9
-0.8%
1.1%
493.8
509.1
536.7
5.4%
50.4%
ToUl Top 20 A
* Markel shares overstated because some agency/license brands are double counted.
A Addition of columns may not agreebecauseof rounding.
1/ 1993 includes the acquisitions made through the joint venture with Asian Pacific Breweries.
2/ 1993 includes 1.6 million barrels of Molson Breweries U.S.A.
3/
4/
5/
6/
2.8% '
23.3%
1993 includes joint venture in the U.K. with Allied-Lyons PLC.
Name changed from Groupe BSN to Danone Group in May 1994.
1993includes acquisitions of Desmocs & Geddes, Seychelles Brewery Co.
1993 excludes production of Zima.
II Formerly Fomenta Proa
8/ 1992 includesthe acquisition of Borsodi Sorgyuar.
SOURCE: Impact's 1995 Annual Beer Study.
Published by M. Shanken Communications. Inc. 387 Park Ave. South, NY, NY 10016(212) 684-4224.
Page 26
31
HPR 17 '95
02:33PM BARI-HOPS UOODBRN OR
P.l-^
APR 17 '95 03135PM
MEMORAHDUX OF AGREEMENT
Between
the United States Department of Agriculture (ARS), and
Busch Agricultural Resources, Inc. (SARI)
The United States Department of Agriculture, by and through the Agricultural
Research Service CARS), and
Busch. Agricultural Resources. Inc. (BARH
enter this memorandum of agreement for the purpose of facilitating cooperative
cultivation, research, and evaluation of experimental hop straini for the benefit
of the U.S. hop industry.
The partie* agree that:
1.
The U.S. Pepartment of Agriculture, ARS, authorises BAR! to plant the
experimental hop selections USDA 21660, 21662 and 21663, from virus-
free plants being maintained at WSU Prosser, in 10-hill plots in both
Oregon and Washington.
2.
BARI or its designated grower (henceforth called "grower") shall plant,
cultivate, and maintain the rhizomes and rootstock as directed by ARS.
3.
Grower shall not propagate additional hop plants for his own use and
shall not sell, remove, or otherwise dispose of the rhizomes or rootstock
without prior written authorization by ARS; grower may not harvsst and
market the hop cones from the experimental planting for his own use,
but shall provide the total production of this experimental planting to
BARI.
4.
At any time during cultivation of the experimental bop strain, the ARS
and their officers, employees, agents, and representatives, shall have
access to grower's test hop plants and of grower's performance under this
agreement, and for all other purposes consistent with this agreement.
5.
In the event of disease or infestation of the rhizomes, rootstock, or
plants, ARS may prune, treat, destroy, remove, or otherwise dispose of
the hop plants as ARS deems necessary, without compensation to the grower.
6.
At any time during cultivation of the experimental hop plants, ARS, after
consultation with BARI, may remove rhizomes from grower's test plot for
propagation purposes.
7.
If and when the experimental hop selection is released as a named variety,
BARI, in conjunction with ARS, may remove all rhizomes for distribution to
U.S. hop growers; provided:
32
APR 17 '95
02:34PM BflRI-HOPS UOODBRN OR
P. Z/2.
RPR 17 '95 03135PM
(•) Upon removal, grower may retain all plated crown* and
Cb) theUrL5t°^r bf"Ch ?f *•"*»*• this agreement, arS shall aAve '
t«t JSJ. ren°V*
9.
rhi"n" ^ "t4bli^ crown! froalha '
Thespartie. .ay modify the terms of thi, contract by written mutual
(BARr)A*ricultur*1 Re«ouroe"» In<5-
The United States Department
of Agriculture
Agricultural Research Service
Name
'—*
t/^LP*e"s>*"7" -r****^ ^.^
•/#*«•
Date:
Date: S~/jY//4Vf~
y-4-ir
Orower. - Oregon
(
Date:
/'"GfoYer -WMhinstOir-^
33
'-^E: 2
02/13/96
ANNUAL RESEARCH PROGRESS REPORT
Report of Progress (AD-421)
Accession: 0144299
Mode Code: 5358-05-00
Title:
Year: 95
Project Number: 5358-21000-008-00 D
STP Codes: 2.1.2.4
50%
2.1.2.5
50%
HOP GENETICS, PRODUCTION, AND UTILIZATION;
GERMPLASM IMPROVEMENT, EVALUATION, AND MAINTENANCE
Period Covered
From:
01/95
To:
12/95
Progress Report
Two of the three Tettnanger-type selections (USDA 21664, 21665) were
harvested from commercial plots and nursery test sites. Pilot brewing
trials are in progress. USDA 21666 was discarded because of low alpha
acid levels. USDA 21665 was reestablished at a second Oregon location.
The original plot will be discarded because of soil problems. All seven
Saazer-derived selections (3 triploids: 21683 to 21685; 4 diploids:
21686 to 21689) plus three new German aroma hops (Hallertauer Gold,
Hallertauer Tradition, Spalter Select) were harvested from commercial
and nursery plot tests. Six Saazer-type selection (21683 to 21688) were
also harvested from 3-acre plots in northern Idaho. Laboratory and
brewing evaluations are in progress. The high-alpha low CoH specialty
hop USDA 21373 in northern Idaho was harvested commercially in
cooperation with a large U.S. brewer. The Hallertauer-mittelfrueh
derived triploid aroma selection USDA 21484 was released to the public
and named Ultra. A 3-acre hop breeding nursery (goal: high alpha, high
beta, low CoH) was established. About 150 seedlings with dark leaf and
stem color were established in a special nursery for ornamentals
potential evaluation. Four new Japanese hops (Eastern Green, Furano
Ace, Sorachi Ace, Selection C 601) and Southern Cross from New Zealand
were added to the USDA World Hop Cultivar collection.
Publications:
01. HAUNOLD, A., NICKERSON, G.B., GAMPERT, U. and KLING, D. 1995.
Registration of Sunbeam ornamental hop. Crop Sci. 35(6):1708.
02. HAUNOLD, A., NICKERSON, G.B., KLING, D.S. and GAMPERT, U. 1995.
Registration of Bianca ornamental hop. Crop Sci. 35 (6) :1708-1709.
Approved:
ROBERT E. SOJKA
Title:
ACTING ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
Date:
02/96
***OFFICIAL***
34
PAGE:
02/13/96
ANNUAL RESEARCH PROGRESS REPORT
Report of Progress (AD-421)
Accession: 0147812
Year: 95
Mode Code:
STP Codes: 2.1.2.5
Title:
5358-05-00
Project Number: 5358-21000-008-02 S
100%
%
MOLECULAR MARKERS FOR GENETIC IMPROVEMENT OF HOP
Period Covered
From:
01/95
To:
12/95
Progress Report
Five, random primers, C5, C6, C8, C9, and D3 (Operon Technologies,
Alameda, California, USA), were used to identify differences among 56 '
hop cultivars. We also surveyed primer sets A, B, C, D, E, and F to
find out if we could identify differences between male and female hop
plants. We did not find a RAPD marker that differentiates between male
and female plants. We used primers All and A17 to follow the
segregation of four polymorphic RAPD markers in four families with a
total of 13 6 progeny. The RAPD markers segregated in a Mendelian manner
and all the markers were dominant. We also used results of primers All
and A17 to demonstrate that a radiolabeled probe made from a single
amplification product used in Southern blots of the amplified products
hybridizes to comigrating fragments not visible with ethidium bromide
and hybridizes to other amplified products differing in size from the
labeled fragment.
Publications:
01. PILLAY, M. and KENNY, S.T. 1995. Anomalies in direct pairwise
comparisons of RAPD fragments for genetic analysis.
Biotech.
19:694-698.
Approved:
ROBERT E. SOJKA
Title:
ACTING ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
Date:
02/96
***0FFICIAL***
35
Wfimm ~osv MAiNUorrA-Rp
H
ir.,t
1
W^
*
i>fa/ik^
4+4^
-i-K-4vI--k-
%w
hlonJi
-* Hi
Ji\U-
a.
*l. • .
I
_££
I-
\\$ilvmEn
•41
ly^
! j.
:T
82-
...u
t
Mil
1TT
i ' I i i i I I
i
£_
i
i
l
M
i
•
^
:t/ahik;
iTrWyi'Tty'^^HTrH
i
.MiiL
£
l
^
plank
I
<J*
17
.__
•*
ilW
tfi i owft^i r
:--,»*
j. |. LU-j
t
-4.
%ȣ
•ukk
r
:
V W;
-,. IfIt,
is ii
.ifcf.fM&i f 1'
JSlJ
si
36
J^4 l
dolftftgy) ?nr/v$: Arlsr^revePcf M/J^n,
off station plots
and 1995
ban •Zr&f - Jyv/cJ
frown USMJl-tty- frws
^Whi/Ss
2^/iW:- 1%?*/*»& - 7x7'sf
*p*t+t.
f
*hft/A
4C*C
Te-Hmm- -type TnWf'W
%QcKA
my
(/-jr. on
4-fnni)
Wits
A rows i ycbA^jU^- -Lluo
L
i
r
l\6J>AA L£A3--.-J.tiplAL'/.....Jl.hlk...
31
elUh
'<fXd
&/6X6
H/6V
ILL.
MK.
Ma
ZMM
fa/U,J*u Site
fkiij&tnim
dram Yar'
"4^t^
f
-ft
K
T~&
I'fh'lllLt-
37
1994-95 ANNUAL REPORT FORM
Agricultural Research Foundation
ACCOUNT: 3618 U.S. Hop Research Council
PROJECT LEADER: Haunold. Al
Date: Sept. 8> 1995
DEPARTMENT: Crop Science
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION:
00.00
Beginning Balance (July 1, 1994)
31500.00
Contributions
(7534.65)
Disbursements
(16250.00)
Transfers (from one ARF account to another)
(1575.00)
Accounting
6140.35
Ending Balance (June 30, 1995)
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Limit your report to no more than 100 words.
2. Describe the project and explain how funds were spent. Ifno funds were spent, describe the intent
of the project.
3. Our office is required to report to the Board of Directors on all accounts for the 1994-95 Fiscal
Year, including those accounts with low balances and no activity
4. Return to: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION. Strand Agriculture Hall, Suite 100
before September 15, 1995.
'
5. If you have any questions, please call x7-3228.
DESCRIPTION OF PROTKPT (Please type):
Seven Saazer-type aroma selections (USDA Nrs. 21683 to 21689) and three new German
aroma varieties (Hallertauer Gold, Hallertauer Tradition, Spalter Select ) were
harvested from Oregon commercial plots. The two promising'Tettnanger-type
ncnfo^ (NrS' 21664' 21665) were hasted from 3-acre Oregon commercial plots.
UbDA 21656 was discarded. A second 3-acre commercial plot- of USDA 21665 and a
2-acre plot of Spalter Select were established. A large breeding nursery from the
iy94 hop crossing program was planted at the OSU East farm.
Use of funds: partial salary of the Research Assistant.
38
1994-95 ANNUAL REPORT FORM
u"
ACCOUNT: 3625
A„ i u . Research
t>
x. Foundation
r*
,
Agricultural
Oregon Hop Commission
Date:
PROJECT LEADER: Haunold, Al
Sept. 8, 1995
DEPARTMENT: Crop Science
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION:
4613.16
Beginning Balance (July 1, 1994)
9000.00
Contributions
(1113.00)
00.00
00.00
12500.16
Disbursements
Transfers (from one ARF account to another)
Accounting
Ending Balance (June 30, 1995)
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Limit your report to no more than 100 words.
2. Describe the project and explain how funds were spent. If no funds were spent, describe the intent
ot the project.
3. Our office is required to report to the Board of Directors on all accounts for the 1994-95 Fiscal
Year, including those accounts with low balances and no activity
4. Return to: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION, Strand Agriculture Hall, Suite 100
before September 15, 1995.
5. If you have any questions, please call x7-3228.
DESCRIPTION of PROTF.PT (Please type):
Two ornamental hops (USDA 21697—Sunbeam- USDA 21698 ma„,^
Use of funds: hourly student help; supplies.
39
994-95 ANNUAL REPORT FORM
ACCOUNT: 3634
Agricultural Research Foundation
Miller Brewing Company
PROJECT LEADER: Haunold, Al
Date:
Sept. 8, 1995
DEPARTMENT: Crop Science
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION:
5643.00
Beginning Balance (July 1, 1994)
6000.00
00.00
Contributions
Disbursements
(3000.00)
Transfers (from one ARF account to another)
(300.00)
Accounting
8343.00
Ending Balance (June 30, 1995)
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Limit your report to no more than 100 words.
2. Describe the project and explain how funds were spent. If no funds were spent, describe the intent
of the project.
3. Our office is required to report to the Board of Directors on all accounts for the 1994-95 Fiscal
Year, including those accounts with low balances and no activity.
4. Return to: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION, Strand Agriculture Hall, Suite 100
before September 15, 1995.
>. If you have any questions, please call x7-3228.
DESCRTPTTON OF PRO.TF.CT (Please type):
Following extensive laboratory and pilot brewing work which led*> new hop chemistry
findings, Miller Brewing Co. discontinued USDA 21120, since large quantities of this
zero-alpha hop were no longer needed. A large hop breeding nursery designed to
combine high alpha with high beta resin content was established. USDA 21373, ahigh-
alpha low cohumulone experimental hop was harvested frona 1-acre plot in northern
Idaho and is scheduled for extensive pilot brewing trials.
Use of funds:
Partial salary of research assistant.
40
1994-95 ANNUAL REPORT FORM
ACCOUNT: 4520
Agricultural Research Foundation
Miller Brewing Company
PROJECT LEADER: Haunold, Al &Nickerson, Gail
DEPARTMENT: Agricultural Chemistry
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION:
15279.00
11600.00
(15260.54)
00.00
(580.00)
11038.46
Beginning Balance (July 1, 1994)
Contributions
Disbursements
Transfers (from one ARF account to another)
Accounting
Ending Balance (June 30, 1995)
INSTRUCTIONS:
1.
Limit your report to no more than 100 words.
2. Describe the project and explain how funds were spent. If no funds were spent, describe the intent
of the project.
3. Our office is required to report to the Board of Directors on all accounts for the 1994-95 Fiscal
Year, including those accounts with low balances and no activity.
4. Return to: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION, Strand Agriculture Hall, Suite 100
5.
before September 15, 1995.
If you have any questions, please call x7-3228.
DESCRIPTION OF PROTF.PT (Please type):
After Miller Brewing Company discontinued development of USDA 21120, Dr
Haunold(cooperating USDA Hop Geneticist) made several crosses for high'alpha with
high beta. Three varieties were identified with characteristics suitable for Miller
Brewing Company and progeny from crosses will be evaluated from 1995 crop. From
the 1994 crop this laboratory analyzed 753 samples collected by Dr. Haunold and
conducted storage tests on 494 samples. Steam-distilled hop oil was collected from 452
miniature bales and gas-liquid chromatography analyses on 416 samples. Aformal
report was presented to Miller Brewing Company in February.
This grant funded about 12% of the Hop Chemistry section's expenses.
41
1994-95 ANNUAL REPORT FORM
ACCOUNT: 4522
Agriculture. Research Foundation
Hop Research Council
PROJECT LEADER: Haunold, Al &Nickerson, Gail
DEPARTMENT: Agricultural Chemistry
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION:
5693.03
54600.00
Beginning Balance (July 1, 1994)
Contributions
(25850.94)
Disbursements
(30665.00)
Transfers (from one ARF account to another)
(2730.00)
1047.09
Accounting
Ending Balance (June 30, 1995)
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Limit your report to no more than 100 words.
2' TtlZ'rSecr^ 3nd eXP,ai" h°W fUndS WCre SPCnt- If n° fUndS WCre Spent> describe the i««ent
3. Our office is required to report to the Board of Directors on all accounts for the 1994-95 Fiscal
Year, including those accounts with low balances and no activity
'• "rs';,r^rL research f°™da™n- ^ **-*-.«... **.,«»,
5. If you have any questions, please call x7-3228.
DESCRIPTION OF PROTF.PT (Please type):
("roeminrusnT R1S I?°ratl0ry analfed ™samples collected by Dr. Haunold
Searn
d t.Ih hhop oil^was collected
T^l ^fromC0"dUCted
St0ra*ebales
testsand°" ^
^mples.
Steam-distilled
452 miniature
gas-liquid
cSd°S
416 r??' St°T
StS WCreTettnanger
C°ndUCted and
°" 494
^ progenies
™« oil
collected from LT
262 samples.Select.ons
fromtCtriploid
Saazer
UrDAl66"216^
UbDA 2166.4, 21665 and 21666 were collected during the growing season to
Aformal report was made to the Hop Research Council in February.' C°nCmi0nS"
determ.ne matunty and qua.ity characteristics under commercial growing conditions
Inis'glnt"'^ ApPr°Ximately 60% °f the HoP Chemi^ section's salaries came from
r
42
Forage seed & Hop Research Unit
Agricultural
Pacific West Area
Research
Service
Dept. Crop and Soil Science
Crop Science Building 451B
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331-3002
Telephone: (503) 737-5841
FAX: (503) 737-133^
Oct. 5, 1995
To whom it may concern ;
From:
Dr. Alfred Haunold
Hop Research Project Leader
USDA Research Collaborator
Subject:
OSU/USDA Hop Research Facility,
East Farm
We lease 14 acres of land at the OSU East Farm, plus another 4 acres
to grow seedless hops at the USDA Peoria Road Germplasm land.
All buildings, facilities, and equipment at both locations are either
USDA/ARS property or are owned directly by the Hop Research Project.
All utilities, repairs and costs of operation are paid either by USDA
or by the hop project.
Responsibility of all field operations at both locations has been delegated
to the Research Assistant (presently Mr. Ulrich Gampert) who serves as
field manager. This includes supervision of temporary and student helpers.
The research assistant has full authority to act in behalf of the project
leader in deciding on the types of field work, arranging the work
supervising temporary and hourly workers, purchasing items needed on a
day to day basis. Purchases to be paid with federal funds require
form AD 700 which must be signed by a federal employee, normally the
project leader.
The Research Assistant ( a state employee) is not
authorized to do that.
The project leader may from time to time offer suggestions regarding
field operations, priorities, and types of work related to the overall
operation of the project.
This will normally be relayed to other emplyees
on the project through the research assistant/field manager.
On a day to day basis, however, all instructions and directives related to
smooth operations of the field-related hop research operations will come
from the research assistant/field manager.
43
Table 1: Hop germplasm and plants, or cone samples distributed in 1995.
Date
Recipient and address
sent
Variety or selection
Anderson, Wayne
Mar. 27
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
Corvallis, OR 97330
Beatson, Dr. Ron
Amount
5
Reason and remarks
orman.hop, propagation
5
Jan. 3
Crystal, 21490
10
Mar. 16
Cascade, 56013
200g
variety testing
Riwaka Res. Station
Moteuka, N. Zealand
USDA-ARS Infor. Ctr.
loose cones + photo of
Binaca. NY newspaper
Greenbelt, MD 20770
editors, demonstration
Becker, Hank
Blumberg, Jeff
May 25
Bianca, 21698
5
PO Box 124
21102M
8
Thetford, VT 05043
31190M
8
21541M
8
21176M
Bogash, Steve
Univ. Maryland Res. Ctr.
Keedysville, MD 21756
Mar. 20
Galena, 21182
Cascade, 56013
Willamette, 21041
demonstration plots
triploid male
?»
»>
»*
6
25
field observation tri
yy
»»
»*
Nugget, 21193
»»
Mt. Hood, 21455
Chinook, 21226
))
c/o David Grinell
observation plot
(request by Hop Union
Boston, MA 02130
USA)
Boston Beer co.
Bowles, Marlin
Apr. 20
June 5
E. Kent Golding, 21680
Bianca, 21698
10
5
ornamental demonstration
plot
Morton Arboretum
Lisle, IL 60532
Busch Ag. Resources
Feb. 27
Color slides of hop selections
10
slides to be used for oral
. presentation
c/o Darrell Smith
Woodburn, OR 97071
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
Butsch, Jeff
Mt. Angel, OR 97362
CalMac Nursery
May 25
Cullman, AL 35057
Coleman Farms, Inc.
Mar. 14
4
4
Bianca, 21698
30
Sunbeam, 21697
30
Spalter Select, 21674
300
ornam. hops, demonstra.
»»
ornam. hops, propagation
-"-
potted plants, increase
(John & Bill Coleman)
St. Paul, OR 97137
Mar. 21
400
Apr. 19
150
Bianca, 21698
2
>»
_"_
potted plants, ornamental
44
(Table 1 continued)
Coleman Farms
May 22
USDA 21665
coieman ureenhouses
Feb. 15
E. Kent Golding, 21680
(Kevin & Craig Coleman)
Dayton, OR 97114
Feb. 27
Mar. 28
Spalter Select, 21674
Coors Brewing Co.
May 8
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
10
21684, Saaz Sel.
18 lbs
21689,
20 lbs
c/o Bob Foster
2000
240
potted pi., off station trial
potted plants, propaga.
240
300
10
potted plants, increase
ornamental hops
Golden, CO 80401
Coors Brewing Co.
c/o Jan Langan
Nov. 20
Golden, CO 80401
Damkoehler, Lee
Oconto, WI 54153
Apr. 18
Davidson, Charles
Gervais, OR 97071
DeMoss, Gary
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
6
Apr. 19
Bianca, 21698
4
potted plants, ornamental
May 9
Blue No. Brewer, 21097
Bianca, 21698
2
potted plants, ornamental
6
Bliss, ID 83314
Dixon, Dan
Greenleaf, ID 83626
Fishman, Marvin
May 1
May 3
Ferrisburgh, VT 05473
Food Science Dept.
Oregon State University
dried cones, pilot brew.
Dec. 15
21683, Saaz Selection
21684,
21687,
21689,
ornamental hops
6
5
off station planting
5
14
6
Bullion, 64100
Brewer's Gold, 19001
5
21664, Tett selection
21665,
lib
baled cones, pilot brewing
21683, Saaz Selection
21684,
21685,
21686,
1 lb
baled cones, pilot brewing
commercial testing
5
c/o Jeff Clawson
Corvallis, OR 97331
21687,
21688,
21689,
Girsberg, Dr. Wilfredo
Nov. 7
Blawert
Misc. Wild American hop
10 g
seeds for Bolivia
20
ornamental propagation
seeds
United Nations
Sarre-Union, France
Gilbertie's Nursery
Mar. 30
Bianca, 21698
Mar. 22
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
Easton, CT 06612
Goschie Farms
Silverton, OR 97381
2
2
ornamental hops
45
(Table 1 continued)
Grant, Bert
Apr. 25
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
4
ornamental hops
April 25
Bianca, 21698
6
ornamental hops
Yakima Brewing Co.
Yakima, WA 98909
Haas, J.I., Inc.
c/o Pete Vandeneynde
Sunbeam, 21697
Salem, OR 97305
Harris, Katherine
Talent, OR 97540
Mar. 16
Bianca, 21698
4
ornamental hops
Hickey, Dr. Ken
Univ. Pennsylvania
Plant Path. Dept.
College Park, PA
May 11
21683, Saaz Sel.
1 lb
baled cones, pilot* brewing
Hop Union USA
c/o Dr. Greg Lewis
21664, Tettnang
Yakima, WA 98902
21684, Saaz Sel.
21686,
21688,
21689,
400 g
Mar. 17
Bianca, 21698
500 g
Feb. 28
MMBB, Life Science
Galena, 21182
Willamette, 21041
c/o Trish Hartzell
Nugget, 21193
Horvath. Dr Willie
Sel.
400 g
baled cones, hand
evaluation
»»
««
»»
«(
)»
u
j)
baled cones, trial brewing
OR State University
Corvallis, OR 97330
Idaho Univ. of
10
demostration plots
Moscow, ID 83844
Jillette, Chris
Mar. 24
Cascade, 56013
Willamette, 21041
home gardening
Mar. 23
Canterbury Goldg., 21681
potted plants, germ pi. coll.
Corvallis, OR 97330
Kenny, Dr. Steven
WSU Prosser IAREC
C-601(KirinExptl.)
Prosser, WA 99350
Southern Cross, 21703
Kerr, Mike
Mar. 31
Capitol Farms
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
50
potted plants, ornamentals
50
Salem, OR 97303
Apr. 19
Kirin Brew. Co.
May 24
Toyko, Japan
Bianca, 21698
Sunbean, 21697
21664, Tettnang Sel.
30
25
600 g
600 g
baled cones, lab evaluation
-"-
E. Kent Golding, 21680
6
virus testing (for Les Roy)
and propagation
21665,
(via Anh. Busch, BARI)
Klein, Dr. Robert
WSU Prosser, IAREC
Prosser, WA 99350
Mar. 24
46
(Table 1 continued)
Knapp, Dr. Steve
OSU Crop Science
Apr. 26
Cascade, 56013
4
Willamette, 21041
4
Bianca, 21698
3
Sunbeam, 21697
3
Apr. 24
Hop screen
1 pc
May 23
Bianca, 21698
5
wire mesh for seed
separation & cleaning
ornamental hop
Mar. 16
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
4
ornamental hops .
hobby gardening
Corvallis, OR 97331
Liebhardt, Armin
Apr. 24
Geisenhausen, Germany
Loan, Konrad
Kemptville, Ont. Canada
Lupofresh Inc.
c/o John Mueller
ornamental hops
4
Wapato.WA 98951
Missouri Botan. Garden
Apr. 18
c/o Jane Huston
St. Louis, MO 63166
McGaughey, Nial
May 3
Duvall, WA 98019
2
potted plants, ornamental
6
rhizomes,
Blue No. Brewer, 21079
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
6
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
5
5
ornamental hops
6
OR State University
Mar. 22
Hersbrucker-6, 21514
6
loc # 222:21-25, nematod
testing (very few found)
Plant Clinic
Corvallis, OR 97331
Tettnanger, 21015
loc #222:1-5, nematode
testing (very few found)
Owades, Dr. Joe
Apr. 24
Sunbeam, 21697
Mar. 22
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
ornamental hops
Qruze Beverage Co.
Sonoma, CA 95476
Owsowitz, Judy
Whitefish, MT 59937
Peacock, Dr. Val
Anheuser Busch, Inc.
St. Louis, MO 63118
Jan. 20
21683, 94 crop, Saaz Sel.
21684,
21686,
21688,
5
ornamental hops
5
300 g
-"-
dried cones, hand + lab
eval.
21689,
Pendergast, Joe
Mar. 17
Bianca, 21698
May 5
misc. hop seeds
Apr. 3
Bianca, 21698
600 g
baled cones, trial brewing
Corvallis, Or 97330
Peters, Jack
20 g
student (class) project
OR State University Seed
Lab; Crop Science Dept.
Corvallis, OR 97331
Rhinefrank, Ken
Corvallis, Or 97330
Sunbeam, 21697
ornamental hops
47
(Table 1, concluded)
63015M
6
c/o Hiro Hasebe
64033M
6
Tokyo 150, Japan
64037M
6
19058M
6
21055
6
21120
6
Bianca. 21698
4
Sunbeam. 21697
4
Bianca, 21698
Sunbeam, 21697
10
Sapporo Brewing Co. Ltd.
Scott, Fred
Jan. 11
Mar. 31
Noblesville, IN 46060
Signorotti, George
Sloughhouse, CA 95683
May 3
Stelljes, Katherine
May 27
Bianca, 21698
Dec. 15
21664, Tettnang Sel.
germplasm for breeding
ornamental hops
ornamental hops
10
2
ornamental-hop
USDA-ARS Info, office
Albany, CA 94710
Steven, Dr. Fred
600 g
baled cones, lab evaluation
21665,
OSU Ag Chemistry
Corvallis, OR 97331
21683, Saaz Sel.
21684,
-"21685,
-"21686,
-"21687,
-"21688,
-"21689,
-"-
600 g
600 g
c/o Dr. Darwin Davidson
Hall. Gold, 21671
Hall. Tradition, 21672
Yakima, WA 98909
Spalter Select, 21674
Steiner, S.S.
Schwartz, Dr. Paul
Dec. 11
Apr. 26
No. Dakota State Univ.
baled cones, hand + lab
eval.
10
Cascade, 56013
Nugget, 21193
demonstration plots
10
Dept. Cereal Science
Fargo, ND 58105
Whitney, Dori
May 16
Bianca, 21698
Mar. 15
19058M
•'
4
ornamental hop
5
male germplasm for
Brewers Digest
Chicago, IL 60646
Wills, Dave
breeding
Freshops Inc.
Philomath, OR 97370
Zimmermann, C.E.
Mar. 23
Prosser, WA 99350
Mar 11
3
potted plants, off sta. trial
Hall. Gold, 21671
Brewer's Gold, 21116
10
rhizomes,
21543M
10
triploid male pollinator
21620M
10
21106M
10
21105M
10
it
(t
a
6
ornamental hop
6
potted plants, off sta. trial
Bianca, 21698
Hall. Tradition, 21672
Hall. Gold, 21671
50
Brewer's Gold, 21116
45
a
"
"
48
Table 2:
Hop Germplasm and cone samples i•eceived
in 1995.
Date
Supplier
received
Amount
Variety
Remarks
Bures, Ing. Emil
Hop Servis, Holedec
Czech Republic
Nov. 30
123g
Saazer, 21077
very lateharvest (end Sept)
Dec. 5
197g
Saazer, 21077
normal harvest (early Sept)
loose, brown cones
loose cones, green
Kirin Brewery Co. Ltd.
Iwate Hop Center
(A. Murakami)
Dec. 30, 94
15g
C-601
new USDA Ace. # 21709
Japan
Steiner, S.S.
Yakima, WA 98909
new aroma hop, requested by
BARI (Ann. Busch)
March 6
500g
21664
Tett.-type selection,
500g
21665
Tett.-type selection,
500g
Tettnanger, 21015
WA grown, control
Brewer Cut
Brewer Cut
Oct. 10
49
Table 3:
New Accession number assigned in 1995
Accession
1995
number
location
Source
Name or Pedigree
Remarks
21709
Greenhouse
Atsushi Murakami
C-601
new aroma Sel.
Kirin Brew. Co.
\
Iwate-Ken, Japan
[Toyo x(KirII x No.Br.-Saazl00)]x[(Saaz-Saazl00)x OP]
[21676 x(21286x64107-Saazl00)]x[(21077-Saazl00)x OP]
21710
6:39-40
Wild American
Mohall W-2
a 4.1, p 4.0
high CoH, early
Oxbow S-2
a 4.1, p 3.6
Sel. 9019-27
21711
12:39-40
Wild American
high CoH, early
Sel. 9030-37
21712
13:39-40
Wild American
Oxbow S-2
Sel. 9030-55
a 6.1, p 4.9
high CoH, early,
compact cone
21713
116:3-4
Wild American
Souris- 25
high CoH
Sel. 8901-25
21714
118:3-4
Wild American
Burlington Al
early, a 2.4, p 2.4,
high CoH
Burlington C12
early, a 3.5, p 2.8,
high CoH
Burlington C41
early, high yld., a 5.4,
P 2.7, high CoH
Mohall A9
early, high yld., a 5.4,
p 2.7, high CoH
Northgate B22
early,0*, high yld.,
Sel. 8913-01
21715
119:3-4
Wild American
Sel. 8918-12
21716
120:3-4
Wild American
Sel. 8918-41
21717
115:5-6
Wild American
Sel. 8923-09
21718
119:5-6
Wild American
a 6.9, p 4.3, high CoH
Sel. 8936-22
21719
120:5-6
Wild American
Northgate B28
113:7-8
Wild American
Sel. 8940-01
early, (?, compact cone,
a 4.5, p 6.5, high CoH
Sel. 8936-28
21720
early, g7, a 4.9, p2.8,
Oxbow Al
early, a 2.3, p 2.5,
CoH 58
50
Table 3 continued
Accession
1995
Number
location
Source
Name or Pedigree
Remarks
21721
114:7-8
Wild American
Oxbow A10
early, a 3.7, p 3.3,
CoH 52
Sel. 8940-10
21722
115:7-8
Wild American
Oxbow D10
Sel. 8943-10
21723
116:7-8
Wild American
Indian Head C2
114:11-12
Wild American
Logan W4E
115:11-12
Wild American
Minot E4S
higha/p,a8, p 3.7,
high CoH
Minot E4S
early, compact c, yld.,
a4.2,p5.1,highCoH
Minot Wl
high yld., a 3.8, p 3.5,
high CoH
Sel. 9008-10
21726
116:11-12
Wild American
Sel. 9008-42
21727
117:11-12
Wild American
Sel. 9010-43
21728
118:11-12
Wild American
Minot W2
119:11-12
Wild American
White Earth S3
red stem, red strig, yld.,
a 6.2, P 2.9, high a/p,
high CoH
Mohall W2
u , male + female fertile,
33% seed set, a 1.9,
p 2.1, high CoH
21120 x 19046M
zero alpha: a 0.5, P 8.9,
Sel. 9017-13
21730
120:11-12
Wild American
Sel. 9019-25
21731
217:31-35
Sel. 8808-74
<£, male +female fertile,
28% seed set, high yld,
a 4.1, p 2.1, high CoH
Sel. 9011-64
21729
red stem, &, high yld.,
a 2.5, p 1.7, high CoH
Sel. 9004-72
21725
early,<j(r,jx3.2,p2.8,
CoH 71
Sel. 8951-02
21724
early, high yld., a 3.2,
p 2.8, CoH 58
CoH 60-70
[(LGpS x Fu-FuS)x(LCS-FuS)] x
21732
219:31-35
Sel. 8808-142
21120 x 19046M
1
[(LGpS x Fu-FuS)x(LCS-FuS)] x
(LCS-FuS)
zero alpha: a 0-0.3, P
10-11, CoH 30-40
(LCS-FuS)
51
Table 3 continued
Accession
1995
number
location
Source
Name or Pedigree
Remarks
21733
213:36-40
Sel. 8809-105
21120x21119M
zero alpha, yield,
compact c, a 0.5,
P 5-7, CoH 40-50
brother-sister mating
[(LGpS x Fu-FuS)x(LCS-FuS)] x 0
21734
214:36-40
Sel. 8809-132
21120x21119M
[(LGpS x Fu-FuS)x(LCS-FuS)] x ®
zero alpha; a 0.4,
p 7-10, CoH 30-50
brother-sister mating
52
Table 4:
Hop genotypes discarded in 1995.
Accession Number
1995 Location
Nameor Pedigree
Reason
21577M
20:39-40
Montana 5
poor vigor, lost in the field
21131M
31:57-58
YCx64037M
short arms, no pollen
a
%
Yield
potential
lbs/Acre
Cross
made
year
x 64037M
dipl. Saaz x 64035M
21683
21684
21686
1600-2000
-"
-"-"-
): Hall/Saaz seedling
):
): Cascade, B. Gold, Hall/Saaz
1M, C, F, H = myrcene, caryophyllene, farnesene, humulene
64035M (
64037M(
21361M(
21088M (diploid $ ): Yugoslavian Sel. 5/9
121618M (tetrapl. £*): Hall, m.f., Cascade, B. Gold
21689
6
7-9
1300-1800
21688
X21361M
5-7
5
1200-1600
700-1200
6
1300-1800
21687
4-5
1600-2000
4
1990
1200-1600
21685
tetr.Saazx21088M
SAAZER TYPES
21665
5
5
4-5
5-6
5
5
4
23
22
24
25
27
24
22
21
1.10
0.80
0.90
0.90
0.90
1.10
1.10
45
55
40
45
45
55
55
55
5
1.20
6-7
1200-1800
35
60
1.50
1.30
1.50
55
42
1.40
25
6-7
1500-2000
M2
%
22
6-7
1500-2000
21663
21664
23
22
%
6-7
5-7
oil
ml/lOOg
CoH
6-7
5-6
6-8
21662
21660
4-6
1988
%
1000-1600
dipl. Tettx21618M
TETTNANGER TYPES
Pedigree1
1200-2000
Accession No.
Genotype
Table 5. Potential new hop varieties from the USDA-ARS Corvallis program 1988 to 1995.
6
5
6
6
5
4
5
%
16
12
21
18
10
10
12
9
13
7
11
9
%
H
20
16
24
22
18
16
16
18
22
17
19
15
%
H/C
3.20
3.30
3.60
3.50
3.50
3.50
3.20
3.50
3.50
3.20
3.60
3.40
ratio
diploid, 2nd yr. commercial, 1st yr. pilot brewing
triploid, 2nd yr. commercial, l"yr- pilotbrewing
triploid, 3rd yr. commercial, 2nd yr. pilot brewing
triploid, small off station and nursery plots
Status
en
54
INFORMATION SHEET USDA 21662
(Selection No. 8802-45)
Pedigree:
61021 (diploid) x 21618M (tetraploid)
Swiss Tettnanger x [tet. Hallertau mf x (Case x 65009-64035M)]
Sister of USDA 21664
Genetic Composition: 1/2 Swiss Tettnanger, 1/4 Hallertau mf, 1/8 Cascade, 1/16 German
Zattler Seedling, 1/32 Brewer's Gold, 1/64 Early Green, 1/64 unknown.
Triploid; chromosome No. 2n=3x=30.
Maturity:
Medium early (about Aug. 22-25 in western Oregon).
History:
1988: Cross 8802 made at Corvallis, OR, between diploid female and
tetraploid male produced 2.5 g (about 1,000 total) seeds. Many were
empty and did not germinate.
1989: 68 seedlings (mostly triploids) transplanted to the field from greenhouse
pots (single hill nursery).
1990: 61 triploid selections of cross 8802 established in 4-hill plots, OSU
main yard, from soft wood cuttings after roottip analysis.
1991: 14 triploid selections, including 8802-45, established in 5-hill seedless
yard near Corvallis.
Selection 8802-45 receives permanent USDA Accession Number 21662
and is identified for possible off-station trials.
ELISA tests at Prosser, WA (Dr. Klein) find original nursery mother
plant (hill 137:07) slightly infected with Hop Mosaic and Hop Latent
virus. However, hills 4:22 and 4:23 of the 4-hill plot established in
1990 are free of all viruses.
1992: Second year's ELISA tests of hills 4:22 and 4:23 confirm that these two
plants are free of all hop viruses. These plants are used for propagation.
Small field increase plot established at Corvallis, OR.
Propagation started at Prosser, WA (40 hills).
Stroh Brewing Company (President Joe Hertrich) identifies USDA
21662 for possible off-station testing.
1993: Corvallis propagation plot discontinued due to lack of commercial
interest.
4-hill nursery plots discontinued at Corvallis. Genotype is established in
2-hill observation plot in the main yard (hills 116:1-2).
1995: 10-hill off-station observation plot established by S. S. Steiner, Inc., in
the Yakima Valley using planting stock from the Prosser propagation
plot. Remainder of Prosser planting stock is discarded.
No additional off station plots planned at this time.
Pruning and Training: No special precautions needed. Erect shoots are easy to train and
readily climb a supporting string.
55
Picking and Drying: Very good, no shatter, good cleanup.
Cone type:
Medium to medium large when stimulated by pollen from fertile males; small
to medium small in seedless location. Due to the triploid condition, cones are
nearly seedless even when grown in the presence of fertile diploid males.
Storage Stability:
Fair; retained from 46 to 62 percent ofthe original alpha acids after 6
months room temperature storage.
Diseases:
Moderately resistant to hop downy mildew; no problems with verticillium wilt.
Propagation plot (Prosser) free of all 5 major hop viruses.
Other Comments:
Proposed as an off-station plot as replacement for USDA 21666 which
had very low alpha acids and significant amounts of male flowers in its first
year of Oregon and Washington commercial testing in 1994.
USDA 21662: Yield and Quality
Nursery Plots - Oregon
Storage
cc
Year
1989
Plot
single
1990
it
1991
it
1991
M
1992
tl
1994
II
1994
2 hills
Average
a
lb/A
%
13
Ratio
CoH
%
new planting on May
hill
1536
4 hills
1992
Yield1
8.3
5.2
61
23
remain
Oil
%
ml/lOOg
37
1.35
18
Remarks
baby
1621
8.4
5.5
60
22
56
1.14
1077
8.9
7.0
56
23
46
0.96
1.57
853
7.9
5.0
61
17
55
267
5.7
4.6
55
21
56
1.23
853
6.8
7.8
47
25
62
1.26
500e
7.7
6.4
42
23
1035
7.2
5.9
55
22
baby
52 '
1.25
(Excl. babies)
Calculated from 1- or 4-hill plot, respectively; e = visual estimate
Oil Composition - Oregon
Year
Plot
1990 single
1991
1991
1992
4 hills
Oil
Myrcene
ml/lOOmg
%
Caryophyllene
Farnesene
Humulene
%
%
H/C
Major
hydrocarbons
%
hill 1.35
43.8
5.3
11.0
19.2
3.62
79.3
1.14
32.5
7.5
10.8
23.7
3.16
74.5
0.96
51.8
5.1
9.2
17.6
3.43
83.7
1.57
37.3
6,1
12.3
23.0
3.79
78.7
1992
1.23
54.8
4.4
9.2
15.9
3.58
84.3
1994
1.26
46.9
3.9
9.6
13.8
3.55
74.2
Average
1.25
44.5
5.4
10.4
18.9
3.52
79.1
56
1995 Crop Extra Bales
Variety
Location
21683
21684
21686
21687
21688
21689
ExtralBales;
224:26-30
232:26-30
237:26-30
5
241:26-30
Coleman
23
7
8
2
Coleman
21671 (Ha Gold)
47
Coleman
21672 (Ha Tradition)
21674 (Spalter Select)
9039-034
9039-041
21683
21689
21683
21685
21686
15
Coleman
12
Coleman
16
235:36-40
108:17-18
105:09-10
231:21-35
10
Coleman
17
2
2
2?
Coleman
9
Coleman
13
Copy to Darrell Smith (AB) on 9/28, 1995.
1995 Crop Extra Bales
Variety
21683
21683
21683
21684
Location
Extra Bales
224:26-30
105:09-10
Coleman
232:26-30
2?
17
1}
21684
Coleman
21685
Coleman
21686
21671 (Ha Gold)
237:26-30
Coleman
241:26-30
Coleman
Coleman
231:21-35
Coleman
21672 (Ha Tradition)
21674 (Spalter Select)
15
Coleman
Coleman
9039-034
9039-041
16
235:36-40
108:17-18
2
21686
21687
21688
21689
21689
USED
7
18 lbs
Coors
20 lbs
Coors
9
5
13
2
22
47
10
12
2
9/8/95
/j '/* (felt
Moisture
4.4
7.2
3.5
142
131
15.00
19.60
20.36
11.50
8/16/95
8/17/95
8/24/95
8/31/95
9/7/95
8/18/95
Saazer (Balel
USDA 21683
USDA 21683
USDA 21683
95098
104
5.0
4.8
6.9
7.2
27
25
0.203
0.220
9.40
Page 1
5.4
5.8
26
0.230
9/7/95
5.4
6.3
24
0.195
5.9
6.9
17.10
20.45
8/24/95
8/31/95
120
95083
3.2
4.0
2.9
4.2
17
21
13
5.6
4.4
20
0.185
0.210
7.9
0.202
4.0
3.2
19
22
0.191
0.195
7.8
0.232
497
7.3
24
0.270
3.5
95079
7.2
5.3
6.6
22
0.227
7.2
5.3
4.4
106
4.2
4.3
21
0.217
5.2
7.2
151
4.6
95158
6.6
4.9
19
0.208
6.2
7.4
199
3.2
95082
5.7
4.8
6.8
6.6
24
0.213
7.9
5.9
75
95099
95140
7.3
5.4
23
0.183
7.3
6.8
498
95152
95123
95151
95122
95121
95078
7.0
6.7
5.4
6.3
20
0.187
7.6
5.9
111
105
6.9
132
95102
5.4
5.0
6.8
21
22
0.204
0.230
96
USDA 21684
Bale
103
6.0
9.0
19
0.230
95101
6.3
8.9
20
Lab No
% Beta
% Alpha
CoH
HSI
0.196
at 8% mc
15.50
18.15
20.25
6.20
USDA 21684
USDA 21684
Bale
5.8
108
8.35
8/18/95
8/24/95
USDA 21665
USDA 21665
5E-218-A32 (17 bales)
15.60
17.90
6.55
5.9
8/17/95
8/21/95
7.4
USDA 21664
USDA 21664
5E-205-X (26 bales)
12.15
23.45
101
8/24/95
5.4
Bale (USDA 21674)
7.5
8/21/95
140
Spalter Select
11.35
8/21/95
23.10
109
6.9
% Beta '
8/24/95
12.10
24.10
9.7
% Alpha
Bale (USDA 21672)
8/24/95
mg DM
/cone
Dry Weight Basis
1995 Off Station Samples
Hallertau Tradition
8/21/95
Bale (USDA 21671)
Date Content
Picking
Hallertau Gold
Variety
Matter or
%Dry
6pu +» baactt Ur^ ^e/4r
en
—i
58
95133
95100
500
95154
95125
95085
499
95153
95124
95084
in
CD
166
95135
95097
95081
o—
CO
oo
co
458
o
t
p»
co
r-»
rt
in
CD
in
co
in
•-<O
CD
t
CN
Tf
tc
in
CM
CO
t
i
in
co
tcd
j-n
m
Tt
in
Kf
#
<r
05
in
co
in cd
*t
t
oo
co
in
t
CO
CD
CO
CD
CO
<- O
CM
a
in
id
co
CM
co
CM
CO
co
•"3-
Tt
<*
in
co
r>
cd
*t
cm
<
#
X
o
o
*-
t
CN
CM
CO CD CD
CM CM CM
O
CM
CM
•<t in
CM CM
CM
in
r*
r-
TJ- •>!•
CM
CM
CM
CN
CM
co
CD
r-
r~
rCM
o
CO
CM
t
i*» o
•-ON
CN
CM
O
CM
CM
CM
Tt
CM
t
t
t
O
CO O
r- CN
CM
CM
CM
CN
O
O
O
O
*- CM
O
CM
O
CO
O
CM
m
oo o
cd
r-
r-» o
CM
CM
«-
CM
i-
cm
•-
CM
o
o
o
o
O
O
O
O
CD
«t
CD
in
in
«t
CM 00
m
p»
CD
00
t-
t
m
*r
p~
co
co
m
m-
•<t in
in
in in
O
CN
CM
CO
CM
*
s
o
CO
fa
o oo cq
co cb co
co
r^
o
oo
co
co oq
CO
CN
co
co
co
>t
in
r*" o> d
CO
CN
ip~
co oo
«- cd
<r
CO
it
i-
cd
in
m
in
p~
CO CD
CD
in
CD CD
o
o\
5
Q
o
O
CO
CM
*-
o
cd
o>-°
E
o
O
o
<£
r.
5
o
in
o
o
p-
CO ^
00
CD
00
CM
O
O
CD
O
O
cd
•q- co
oo
co
p~
co
co
co
o
00
O
00
O
CM
O
O
CM
O
oo co
i-
.-
CM
•-
CN
CM
i-
•-
in
in
o
in
cm
co
in
—
oo
co
oo
P»
CO
CM
00
in
t-
r-
CM
c
?w
O
CO
c
CN
o
:> O
r»
c
o
<D
ro
Q
in
0)
in
en
in
in
m
CD
m
m
in
en
in
CD
CD
CD
in
CD
in
CD
in
CD
in
CD
in
CD
in
CD
CD
in
CD
in
CD
00
«t
r—
l>
CO
P»
T—
CO
O
CO O
T—
CD
CM
in
en
t
1—
r^
oo
O
p-
T—
^-
CN
CJ
CN
co
CN
CN
CO
.—
CN
co
i—
CM
co
CO
00
CO 00
CO
CO
CO
00
00
CO
oo
co CO 00 CO
in in m
CO CO CO
CD CO CD
CD CO
oo oo
CD CD
CO
oo
CO
p~
r~
CD
00
CO
co co
oo co
CD CD
CD
CO
CD
00
CO
00 00
CO CO
CM
CM
CN
CM
CM
CM
CM
CN
CM
CM
CM
CN
CM
<
Q
<
Q
<
Q
<
Q
<
Q
<
Q
<
•
<
a
<
<
<
<
<
00
CO
to
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
a.
<u
m
CD
o>
CO
CD
CO
Q
O
CO
CO
3
3
V
CQ
£?
CD
Q
Q Q
CO CO CO
3
3
3
&
8/30/95
8/30/95
8/30/95
21689
9/7/95
21686~
21688
9/7/95
21685
21687
9/7/95
9/7/95
21684
(11.50)
(9.40)
(13.10)
(10.60)
(10.80)
(8.65)
(8.00)
(6.55)
(6.20)
Picking (Moisture
Content)
Date
21683
Saazer Progeny
21664 (5E-205-X)
21665 (5E-218-A32)
Tettnanger Progeny
Variety
6.4
6.9
4.2
3.2
2.4
5.7
4.2
5.3
5.8
3.7
6.3
4.3
5.3
5.4
7.4
5.3
5.5
% Beta
6.8
% Alpha
As Is Basis
1.45
0.68
0.57
1.23
0.95
0.91
1.42
1.41
1.53
ml_/100g
Content
Oil
0.21
HSI
0.23
0.22
0.23
0.20
0.22
0.23
0.21
0.23
11/30/95
26
24
27
25
26
26
21
22
24
CoH
%
51.6
59.8
52.6
49.7
71.7
70.9
58.6
45.0
21.6
Myrcene
4.4
2.6
3.5
3.6
3.8
2.1
4.1
5.3
8.2
Caryophyllene
%
16.6
9.8
14.0
18.2
9.2
7.5
8.3
10.7
16.1
Farnesene
%
15.7
9.4
13.5
12.7
13.6
7.3
15.3
19.0
28.7
Humulene
%
Hop Oil Composition (Are?1%)
1995 Oregon Off-station Selections
1995 Oregon Off Station Selections
3.57
3.62
3.86
3.53
3.58
3.48
3.73
3.58
3.50
H/C
3.77
3.77
4.00
5.06
2.42
3.57
2.02
2.02
1.96
F/C
166
167
458
500
499
498
497
95158/318
95140/107
Lab No
en
en
60
1995
1995 crop:
Variety
pilot brewing.
Picking
(Moisture
Content)
%Dry
Date
Matter
8/21/95
24.10
Bale
8/24/95
12.10
Hallertau Tradition
8/21/95
23.10
Bale
8/24/95
(11.35)
Spatter Select
8/21/95
23.45
Bale
8/24/95
(12.15)
8/17/95
15.60
8/21/95
17.90
/
USDA 21664
l/
USDA 21665
USDA 21683
/
USDA 21683
USDA 21683
mc
%
mg DM
8/25/95
8/18/95
18.15
8/24/95
20.25
109
140
0.23
19
9.0
6.0
103
7.5
5.4
0.20
27
6.9
7.2
5.0
4.8
95098
104
5.4
5.0
95102
105
95078
95099
95140
107
7.8
5.2
0.22
25
7.4
5.9
0.20
21
6.8
7.5
5.4
0.23
22
6.9
132
5.9
5.4
6.8
0.19
0.18
0.21
20
111
7.6
7.3
7.9
23
6.3
24
5.4
7.0
6.7
7.3
5.3
6.9
101
5.9
5.8
7.5
0.24
23
199
7.4
6.2
0.21
19
6.8
151
7.2
0.22
0.23
0.26
21
6.6
22
6.6
5.7 95082
4.8 95121
5.2 95158
22
6.0
5.2
318
4.3
4.0
106
7.2
7.3
8/31/95
(6.20)
(5.85)
6.5
8/16/95
(8.35)
4.7
4.3
0.27
24
8/17/95
15.00
0.19
0.20
19
5.3
22
6.6
8/31/95
19.60
142
7.2
7.8
7.9
20.36
131
3.5
4.4
0.19
20
3.2
4.8
6.1
0.21
21
4.4
3.2
3.5
4.4
5.9
0.23
0.20
0.20
13
2.9
17
4.2
24
0.23
26
108
5.8
(11.50)
USDA 21684 \J
8/18/95
15.50
USDA 21684
8/24/95
17.10
96
4.6
8/31/95
20.45
120
6.9
USDA 21684
Bale
9/7/95
(9.40)
95101
6.5
5.2
5.6
5.7
8/24/95
Lab No
9.8
9/7/95
Bale
%
CoH Alpha Beta
% Alpha % Beta HSI
6.9
0.20
20
8.9
6.3
9.7
7.2
5E-218-A32 (17 bales)
Saazer
at 8%
Basis
(6.55)
(6.60)
5E-205-X (26 bales)
USDA 21665
Dry
Weight
/cone
Hallertau Gold
USDA 21664
^•/r/r
Aroma selections and foreign introductions for
75
6.3
5.9
95079
95122
4.0 95151
5.6
497
6.3
3.2
4.0
5.4
95083
95123
95152
5.8
5.4
498
alto fir /fAC </*x/Uy 3^ ZCf
ito
QfiAJ ay/// eeerdt'n^.ti ,!J-
Page 1
61
1995
Dry
Weight
(Moisture
Variety
Picking
Content)
%Dry
Date
Matter
Bas
at 8%
s
mc
mg DM
%
% Alpha %
/cone
Beta HSI
(2oH
%
Alpha Beta
Lab No
USDA 21685
8/18/95
18.00
128
6.0
5.9
0.20
22
5.5
5.4
95084
USDA 21685
8/24/95
19.70
130
6.8
5.4
0.22
23
6.3
5.0
95124
USDA 21685
8/31/95
18.95
112
3.8
4.6
0.18
26
3.5
4.2
95153
2.8
5.0
0.22
26
2.6
4.6
499
Bale
9/7/95
(13.10)
USDA 21686
8/18/95
18.40
71
2.6
5.5
0.19
20
2.4
5.1
95085
USDA 21686
8/24/95
18.30
113
3.7
4.5
0.22
24
3.4
4.1
95125
USDA 21686
8/31/95
22.82
98
Bale
9/7/95
(10.60)
3.0
7.4
0.18
24
2.8
6.8
95154
3.6
7.1
0.20
25
3.3
6.5
500
USDA 21687
8/21/95
20.70
84
3.8
3.2
0.20
22
3.5
2.9
95100
USDA 21687
8/28/95
22.86
114
4.8
3.8
0.22
25
4.4
3.5
95133
Bale
8/30/95
4.7
4.2
0.23
27
4.3
3.9
458
8/30/95
(10.80)
(11.50)
4.5
4.1
0.24
26
4.1
3.8
317
USDA 21688 l/
8/17/95
18.60
59
5.3
5.5
0.21
21
4.9
5.1
95080
USDA 21688
8/28/95
23.09
75
5.8
4.7
0.21
24
5.3
4.3
95134
Bale
8/30/95
(8.65)
7.5
6.4
0.22
24
6.9
5.9
167
USDA 21689 J
8/17/95
17.50
65
7.9
4.9
0.24
20
7.3
4.5
95081
USDA 21689
8/21/95
18.15
90
9.9
5.8
0.20
22
9.1
5.3
95097
USDA 21689
8/28/95
22.82
99
10.9
5.1
0.22
24
10.0
4.7
95135
Bale
8/30/95
7.0
5.8
0.23
26
6.4
5.3
166
(8.00)
Page 2
62
Off-Station Experimental Varieties
^i alio • <^/cv tlirb, f'ff) 'tf
Darrell Smith gave me the analytical results (by S.S. Steiner, Inc. Yakima) ofthe varieties1 /
planted in northern Idaho, Oregon and Washington.
^iuJJ 1/
Variety
Total Bales ^Moisture U %q-acids
Content ^ (dwb)
Idaho 21684
12 3
7.2 7fe* 5.8.
Idaho 21685
8 6
7.0 jfa 3.2
%B-acids
fdwb)
5.5
5.6
HSI
0.254
0.243
Idaho 21686
Idaho 21687
Idaho 21688
13
4
15
3
3
?
8.7 3, fa
6.4 A*/
4.8 ^
2.7
42
4.3
6.8
4.2
5.2
0.225
0.251
0 243
Idaho 21373
Wa 21373
4
9
|
7.5
7.0
10.1
11.7
6.6
8.8
0 233
0 247
J-PJXZ21683
9
3
8.0 £53
3.6
4.1
0.258
Or 21664
Wa 21664
Or 21665
Wa 21665
Wa 21666
26
27
17
11
11
7.5
6.9
8.0
9.8
6.3
6.6
5.6
5.4
3.9
2.3
5.3
8.9
7.1
5.0
7.1
0.251
0.217
0.239
0.232
0.243
<f
Columbus
Tomahawk
Chelan (87203-1)
Tillicum (87207-2)
unnamed (87311-3)
Patented varieties
63015M
21429M
Eastern Gold
19058M
58111M
Hall. Magnum
not available
13-15
13-15
16-18
14-16
9-12
9-12
6-7
4-6
5-7
6
50
48
24
50
%
%
14-16
10-12
24
24
52
29
B
a
(commercial
1995 Nurserv (TJSDAI
High a + B Material
•
35
35
50
30-35
27
28
17
28
24
24
CoH
%
OO
64
High Alpha-acid or 'Kettle' Hops
Note: These rankings are based on chemical data collected from the USDA-ARS germ plasm collection
at Corvallis, Oregon. Some characteristics are affected by climate, for example, alpha-acid content of
Cluster grown in Oregon is usually lower than a Washington sample. How well a variety stores is
affected by post-harvest handling. Probably the best efficiency for high alpha-acid conversion to BU's is
obtained by high alpha-acids content with high % Cohumulone in the alpha-acids.
Traditional
New Varieties
Traditional
Ha Magnum
Yakima Cluster
Chinook
New Varieties
Northern Brewer
Nugget
Wye Target
Olympic
Galena
Eroica
Nugget
Wye Challenger
Wye Northdown
Centennial
Talisman
Galena
Chinook
Banner
Eroica
Pride of Ringwood
Bullion
Orion
Pride of Ringwood
Northern Brewer
Ha Magnum
Brewers Gold
Orion
Record
Wye Northdown
Olympic
Wye Target
Record
Yakima Cluster
Wye Challenger
Bullion
Banner
Talisman
Brewers Gold
Centennial
Alpha/Beta (Highest at top of lisrt
Traditional
New Varieties
%Cohumulone (Highest at top of lisrt
Traditional
Chinook (-4:1)
Talisman (55)
Record
Galena
Nugget
Orion
Centennial
Yakima Cluster
Eroica
Eroica
Bullion
Wye Target
Wye Target
Olympic
Brewers Gold
Chinook
Northern Brewer
Pride of Ringwood
Olympic
Banner
Ha Magnum
Brewers Gold
Bullion
Yakima Cluster
New Varieties
Centennial
Wye Challenger
Record
Talisman
Ha Magnum
Nugget
Banner
Orion
Northern Brewer
Galena
Wye Northdown
Wye Challenger
Pride of Ringwood
1995 Northwest Craft Brewers Conference
65
Aroma Hops (world wide)
Note- These rankings are based on chemical data collected from the USDA-ARS germ plasm,colection
atSrvls Oregon. Some characteristics are affected by climate, for example, alpha-add content of
Cascade giown 2Oregon is usually higher than aWashington sample. How well avanety stores is
affected by post-harvest handling.
TRAnrnoNAi, A?OMA Varieties
<;TMiiar New Varieties
Crystal
Hallertauer
Liberty
Ultra
Mt Hood
Strisselspalter
Elsasser
Backa
Hersbrucker
Huller Bitterer
Savinja Golding
Yugoslavian Golding
Fuggle
Styrian
Willamette
Columbia
Cascade
Tettnanger
Saazer
USDA 21664, USDA 21666
Selections (7) in off-station trials
Spalter
1995 Northwest Craft Brewers Conference
66
••
Sensory Analysis and Hops
'4
•
Sensory evaluation by a trained, descriptive panel provides
a valuable tool for assessing the contribution of hops to the
aroma and flavor of beer. In our sensory lab, we have
spent over seven years evaluating the aroma contribution
of hops and this past year we have begun looking at the
bitterness contribution of hops to beer.
Research for 1994: Bitterness Quality in Beer
Method:
1) Brewing beers with different hops (Cluster,
Willamette, Galena, Mt. Hood, Spalt Select, Hallertauer,
Saazer, and a few Washington Selection varieties)
2) Sensory evaluation of the bitterness by rating the flavor
intensities of the following descriptors: Maximum
Bitterness, Harshness, Smoothness, Come-on-time and
Lingering
Sensory Results:
There was a general trend for hops which were higher in
cohumulone to be rated lower in Maximum Bitterness and
Harshness, although there were a few exceptions.
67
PILOT BREWERY
Oregon State University
GOALS:
- To have a state of the art pilot brewery in the processing plant
- To use the brewery for research and education in the hop and
brewing fields
- Have the brewery and personnel available to industry on a
contract basis
Equipment Obtained:
- Glycol Unit
- Heat Exchangers
- Refrigerator
- Scale
- Roller Mill
- Grain Storage
- Water Treatment System
- Pumps
Some of these items were donated.
Cost
$4,000
$3,500
$1,400
$ 900
$ 500
$ 500
$ 150
$1,500
and 5-Cone
Location P
001:01-04 C
033:49-50 C
034:49-50 C
001:49-50 C
002:49-50 C
003:49-50 C
004:49-50 C
005:49-50 C
006:49-50 C
101:01-02 B
041:49-50 C
005:01-04 C
221:01-05 B
007:01-04 B
222:01-05 B
008:01-04 B
223:01-05 B
009:01-04 B
024:51-52 C
015:01-04 C
224:01-05 C
225:01-05 B
023:05-08 C
024:05-08 B
224:16-20 B
103:07-08 C
226:01-05 B
018:05-08 B
221:16-20 C
019:05-08 C
232:06-10 C
020:05-08 B
225:16-20 B
001:09-12 B
227:01-05 B
228:01-05 C
004:09-12 B
002:09-12 B
229:01-05 C
230:01-05 B
003:09-12 B
033:05-08 B
044:47-48 C
013:09-12 B
226:16-20 B
036:49-50 C
043:51-52 C
Coleman
B
Date
9/06/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
8/23/95
9/05/95
9/06/95
8/29/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
9/11/95
9/07/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
9/08/95
8/29/95
9/08/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
9/08/95
8/21/95
8/29/95
9/08/95
8/29/95
8/21/95
8/29/95
9/01/95
8/29/95
9/11/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
8/16/95
Lb/Ac
1200
800
1200
1200
1400
1200
400
1200
1000
242
200
2000
461
484
265
256
887
811
500
2200
2200
1056
800
725
1186
1800
1502
711
400
200
1600
576
565
597
1476
1500
640
981
1600
1376
747
1003
600
1195
2022
800
400
300
ConeWt % a
208 10.3
149
0.8
133
2.9
109
1.5
198
5.0
211
8.1
142
7.6
135
1.9
145
5.7
10.30 3.8
161
4.4
207
6.6
9.25 5.2
10.45 5.4
12.65 5.4
8.70 3.8
12.70 3.7
10.35 5.3
187 8.8
153
5.6
105
4.0
10.10 5.1
117 6.6
15.65 5.7
11.25 5.1
193
4.3
8.10 7.3
15.70 10.2
170
8.6
180 3.6
177 5.7
7.45 5.0
12.05 4.6
10.60 8.6
9.55 11.4
226
7.8
13.55 10.6
10.00 9.1
105
7.2
8.10 9.5
12.50 9.1
24.65 12.9
386 16.6
8.65 6.2
11.35 10.5
184
9.1
242
3.9
8.35 4.3
Y Harvest Yield MC or
Identification
Brewers Gold
Fu x Fu-S
EGr x EC-S
LGp-S(Fu Fu-S)
Belg 31-S OP
Sunshine-S
Sunshine-S
Fu-RedV-OP
LGpFuRedV-OP
Fu T4
6735-005
L-16
Hallertau MF
Hallertau MF
Tettnanger
Tettnanger
Fu N, VF
Fu N, VF
6616-019
Golden Star
Golden Star
Columbia
Columbia
Willamette
Willamette
6769-002
Wye Challenger
Wye Challenger
Wye Northdown
Wye Northdown
Wye Northdown
Styrian, Yugo
Styrian, Yugo
Ahil.Yugo
Ahil.Yugo
Apolon, Yugo
Apolon, Yugo
Atlas,Yugo
Atlas,Yugo
Aurora, Yugo
Aurora, Yugo
6806-080
6806-080
Bullion, 10A.VF
Bullion, 10A,VF
PrRingwood Sel
6512-024
Saazer, Czech
or Nursery-p
Number
19001
19027
19028
19105
19110
19120
19137
19151
19185
21003
21007
21011
21014
21014
21015
21015
21016
21016
21030
21039
21039
21040
21040
21041
21041
21042
21043
21043
21044
21044
21044
21049
21049
21050
21050
21051
21051
21052
21052
21053
21053
21055
21055
21056
21056
21057
21062
21077
T
Alpha
5.3
3.2
31 28
24 29
27 33
25 28
25 24
25 24
55
71
65
70
63
74
70
71
69
71
78
81
66
64
59
68
52
4.3
3.6
3.7
3.9
3.2
5.9
6.4
1.9
4.0
68
26
22
29
31
24
23
24
32
27
24
21
50
49
38
39
40
53
24
22 25
25 40
31 40
28 28
31 23
62
60
27 38
26 26
26 22
27 38
23 32
28 37
57
62
58
54
60
68
.23 40
25
41
51
.26 50
22
30
28
31
22
19
35
45
28
38
28
56
27 56
.30 31
27 38
28 31
.33
28
29
27
33
24
.26
.21
29
21
29
.24
.26
692
1.02
0.48
0.38
0.73
0.50
0.64
0.51
0.50
0.43
0.41
0.51
0.65
0.48
0.40
0.51
0.77
0.56
0.38
0.53
0.55
0.39
0.47
0.70
0.62
0.79
0.54
0.81
0.72
0.34
0.32
0.00
0.38
70 0.56
41 0.76
65 0.33
64 0.89
65 0.49
50
47
54
50
53
48
43
47
66
65
52
49
72
73
55 0.50
68
40
40
51
41
49
51
64
73
73
62
60
56
59
65
49
44
50 0..42
61 0..45
24 0..86
61 0..46
76 0.34
56 0,.46
54 0..45
55
HSI
6 Mo
%
86
0
81
61
38
86
62
37
39
50
85
45
58
46
52
81
72
67
64
62
54
62
43
62
81
54
58
77
76
66
70
75
52
60
57
64
80
73
72
71
41
72
85
70
33
Left
67 0.87 40
56 0.63 56
62 0.71
50
Coa CoB
27 38
.33 38
HSI
n =
(as is basis)
57
50
67
54
53
53
51
57
64
51
3.7
4.0
2.9
5.2
4.5
2.0
2.5
3.6
2.2
4.7
4.9
5.7
3.7
3.6
4.9
3.9
5.0
3.6
7.5
5.0
4.1
3.6
2.6
3.3
3.0
4.0
4.8
4.9
60
58
65
3.0
63
2.0
73
28
5.0
3.3
2.8
16
49
7.7
72
68
21
30
B Ratio
4.8
2.9
6.9
%
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Accession (j
1995 Bale
0.49
0.00
0.00
0.64
0.50
0.30
0.22
0.63
0.72
48
67
Page
60.9
0.0
65.8
55.5
0.0
50.5
55.2
0.0
47.8
41.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.5
0.0
43.4
52.2
0.0
40.7
45.0
0.0
0.0
51.1
58.6
42.0
63.0
47.8
0.0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.1 25.7 3.25
0.1 30.1 3.50
9.0 10.6 3.40
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.04
1.94
2.22
0.00
2.48
2.09
0.00
3.42
3.51
1.44
0.00
1.61
1.70
0.00
2.82
0.00
0.00
3.37
3.28
2.92
0.00
0.0 0.00
23.1 3.57
0.0 0.00
0.0
1 20.5
0
0.0
1 23.7
9 18.8
0
0.0
0 15.4
1.8 19.9
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
1.8 13.1
4.8 21.5
12.8 9.0
10.7 7.6
0.0
0.0
9.8
7.6
11.8 7.2
0.0 0.0
5.3 13.5
3.5 16.1
5.9 6.5
0.0
0.0
0.1
8.5
0.1
9.3
0
6.5 16.1
3.4
0.0
3.9
4.6
4.5
0.0
5.3
5.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
4.6
3.4
0.0
4.6
7.1
0.0
0.0
4.6
6.1
8.4
6.4
0.0
0.0
7.9
0.0
5.3 10.5 17.9 3.39
5.7 4.2 16.7 2.92
8.4 4.5 23.6 2.80
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
7.9
8.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Area % Oil Composition
Myr Cary Farn Hum H/C
45.4
0.58 0.65
55.1
2.43 0.00
52.6
0.00 0.00
0.0
1.02 0.37 60.5
3.32 0.96- 68.6
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.60 0.27 32.5
0.00 0.00
1.26 0.69
00
61
1.79 0.46
1.85
54
60
00
00
0.83 0.55
0.00 0.00
2.18 0.74
0.00 0.00
1.39 0.00
0.65 0.29
0.00 0.00
1.51 0.46
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.69
0.00
0.00
1.92
1.03
1.03
0.57
0.88
1.15
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Fresh Stor.
0.00 0.00
mL oil/100g
Analyses
448
474
6
473
173
461
609
231
216
106
528
5
439
4
35
522
468
113
432
475
516
590
518
611
424
470
124
315
340
434
34
3
33
2
1
476
239
71
223
329
236
254
250
240
253
227
233
LabNo
357
oo
Neoplanta.Yugo
Neoplanta
Vojvodina.Yugo
vojvodina.Yugo
Yugo VI1/23
Yugo VI11/27
Cascade VF
Cascade VF
N. Brewer VF
N. Brewer VF
6903-112
6903-259
Huller Bitter
Huller Bitter
6913-068
Wye Target
Wye Target
Lubelska, Pol
Nadwislanska
Pocket Talisman
Brewers Gold VF
Brewers Gold VF
7001-013
6701-054
6704-138
6185-001
6305-004
6616-010
6616-020
6806-094
6806-099
6818-043
6901-140
6903-226
6903-263
6907-058
6907-077
Hybrid 2, India 240:01- 05
Hybrid 2, India 014:01- 04
Prec d Bourg
023:01-04
21082
21082
21083
21083
21085
21086
21092
21092
21093
21093
21094
21095
21097
21097
21098
21112
21112
21113
21114
21115
21116
21116
21120
21138
21139
21144
21145
21150
21151
21156
21158
21159
21160
21161
21162
21163
21164
21167
21167
21168
019:09- 12
020:09- 12
015:09- 12
239:01- 05
218:31- 35
016:49- 50
024:49- 50
051:51- 52
052:51- 52
049:51- 52
030:51- 52
009:51- 52
049:49- 50
010:51- 52
051:49- 50
039:51- 52
040:51- 52
052:49- 50
055:49- 50
016:09-•12
238:01- 05
018:09- 12
235:01--05
014:09-•12
236:01-•05
012:09--12
009:49-•50
010:49-•50
030:05-•08
237:01-•05
112:03-•04
039:49--50
040:49--50
006:09 -12
233:01--05
234:01--05
007:09--12
232:01 -05
005:09 -12
100
500
Dunav
Dunav
21081
21081
9/06/95
8/29/95
Saazer, Czech
Record, Belg
Blue N.B.,Belg
Blue N.B.,Belg
Backa, Yugo
Backa, Yugo
21077
21078
21079
21079
21080
21080
021:05 08
021:09 12
008:51 52
009:09 -12
231:01 05
008:09 12
P Date
Lb/Ac
C
8/29/95
100
B 8/31/95
683
9/06/95
50
8/29/95
50
9/08/95 2000
9/06/95
800
9/08/95 1800
B 8/29/95
939
B 8/29/95
725
9/08/95
600
9/08/95 2000
9/06/95
700
9/05/95
200
9/05/95
100
9/08/95 2000
B 8/29/95
885
B 8/22/95
1422
B 8/21/95
427
C 9/05/95
1600
C 9/05/95
1400
C 9/06/95
1400
C 9/08/95
1900
B
8/23/95 2815
B
8/29/95 1419
B 8/29/95
1898
224
B 8/21/95
C
8/29/95
150
C 9/06/95
600
C 9/06/95
1200
B
9/13/95 3336
C
9/08/95 1600
9/05/95 1400
9/05/95 2000
9/05/95
800
9/05/95 1000
9/05/95
800
9/06/95 1600
9/06/95 1200
9/05/95 1000
9/06/95
600
9/05/95
800
300
9/06/95
9/06/95 1600
9/05/95 1000
9/05/95 1800
9/08/95 1800
Identification
Number
Alpha
30
5
8
4
153
187
203
101
112
184
232
180
190
350
124
131
169
293
125
5.4
7.2
5.4
8.4
10.2
5.3
53
63
56
44
44
40
76
30
46
38
5
9
3
8
8
0
45
72
8
4.4
7.4
11.3
3.4
6.2
4.2
39
46
35
41
11
53
3.
3.
5.
5
205
7.20 10
71
1.
2.
186
190
4.
67
70
54
52
59
8
5
64
70
68
132
11.30
6
8.80 11
12.15 12
6.85
4
202
5
122
2
73
54
49
55
67
46
46
48
73
67
70
71
66
63
58
59
6
.7
8
3
.4
.7
.2
.1
5
178
174
11.00
8.05
196
217
8.65
140
133
145
111
128
10.20
9.15
5.4
7.2
9.8
6.3
7.1
7.6
4.6
5.2
3.7
6.0
10.5
10.1
6
3.0
164
248
0.26
0.24
0.27
0.25
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.25
0.26
21
26
25
31
29
34
33
32
22
0.31 40
0.26 35
0.32 40
0.31 39
0.26 37
0.31 37
0.31 27
0.25 47
0.26 44
0.28 64
0.27 23
0.38 53
0.31 35
0.25 35
0.25 40
0.21 23
.27 31
0.23 25
.27 33
.27 37
.24 36
0.27 27
.23 24
0.28 37
0.23 38
0.28 19
0.28 26
0.29 23
0.30 34
0.25 35
0.28 38
0.26 31
0.29 29
0.26 27
0.24 24
0.40 24
29
9
7.3
2.3
148
135
0.23 26
0.35 24
69
.9
6.9
4.2
692
0..36
0.51
0.53
0.86
0..48
0..44
47
93
49
62
55
54
42
0.40
0.38
0.35
0.35
0.45
0.39
0.50
50 0.31
43 0.58
75 0.46
65 0.37
68 0.58
51 0.95
46 0.48
69 0.40
61 0.98
62 0.45
63 0.82
64 1.03
64 0.77
57 0.81
39 0.44
63 0.43
63 0.77
43 0.60
53 0.69
52 0.65
50 0.61
59 0..33
59 0..33
45
41
55
56
51
50
63 0..47
56 0..34
64 0..46
47 0.43
60 0..47
64 0..41
45 0.51
40 0.72
48 0.54
49 0.47
HSI
6 Mo
%
90
78
80
84
84
72
79
67
73
77
35
72
44
32
46
44
36
69
82
57
53
60
71
51
74
40
51
54
81
86
87
64
76
64
41
66
85
71
70
76
75
72
50
69
66
63
Left
43 0.58 60
50 0.52 60
Cog CoB
0.29 23
HSI
n =
(as is basis)
71
47
1
4.6
53
% B Ratio
174
10.40
166
ConeWt % a
Yield MC or
T
Y Harvest
Location
and 5- Cone
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
or Nursery
Bale
Accession
1995
1.02
2.08
1.58
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.94
1.59
2 26
0 58
0 00
0 00
0 00
1.39
0.00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Page
0.0
62.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
52.1
39.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
55.3
0.0
H/C
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.3 18.0 3.00
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
00
0.00
00
00
00
00
08
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0.9
0.
0.0 0.00
2.16
3.36
0.00
0.00
1.16
1.89
0.0 0.00
7.6 2.60
0.1 11.7 2.65
0.1 16.6 2.76
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0 0.00
3.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.1
8.7
7.3
4.8 12.0 16.2
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
4
3.4
0
0
0
0
2.9
4.4
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8 32.3 16.7 2.86
4.8 22.0 2.07
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
10.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
Cary Farn Hum
Area % Oil Composition
Myr
0.47
1.45 67.2
0.84 60.5
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.43 66.7
0.82 55.9
0.69 62.3
0.23 50.4
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.70 60.1
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0..00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00'
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
0.0
00
00
00
00
00
00
78
1.42 0.80
00
00
1.79 1. 21
0.00 0. 00
0.00
00
0.00
00
0.00 0. 00
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100g
Analyses
221
314
302
255
218
433
356
129
225
294
290
265
243
230
234
258
257
656
591
122
341
326
462
465
8
343
446
72
249
241
36
7
466
467
527
450
441
327
247
232
444
435
355
109
437
274
119
494
LabNo
2
en
Galena (43-16)
Galena (43-16)
Eroica (34-5)
21182
21182
21183
21185
21186
21187
21187
21188
21188
21193
21193
21194
21195
21196
21197
21198
21199
21201
21202
21209
21213
21214
21215
21216
21217
21218
21219
21220
21220
21222
21222
21225
21225
21226
21226
21227
21227
21232
21233
21238
Jap 69K-BH66
Jap 70K-SH6
Blisk, Yugo
Chinook
Ch inook
Perle
Perle
Aquila, Id 33-6
Aquila, Id 33-6
Olympic
Olympic
Eroica VF
7005-149
65009 VF
Eroica VF
Star, Belg
Groene Bel
Sirem, Yugo
Norgard 1478, Y
Yugo 33P13
Aromat, Yugo
7003-038
7004-003
7005-070
6903-107
Tettnang? VF
7006-311
7006-408
Bullion 6A
S.Af. NP2/55
S.Af. NP2/55
Nugget
Nugget
Southern Brewer
Southern Brewer
Spalter
Hersbrucker Ger
7003-143
7003-243
21180
21181
21179
21173
Elsasser
Landhopfen
Strisselspalter
Hersbrucker Eng
21170
21172
022:05-08 B
031:01-04 C
006:01-04 C
034:51-52 C
035:51-52 C
008:05-08 B
227:16-20 B
013:05-08 C
004:01-04 C
022:01-04 B
233:06-10 C
028:01-04 C
017:47-48 C
018:49-50 C
228:16-20 B
036:01-04 B
032:51-52 C
036:51-52 C
007:05-08 B
032:05-08 B
010:47-48 C
004:47-48 C
046:47-48 C
014:47-48 C
105:01-02 B
025:05-08 C
026:05-08 C
027:05-08 C
028:05-08 C
029:05-08 B
045:47-48 C
008:49-50 C
031:05-08 C
241:01-05 C
039:05-08 B
229:16-20 B
037:01-04 C
242:01-05 B
038:01-04 C
230:16-20 C
032:01-04 B
231:16-20 B
034:47-48 C
035:47-48 C
025:01-04 C
027:01-04 C
Lb/Ac
Yield
9/08/95
1600
8/29/95
800
8/29/95
800
8/29/95
100
8/29/95
200
9/06/95
800
9/06/95 2000
9/06/95
400
8/29/95 1621
9/11/95 1604
9/06/95 1900
9/06/95
600
8/21/95
213
9/08/95 1900
9/06/95 1600
9/01/95
1200
9/05/95
100
9/11/95 2252
8/29/95 3039
9/06/95
700
9/06/95
600
8/29/95 1173
8/21/95
569
9/01/95 1400
9/01/95
800
9/01/95 2000
9/01/95 2010
8/23/95
981
8/29/95
50
8/29/95
100
8/29/95
100
8/29/95
400
8/21/95
192
9/01/95
400
9/05/95 2000
9/06/95 1600
9/08/95 2000
8/29/95 1152
9/11/95 2517
9/06/95 1600
8/29/95 1638
9/06/95 1700
9/08/95 1900
8/29/95
626
9/11/95
768
9/01/95
1800
9/01/95
800
8/29/95 2048
222:16-20 C
Tardif d Bourg
Tardif d Bourg
21169
21169
024:01-04 C
P Date
Location
Identification
Number
Harvest
T
Y
8.4
7.0
3.6
3.9
72
4.3
10.30
9.8
9.1
199
12.00
10.6
248
8.3
3.6
4.0
4.7
3.7
5.8
4.6
2.6
6.3
3.6
3.0
5.0
8.7
3.8
1.5
4.2
4.3
4.0
2.3
2.5
3.7
5.3
6.2
6.2
4.1
2.3
7.4
125
14.7
13.15 8.1
8.45
4.4
170
7.5
168
9.1
258
11.8
163
6.0
9.40 5.0
151
2.6
189
4.0
238
8.4
174
5.4
10.25
2.7
126
11.8
212
10.6
197
9.7
160
8.9
14.55
7.7
13.50 7.3
157
5.1
10.75 13.1
199
11.5
278
11.0
15.45 11.1
6.9
4.7
2.7
5.3
4.7
3.5
15.80 13.1
17.95 12.5
272
12.1
117
124
3.9
4.8
9.0
6.1
61
72
66
68
76
73
70
66
70
72
60
71
74
55
72
64
57
52
66
49
68
51
50
63
66
76
67
66
64
73
56
71
70
56
63
65
36
4.6
6.5
2.3
62
46
62
55
36
64
9.0
6.3
8.0
6.5
7.0
3.8
4.0
Alph a
16
18
17
28
31
39
35
0.26
0.27
0.22
0.28
0.28
0.25
0.25
35
39
26
34
38
44
37
0.23 53
0.28 36
0.24 34
0.25 42
0.26 32
0.25 33
0.24 42
0.27 23
0.26 38
0.29 31
0.27 28
0.27 28
0.33 22
0.27 22
0.26 22
0.32
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.24 26
0.28 26
0.24 39
0.24 32
0.24 29
0.27 30
0.34 29
0.24 45
0.25 41
0.25 22
0.24 39
0.26 20
0.23 41
0.22 43
0.25 27
0.24 40
0.26 21
HSI
6 Mo
62 0.84
54 0.52
61 0.43
68 0.00
64 0.47
67 0.45
39 0.45
45 0.54
70 0.40
69 0.67
55 0.44
55 0.61
58 0.52
54 0.00
52 0.48
52 0.35
66 0.57
53 0.41
58 0.31
61 0.49
61 0.52
42 0.33
51 0.42
42 0.45
43 0.82
59 0.48
53 0.52
43 0.39
63 0.37
59 0.82
68 1.12
68 0.58
54 0.71
75 0.79
64 1.06
60 0.66
61 0.36
62 0.71
54 0.41
59 0.42
68 0.54
71 0.67
38 0.43
44 0.55
77 0.42
34 0.36
34 0.41
33 0.43
Cocr CoB
24
0.28 28
HSI
% B Ratio
7.1
26
0.25
5.1
48
0.25
6.8
29
0.28
5.0 49
0.25
6.9
228
238
7.95
12.90 14.4
190
12.1
157
3.6
130
6.9
16.30 10.0
136
140
153
ConeWt X a
155
2.5
128
4.7
127
2.8
133
4.7
MC or
49
82
50
68
77
63
53
36
47
40
31
60
28
82
43
68
65
82
72
43
65
87
75
83
89
68
83
56
62
0
68
73
57
53
65
77
72
69
72
74
0
65
74
75
62
83
76
74
Left
%
8% mc) cmd 5-C one! (as is basis)
Sorted by Accno (February 6 1997)
n = 692
(at
or Nursery
Bale
Accession
1 995
2.31
0.41
0.00 0.00
54.6
0.0
0.0
2.35 1.45 , 46.0
0.00 0.00
Page
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
4.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.1
4.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
4.5 12.3
3.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
5.4
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
9.7
0.1
8.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.7 16.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.1
0.0
0.0
9.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.2
8.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
7.1
6.5 11.1
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.2
0.0
3.1
7.2
0.0
0.0
21.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.8
16.2
0.0
0.0
7.4
23.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
24.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
34.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.8
1.1
0.0
7.0
0.0
0.0
31.3
24.4
0.0
0.0
9.6
2.25
0.00
0.00
3.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.38
2.30
0.00
0.00
1.45
2.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.21
0.35
0.00
1.29
0.00
0.00
3.25
2.89
0.00
0.00
2.59
6.6 2.11
0.0 0.00
565
520
637
199
211
526
349
451
456
663
335
472
238
325
179
131
11
128
123
198
73
116
200
212
170
312
459
10
529
297
261
636
353
214
438
346
9
344
519
617
300
Area % 0 I Composition
Myr
Cary Farn Hum
H/C
LabNo
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
577
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
130
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
126
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
118
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
117
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
337
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
310
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.0
1.52 0.00 52.2
2.51 0.95
57.9
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.65 0.15 38.7
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
2.44 1.14 51.9
0.90 0.00
53.7
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
1.51 0.42 62.9
1.28 0.38 44.6
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.97 0.62 43.1
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.53 0.21
31.2
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
1.89 0.41
50.7
1.91 0.86 65.5
0.00 0.00
0.0
1.29 0.58 63.4
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.98 0.42 37.2
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Fresh Stor.
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
mL oil/100c
Analyses
o
Blisk,
Bobek,
Bobek,
Buket,
Buket,
Pol Klon 30
7311-032
7311-068
7311-095
7311-152
7312-009
7312-036
7312-041
7312-134
7312-032
7312-032
7313-083
7313-083
7003-075
Early Prolific
Early Prolific
Early Promise
Early Promise
Keyworths Early
Keyworths Early
Keyworths Mids
Keyworths Mids
Pride of Kent
Pride of Kent
Sunshine
Sunshine
Wye Saxon
Wye Saxon
Wye Viking
Wye Viking
Bramling
Id sel BOR 704
Kirin II
Kirin II
Banner
Banner
7312-053
7312-057
7312-081
7312-084
7312-106
7312-115
7312-128
21238
21239
21239
21240
21240
21243
21246
21247
21248
21250
21251
21252
21253
21255
21256
21256
21257
21257
21261
21276
21276
21277
21277
21278
21278
21279
21279
21280
21280
21281
21281
21282
21282
21283
21283
21284
21285
21286
21286
21287
21287
21289
21290
21292
21293
21294
21295
21296
Yugo
Yugo
Yugo
Yugo
Yugo
Identification
Number
or Nursery
Accession
48
52
52
48
48
52
48
48
50
48
48
48
48
B
48 C
B
B
12 C
12 B
20 C
10 C
002:51- 52
230:06- 10
039:01- 04
016:13- 16
233:16- 20
012:49- 50
015:49- 50
020:49- 50
021:49- 50
022:49- 50
023:49 50
032:49- 50
B
B
C
C
C
029:09- 12 C
228:06- 10 B
229:06- 10 B
030:09- 12 B
030:01- 04 C
227:06027:09220:16028:09-
023:09- 12 B
223:06- 10 B
024:09- 12
224:06225:06025:09226:06026:09- 12 B
038:47
023:47
024:47
027:47
029:47
028:49
040:47
041:47
042:47
054:51
009:47021:47
053:51055:51-
232:16 -20
221:06 10
017:09 12
222:06 10
022:09 12
9/11/95
8/29/95
8/31/95
8/29/95
8/31/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/05/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/05/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/29/95
9/08/95
8/29/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
8/21/95
9/08/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
8/21/95
8/29/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/11/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
P Date
and 5- Cone
262
1400
1000
1000
1600
800
800
2200
2200
2314
1941
1200
2000
100
800
444
284
150
704
1045
100
200
910
600
155
100
922
400
1600
9.9
1.6
4.5
6.5
9.4
15.35 10.7
145
9.3
196
10.7
150
8.4
194
13.2
14.6
193
280
12.0
13.1
279
133
142
172
9.00
7
4
8
8
9
8
7
11.50 10
8.40
152
8
1
7
8
138
192
10.30
1
9.2
9
6
8.8
7.4
7.7
7.0
5.8
8.2
4.9
3.9
15.8
12.3
8.6
.1
8
14.3
12.0
10.4
.7
3
1
11.1
11.7
13.1
184
10.50
171
214
153
9.55
12.20
7.45
11.75
200
362
223
191
144
341
555
100
600
1400
600
800
312
163
244
280
1000
1800
184
187
246
9.85 10.6
236
7.9
5
.8
65
61
76
80
78
78
73
80
73
36
49
52
65
66
61
66
73
66
57
59
73
71
71
71
68
63
75
74
57
67
74
74
73
67
74
83
75
78
81
75
70
76
72
67
67
.4
3
9.50 8.5
13.35 11.0
54
58
8
1
7.9
10.35
70
.8
9.1
234
1400
1500
Alpha
% B Ratio
15.20
ConeWt % a
MC or
1700
1800
2200
1600
853
1000
779
1160
1333
683
Lb/Ac
Yield
692
24
21
27
12
50
50
37
36
25
36
31
24
41
29
35
19
21
39
29
31
44
36
32
34
31
47
24
28
34
42
19
28
40
38
43
35
38
36
.29 28
.30 40
.29 44
.30 66
0.25 23
0.31 29
0.24 24
0.24 25
0.31
0.38
0..36
0..39
0..33
0..32
0.35
0.44
0..43
0..42
0..47
0..46
0..42
0.47
0.36
63 0.63
60
81
58
49
61
38
61
46
53
40
64 0.37
56 0.50
57 0.37
27 0.63
73 0.62
72 0.36
51 0..39
45 0..50
43 0..40
56 0..48
42 0..44
46 0..48
62 0..91
53 0..46
44
53
55 0..46
56 0..43
53 0..42
69 0..56
69 0.50
61 0.66
44
53
68
95
64
56
62
60
62
63
70
65
60
57 0.85
54 0.55
50 0.62
78 0.36
48 0.46
48 0.40
63 1.07
HSI
6 Mo
68
80
70
77
81
67
81
83
56
39
56
56
79
79
81
67
71
69
72
53
34
72
76
62
61
64
82
71
70
71
62
74
75
73
88
84
86
79
83
89
80
83
55
56
31
64
74
27
Left
%
i s basis)
Cog CoB
0.25 39
0.22 25
HSI
n =
(as
.32
0.31
0.27
0.27
0.29
0.30
0.32
0.31
0.25
0.26
0.29
0.28
0.27
0.27
0.29
0.26
0.24
0.24
0.23
0.30
0.30
0.26
0.23
0.25
0.22
.31
.30
.26
.23
.25
0.23
0.34
0.30
0.36
0.30
0.26
0.31
0.29
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Y Harvest
Bale
Location
1995
00
41
47
00
00
00
00
0.93
0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 '
2.32
3.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
00 0.00
00 0.00
61
59
95
02 0.73
0.00
1.31
0.00
00
01
0.00 0.00
00
37
00
00
00
0.00
1.64 0.93
0.60
0.93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
00
0.00
00
0.00
00
0.00
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.60 0.86
1.32
0.00
1.33 0.61
1.31 0.89
2.76 0.56
mL oil/100g
Fresh Stor.
Page
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
61.6
65.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.8
0.0
65.0
55.5
0.0
0.0
83.6
0.0
44.9
0.0
0.0
45.8
0.0
50.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
45.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
58.3
47.3
0.0
59.2
66.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.4
4.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.9
0.0
1.8
0.0
7.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.2
3.1
5.5 2.47
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1 11.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
78
00
00
00
00
00
0.00
0.00
52
00
26
2.67
70
00
00
00
00
00
83
0.0
00
0 .0
00
0.3 22 .0
05
0.0 0 .0
00
0.0 0 .0 0.00
0.7 23 .4 1.82
0.0 0 .0 0.00
0.0 4.2
30
0.0 0.0
00
00
77
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0
17.3
4.8 14.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4 17.6 2.77
0.0 0.0 0.00
4.6 14.1 3.11
3.9 10.0 3.25
2.7 11.3 2.98
9.7
Area % Oil Composition
Myr Cary Farn Hum H/C
69.4
Analyses
185
210
242
186
181
184
222
202
194
219
220
12
37
112
443
464
345
447
487
440
13
582
110
120
514
463
14
125
271
449
331
620
641
245
256
252
246
262
237
259
192
188
485
183
492
521
619
523
LabNo
4
T
033:47-48 C
011:47-48
020:47-48
026:47-48
112:15-16
242:21-25
102:03-04
104:03-04
106:05-06
112:05-06
111:05-06
231:06-10
110:01-02
234:16-20
002:01-04
003:01-04
033:01-04
236:16-20
235:16-20
026:01-04
237:16-20
022:47-48
028:47-48
106:03-04
048:49-50
017:51-52
023:51-52
025:51-52
026:51-52
027:51-52
033:51-52
238:16-20
010:09-12
111:03-04
239:16-20 B
011:05-08 C
Yugo 88/201
7003-066
7006-061
7006-398
7006-398
7006-398
6929-042
7013-003
56008x19058M
6751-136
6750-210
Tolhurst
Hallertau MF T4
Sticklebract
Sticklebract
Green Bullet
Superalpha
Superalpha
Superalpha
AlphaAroma
AlphaAroma
Id 51-8A
W402-49
7013-051
7710-034
7727-044
7304-107
7306-193
7311-028
7314-033
7007-339
Mt Hood
Mt Hood
8303-046
Liberty
Liberty
21369
21370
21370
21371
21372
21373
21373
21373
21386
21387
21389
21394
21395
21396
21397
21403
21403
21404
21405
21405
21405
21406
21406
21407
21408
21412
21441
21443
21450
21451
21452
21453
21454
21455
21455
21456
21457
21457
21459
21460
21469
21484
21485
21485
21369
110:07-08 C
041:51-52 C
240:36-40 C
238:21-25 B
007:49-50 C
019:47-48 C
8308-066
HP1/86 S. Afr.
8301-011
8305-017
S Afr Rf5/54
S Afr Rf5/54
B
C
C
B
C
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
031:47-48
106:07-08
107:07-08
032:47-48
108:07-08 B
88/150
88/150
88/187
88/187
88/201
Yugo
Yugo
Yugo
Yugo
Yugo
21298
21368
21368
038:49-50
7315-035
9/05/95
9/01/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/01/95
8/23/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
8/31/95
9/13/95
8/23/95
8/23/95
8/25/95
8/23/95
8/23/95
8/22/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
8/25/95
9/05/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
,9/06/95
9/06/95
9/11/95
9/06/95
9/07/95
9/11/95
8/29/95
9/07/95
9/06/95
9/11/95
9/13/95
9/05/95
9/01/95
Location P Date
Identification
and 5-Cone
Alpha
1400
50
875
1169
704
1173
811
1152
1536
725
200
1900
2000
1800
1800
2000
1800
2000
2000
600
200
832
800
1000
1800
1400
1600
800
1200
1587
700
400
825
900
800
1800
1200
862
100
1200
1800
1800
960
1700
1800
600
600
400
5.5
5.2
53
62
33
55
4.2
4.6
3.3
3.4
3.0
6.0
4.2
4.6
5.0
4.0
5.4
4.9
4.1
2.7
4.0
5.1
5.1
5.4
3.7
52
52
57
49
29
47
66
64
46
43
66
62
40
71
79
65
73
43
46
71
72
69
60
65
61
68
71
65
66
28
57
6.3
4.5
4.0
63
55
64
67
49
76
73
63
70
66
62
70
77
7.9
4.1
3.6
4.5
4.7
9.3
171
199
12.6
11.0
196
7.5
218
7.3
189
8.1
148
11.20 8.5
11.0
209
6.0
121
8.9
183
13.1
237
9.20 12.1
10.65 13.1
9.20 4.9
2.4
10.45
5.9
10.65
4.7
11.55
7.5
11.70
1.6
13.45
6.3
146
12.5
217
10.2
159
7.2
133
10.0
184
7.8
181
8.8
172
6.8
138
10.5
183
12.9
149
230 10.3
11.55 3.1
4.8
270
6.4
161
8.0
207
5.1
173
14.8
268
10.0
171
9.3
168
12.20 4.6
6.6
238
3.7
163
12.20 4.3
3.6
146
4.0
214
5.9
109
1.7
129
8.70 4.1
10.6
118
3.7
4.6
3.8
Lb/Ac ConeWt % a % B Ratio
Yield MC or
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Y Harvest
Number
Accession
or Nursery
1995 Bale
6
Mo
HSI
0.40
0.50
0.75
0.84
0.57
0.46
0.72
0.35
0.41
0 37
0 38
0 57
0 64
0.90
0.53
0 94
0 55
0 70
0 84
71 0.37
69 0.44
68 0.52
61 0.34
64 0.38
71 0.46
52 0.37
53 0.43
67 0.51
73 0.82
0
43 0.61
0
55 0.51
0
46 0.40
0
55 0.58
0
57 0.34
0
61 0.37
0
60 0.54
0
70 0.51
0
49 1.29
46 0.84
43 0.67
48 0.85
41 0.41
41 0 .47
51 0 .35
45 0 .94
45 0 .46
39 0.35
36 0.30
52
60
64
61
61
59
62
54
54
42
43
47
55
53
62
64
65
47
65
Cog CoB
692
0.26 26
0.24 34
0.26 34
0.27 32
0.28 32
23 33
26 33
26 35
31 28
28 18
24 18
0.24 22
0.23 34
0.24 30
0.23 42
0.25 42
0.23 41
0.26 29
0.25 42
0.25 47
0.25 43
0.27 41
0.23 34
0.26 39
0.24 42
0.28 25
0.24 27
0.25 43
0.25 49
0.25 27
26 35
28 21
27 30
30 29
29 38
0.29 32
0.28 42
0.22 27
0.22 23
0.26 24
0.24 28
0.28 21
0.27 21
0.26 31
0.31 22
0.23 27
0.25 18
0.24 15
HSI
n =
40
76
69
84
37
73
84
92
53
42
18
66
51
66
78
60
85
81
64
75
66
43
71
81
65
86
80
42
81
73
56
46
59
32
54
36
58
81
79
76
49
84
57
42
61
67
48
77
%
Left
00
00
.65
,00
0.00
2.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.63
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.90
0.00
0.00
0.73
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.76
0.00
0.00
0..00
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0..00
00
0.00
0.44
00
00
0.00
1.03
0.93
0.38
0.43
0.45
0.45
0.42
0.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
00
00
0.0
0.
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.
50.
0.
0.0
75.1
72.8
66.1
68.4
79.6
76.6
70.2
48.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.
58.
0.0
60.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
00 0..00
00 0.00
00
49
33
1.22
1.70
0.36
1.76
1.33
0.96
0.00
0.00
Page
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.2
0.0
0.0
3.4
3.8
2.8
2.7
1.7
1.5
3.0
6.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
00
00
00
00
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.4
00
47
00
00
0.00
0.00
3.51
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
24.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
37.1
0.0
0.0
00
54
00
00
82
00
00
00
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
7.5
16.7
0.0
0.0
3.8
3.9
0.00
1.51
1.63
1.35
31
33
47
50
43
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.5 11.7 10.1 2.86
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Area X Oil Composition
Mvr Carv Farn Hum H/C
0.00 0..00
0.00 0..00
1.01 0..50
00 0..00
0.00 0..00
0.00 0..00
0.00 0..00
mL oil/100g
Fresh Stor.
(as is basis) Analyses
187
66
175
195
209
174
493
668
67
74
132
75
68
38
419
566
330
333
328
575
589
332
583
205
191
164
224
284
307
285
303
291
292
652
320
418
665
115
423
316
606
649
260
208
182
425
414
226
LabNo
ro
040:01-04 B
Tettnanger A
Tettnanger B
Iowa 6
Iowa 7
21567
21525 vf
21525 vf
7003-154
7006-370
Iowa 3
Osvald #72 (CSR
Osvald #31
Blato (CSR)
21114 vf
21114 vf
Osvald #126
Saazer-36
21113 vf
21113 vf
Saazer-36
Ba 11/72/19a Yu
Ba 11/72/19a Yu
Hersb alpha
Hersb alpha
Ap71/74-2a Yugo
Zenith
7504-026
7504-137
8036-099
Centennial
Centennial
7610-104
7611-025
7504-004
Hersbrucker-6
Hersbrucker-8
Hersbrucker-8
Hersbrucker-9
Hersbrucker-9
Hersb red stem
Hersb red stem
Zenith
Yeoman
Yeoman
B
C
C
B
C
C
C
C
B
C
B
029:41-44
028:41-44
027:41-44
025:47-48
016:47-48
001:13-16
227:21-25
229:21-25
003:13-16
004:13-16
230:21-25
005:13-16
006:13-16
008:13-16
011:13-16
231:21-25
013:13-16
050:47-48
B
B
C
C
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
C
B
B
013:47-48 C
039:09-12 B
225:21-25 C
226:21-25 C
038:05-08 C
036:05-08 C
224:21-25 C
037:05-08 C
C
C
223:21-25 C
034:01-04
035:01-04
242:16-20
036:47-48
037:47-48
039:47-48
221:21-25
031:09-12
015:47-48
018:47-48
043:47-48
222:21-25
035:05-08
041:01-04 B
241:16-20 B
111:07-08 B
113:01-02 B
8408-096
8/23/95
8/28/95
8/21/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
8/29/95
9/06/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
203
149
213
299
600
800
600
700
1700
1166
192
235
181
299
427
341
224
1600
114
1400
1000
800
1900
1800
1600
1900
2000
1700
1800
400
1600
1269
1800
200
800
400
981
700
640
1195
501
1525
704
203
811
4.4
4.2
3.5
4.7
6.2
% a
8.1
9.0
115
157
105
137
103
9.40
8.90
10.00
11.05
3.2
6.4
7.9
0.7
3.9
1.4
3.8
3.5
5.0
4.7
5.1
3.6
7.25
6.35
11.15
11.70
9.90
3.7
2.7
10.90
9.50
7.8
7.3
3.2
4.8
6.9
3.5
4.2
4.5
4.4
3.0
4.1
5.5
9.9
3.4
9.9
12.6
5.9
11.3
5.9
3.5
5.2
5.6
146
6.65
154
102
9.10
152
120
114
145
130
145
139
102
140
211
179
188
11.25
178
170
10.45 10.8
10.20 11.1
147 11.9
11.25 12.9
11.15 14.8
7.85
7.50
11.50
13.85
ConeWt
154
174
9.15
MC or
4.1
3.0
6.0
9.5
2.4
4.2
3.1
2.2
3.1
3.1
3.0
2.7
4.6
5.3
3.8
3.1
5.3
3.2
4.2
3.9
5.0
4.9
6.8
5.2
6.0
4.0
5.3
6.0
5.5
5.6
3.6
1.2
3.6
2.5
4.2
4.6
6.9
55
54
55
52
52
45
23
48
31
69
54
50
51
51
49
52
65
65
53
39
50
68
40
41
53
42
36
38
64
37
73
78
82
73
46
70
72
17
21
19
19
0.22
0.23
0.27
0.25
0.42
0.31
0.44
0.26
0.23
0.22
0.22
24
23
37
17
65
64
77
28
24
22
23
0.23 22
0.24 25
0.24 25
0.25 22
0.29 31
0.27 23
0.22 24
0.30 27
0.25 31
0.25
0.27
0.25
0.23
0.23 17
0.27 18
0.27 17
0.26 19
0.30 19
0.28 30
0.35 29
0.25 27
0.27 30
0.26 32
0.29 31
0.27 31
0.24 21
0.88
1.03
0.35
0.45
0.38
0.45
0.44
0.47
0.42
0.43
0.44
0.38
0.47
0.44
0.48
0.40
0.38
0.59
0.62
0.54
0.58
0.57
0.52
0.45
0.56
0.57
0.00
0.00
0.63
64
38
82
80
88
0.38
0.38
0.84
0.50
0.66
44 0.59
55
55
54
49
47
37
38
37
36
38
37
40
37
39
49
57
57
43
42
42
42
41
42
52
43
43
42
42
55
45 0.37
54 0.49
53
81
80
42
67
54
47
0
0
62
71
65
59
52
60
54
80
54
73
69
74
70
80
73
70
75
74
73
72
84
72
80
40
29
68
56
82
Alpha
6 Mo
X
% B Ratio
HSI Coa CoB
HSI Left
5.4
60
0.25 28
50 0.36 82
5.6
61
0.27 27
46 0.44
73
6.7
34
0.22 22
37 0.89 34
3.5
58
0.24 22
41 0.66 48
5.0
55
0.23 22
43 0.67 50
4.9 47
0.22 24
43 0.00
0
4.9
46
0.23 22
42 0.62 51
4.7 76
0.27 27
50 0.35
81
4.3
75
0.27 25
50 0.34 82
3.6
75
0.25 24
50 0.40 74
3.5
76
0.27 28
53 0.53 65
and 5-Cone (as is basis)
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
n = 692
(at 8% mc)
Harvest
Yield
Location
P Date
Lb/Ac
012:47-48 C
9/01/95 2000
030:47-48 C
9/01/95
200
240:16-20 B
9/13/95 2082
8405-026
Crystal
Identification
7507-109
7507-109
21566
21563
21486
21486
21490
21491
21493
21496
21497
21498
21498
21499
21499
21500
21503
21505
21507
21507
21511
21512
21513
21514
21515
21515
21516
21516
21517
21517
21518
21518
21519
21520
21520
21521
21521
21523
21523
21524
21524
21526
21527
21529
21532
21535
21535
21536
21537
Number
T
Y
or Nursery
Bale
Accession
1995
0.00
0.63
0.37
0.57
0.73
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.30
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.18
0.34
0.44
0.46
0.16
0.42
0.62
0.23
0.27
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.00 •
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.43
0.00
0.62
1.13
0.96
0.52
0.29
0.93
1.11
0.74
0.41
0.31
0.76
0.46
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
3.24
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.89 0.95
2.09 0.92
0.89 0.31
1.63 1.47
0.60 0.00
0.00
1.97
0.93
1.48
0.00 0.00
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100g
Page
0.0
58.8
47.3
49.6
33.6
45.3
50.4
57.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
46.8
35.6
63.3
65.4
0.0
54.3
0.0
0.0
26.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.8
49.2
60.2
49.2
46.5
52.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.8
6
5.8
5.5
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.9
0.0
3.6
2.7
2.5
4.4
5.4
3.3
8.5
4.8
5.7
4.6
4.4
3.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
12.7
10.5
9.1
15.2
14.4
11.6
4.1
11.2
12.7
10.4
13.1
10.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.0
14.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
31.5
0.0
12.8
9.6
8.3
15.3
19.1
11.3
23.9
16.1
20.9
16.3
15.4
11.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.18
0.00
3.59
3.52
3.33
3.45
3.54
3.45
2.80
3.33
3.63
3.53
3.48
3.46
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.15
0.00
3.43
3.54
0.00
O.OO
15.6 3.39
12.3 3.03
0.2 16.1 2.77
4.6 14.1
4.0
0.1
4.3
1.1 15.2 3.54
4.4 12.3 15.1 3.47
47
452
168
193
272
313
283
44
45
46
42
43
20
41
19
18
40
213
508
197
568
570
347
350
567
338
334
579
203
176
588
207
571
501
190
201
625
172
517
17
39
15
358
16
LabNo
Cary Farn Hum
H/C
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
204
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
189
5.0
0.2 17.3 3.46
648
10.0 0.6 26.8 2.67
76
Area % Oil Composition
Myr
0.0
0.0
59.7
48.9
63.6
Analyses
CO
042:41-44 C
043:41-44 C
026:39-40 B
027:39-40 B
Montana 17
Montana 18
Montana 19
Montana 20
Utah 12
21664
21664
21664
21664
041:41-44 C
Eng 27/57/264
Wye Dwarf gene
English Int 30
218:36-40 C
8802-045
8802-048
8802-048
8802-068
8802-068
8802-068
8802-068
118:01-02 B
Coleman
B
C
B
B
B
116:01-02 B
8802-045
219:36-40
117:01-02
Coleman
110:25-26
114:01-02 B
115:01-02 B
236:06-10 B
217:36-40 C
237:21-25 B
021:01-04 B
235:06-10 B
8802-019
8802-024
8802-019
Fuggte vf (4820
Fuggle vf (4820
Cicero
Cicero
Cicero
236:21-25 B
022:13-16 C
021:13-16 C
019:13-16 B
Cerera
Cekin
Cekin
235:21-25 B
Cerera
018:13-16 B
233:21-26 B
234:21-25 B
020:13-16 B
Hallertauer
Hallertauer
032:39-40 B
017:13-16 B
232:21-25 B
Celeia
Celeia
NZ
NZ
Pacific Gem
N Dakota 9
Pacific Gem
031:39-40 B
005:47-48 C
W Am Minn
007:47-48 C
220:21-25 C
030:39-40 B
003:39-40 C
004:39-40 C
Montana 24
Utah 13
025:39-40 B
Montana 16
037:41-44 C
036:41-44 C
024:39-40 B
Montana 12
21583
035:41-44 C
022:39-40 B
21586
21590
21591
21592
21593
21594
21599
21600
21602
21605
21606
21607
21607
21608
21609
21609
21610
21610
21611
21611
21612
21612
21613
21613
21614
21614
21614
21650
21650
21660
21660
21661
21662
21662
21663
21663
Montana 9
Montana 10
21581
Iowa 8
Montana 8
21580
034:41-44 C
Montana 11
Montana 7
21579
21585
Montana 6
9/13/95
9/06/95
8/22/95
9/06/95
9/01/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/01/95
8/31/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
9/11/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
9/11/95
9/11/95
8/28/95
8/25/95
8/25/95
8/28/95
8/25/95
9/06/95
8/28/95
9/06/95
8/28/95
8/25/95
9/06/95
8/28/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
9/01/95
9/01/95
9/08/95
8/28/95
9/08/95
9/13/95
9/08/95
100
1066
0
192
1194
1731
469
50
811
981
100
757
1399
1351
1152
1600
1024
794
1800
300
811
300
363
200
600
469
500
400
600
427
896
600
600
512
427
800
200
50
427
739
3029
2218
887
1322
1824
1271
5.5
227
252
12.00
14.25
9.10
9.05
6.60
10.80
173
10.90
227
12.90
7.90
12.70
12.55
185
9.85
9.50
10.20
10.45
181
10.50
13.65
8.10
7.8
5.7
4.8
5.3
5.7
5.3
5.9
4.5
4.7
7.9
3.9
4.7
5.2
7.6
6.1
6.9
7.1
7.6
4.9
6.8
4.5
5.5
4.5
7.85 10.0
7.0
9.35
10.45
3.8
8.10 13.7
5.8
112
2.1
6.6
6.0
145
124
16.10
14.25
5.3
4.9
3.3
1.9
9.30
207
5.4
10.90
1.9
3.9
194
204
4.7
9.75
332
5.5
4.3
5.9
3.3
6.3
3.4
5.8
5.9
252
383
7.30
8.35
231
285
321
310
ConeWt % a
MC or
n
=
692
(as is
6 Mo
%
basis)
7.3
6.5
6.7
6.8
7.1
6.9
6.7
5.6
6.3
6.5
5.3
2.1
3.1
2.8
2.2
2.8
3.6
2.8
2.6
3.4
4.0
3.4
6.3
5.0
5.2
3.7
7.2
3.5
6.5
3.7
4.6
6.0
1.6
3.7
3.4
4.2
3.6
5.0
2.2
6.0
2.2
3.9
2.6
3.4
3.2
52
47
42
44
45
44
47
44
43
55
43
69
63
73
74
72
73
73
59
65
58
48
57
65
66
53
51
62
50
62
31
47
54
57
50
56
52
28
68
48
72
52
69
49
66
0.21 23
0.26 24
0.23 23
0.22 26
0.28
0
0.21 22
0.19 23
0.24 23
0.24 23
0.21 23
0.22 19
0.29 26
0.27 30
0.28 29
0.30 26
0.29 30
0.26 25
0.27 27
0.24 29
0.27 25
0.24 24
0.24 46
0.22 36
0.25 41
0.28 30
0.23 39
0.30 66
0.30 66
0.24 70
0.23 52
0.25 50
0.23 62
0.33 83
0.27 81
0.25 65
0.25 67
0.31 62
0.30 57
0.23 63
0.28 70
0.29 71
0.31 60
0.28 70
0.28 81
0.25 61
0.63
1.08
0.74
0.63
0.59
0.44
0.48
1.11
0.84
0.55
0.39
0.46
42 0.89
40 0.67
39 0.00
0 0.00
76
67
78
78
85 0.00
66 0.35
69 0.37
62 0.39
64 0.47
61 0.73
54 0.38
60 0.70
56 0.64
50 0.36
52 0.39
48 0.36
51 0.37
50 0.35
53 0.42
51 0.48
44 0.62
45 0.91
36 0.77
40 0.00
37 0.00
37 0.62
41 0.83
78
92
91
85
83
80
81
82
80 0.70
86 0.54
82 0.73
83 0.77
92 0.83
80 0.66
56
36
0
0
49
29
0
0
32
42
69
56
77
82
83
74
83
55
82
47
78
51
72
64
83
76
0
71
53
43
46
49
63
45
56
30
48
57
53
72
69
26
40
62
79
HSI Left
HSI Coa CoB
% B Ratio
0.26 62
82 0.52
65
5.0
54
0.27 68
83 0.77 46
3.6 61
0.34 63
83 0.47 70
3.1
53
Alpha
and 5-Cone
Sorted by Accno (Februe ry 6 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Harvest
Yield
Location P Date
Lb/Ac
033:41-44 C
8/25/95
100
021:39-40 C
9/06/95
300
T
Y
21584
Montana 4
21576
Identification
21578
Number
or Nursery
Accession
1995 Bale
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.0
76.6
74.0
0.0
0.0
3.50
0.00
3.58
3.70
0.0 0.00
15.9
18.9
17.9
0.0
52
8.2 16.1
28.7 3.50
5.0 10.0 17.8 3.58
6.6 12.7 23.3 3.54
45.4
0.99 0.47' 34.4
21.6
3.2
8.5 13.6 30.4 3.58
162
359
107
608
602
391
683
365
384
598
370
17.1 3.14
0.0 0.00
17.9
0.0
5.3
4.8
0.0
4.5
50
21
180
631
27.6 3.13
19.1 2.61
7.2 11.3 3.57
4.1
3.5
4.5
0.0
8.7
10.5
10.4
0.0
7.3
5.4
1.22
626
7.1
1.1
0.0 0.0 0.00
3.1 15.8 2.89
0.0
5.5
171
49
629
643
667
628
615
669
387
569
196
206
369
388
276
296
380
364
281
267
308
390
264
95
389
311
379
616
8.8
270
268
0.0 0.0 0.00
7.4 20.2 3.19
4.2 19.9 2.66
2.7 12.1 2.37
4.2 10.2 2.03
3.6 13.1 2.27
57.4
1.53 0.51
7
6.3
5.8
0.0
12.4 3.07
2.8 1.51
0.18
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.75
0.18
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.1 20.0 3.10
3.8 9.3 1.87
0.1
0.0
43.2
47.2
0.0
55.6
38.2
51.0
58.6
0.0
58.1
46.7
39.8
0.0
0.0
5.8
7.5
5.1
44.9
59.8
6.4
5.0
5.0
54.6
56.6
57.4
58.4
4.1
61.1
70.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
0.0
3.9
3.5
1.3
84.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
78.0
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
69.7
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.4
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0 0.00
0.2 0.37
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
76.1
1.69 0.58
0.00
0.00
0.65
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.53
0.44
0.00
0.00
0.63
0.27
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.88
0.99
0.81
0.00
0.00
0.36
0.75
0.00
0.82
0.94
0.00
1.07
0.43
0.37
0.73
0.00
0.45
0.77
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.63
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1.81
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.63
1.00
0.00
0.00
1.48
0.61
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.13
1.78
1.80
1.53
1.54
2.36
0.52
1.77
0.00
1.19
1.55
0.00
1.58
0.69
0.88
1.27
0.00
1.41
2.20
0.90
0.00
0.00
1.96
1.28
1.21
90.3
0.54 0.45
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
I Composition
Page
LabNo
Cary Farn Hum
H/C
0.0 0.0 0.00
96
0.0
Area % 0
Myr
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100g
Analyses
4^
Canterbury Gold
21681
Eastern Gold
Eastern Gold
Kitamidori
Kitamidori
Toyomidori
Hersbrucker G
Toyomidori
Orion
Orion
Spalter Select
Spalter Select
Spalter Select
Spalter Select
Spalter Select
Canadian RedVin
East Kent Goldi
East Kent Goldi
Hallertauer Tra
Hersbrucker Pur
Hersbrucker Pur
Hallertauer Tra
Hallertauer Tra
Ha Tradition
Hallertauer Gol
Hallertauer Gol
Hallertauer Tra
Hallertauer Gol
Hallertauer Gol
Hallertauer Gol
Hallertauer Mag
Hallertauer Mag
Whitbread's GoI
Eastwell Goldin
Eastwell Goldin
Whithread's Go I
Omega
Omega
8805-040
8805-040
8805-040
8805-040
8806-017
8806-017
8805-040
8805-040
Identification
8802-068
8802-068
21673
21674
21674
21674
21674
21674
21675
21675
21676
21676
21676
21677
21677
21678
21678
21679
21680
21680
21672
21673
21672
21665
21665
21665
21665
21666
21666
21667
21667
21668
21668
21669
21669
21670
21670
21671
21671
21671
21671
21671
21672
21672
21672
21665
21664
21665
Number
21664
or Nursery
Accession
B
B
B
Coleman
Coleman
B
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
228:11-15 B
037:09-12 B
038:09-12 B
229:11-15 C
223:11-15
034:09-12
034:09-12
224:11-15
035:09-12
225:11-15
226:11-15
036:09-12
028:13-16 B
222:11-15 B
Coleman
B
027:13-16 B
Coleman
B
Coleman
B
025:13-16 C
221:11-15 B
026:13-16 C
B
C
B
B
Coleman
024:13-16
Coleman
242:06-10
Coleman
B
241:06-10 B
023:13-16 B
240:06-10 B
Coleman
B
239:06-10 B
043:01-04 C
238:06-10 B
011:09-12 B
042:01-04 B
237:06-10 B
239:36-40 C
111:25-26 B
120:01-02 B
Alluvial
238:36-40 C
238:36-40 B
Y
T
Bale
9/08/95
9/13/95
8/31/95
8/25/95
8/28/95
9/11/95
8/31/95
8/21/95
8/21/95
8/31/95
8/31/95
8/29/95
8/22/95
8/31/95
8/24/95
8/24/95
9/11/95
8/24/95
9/01/95
8/24/95
9/11/95
8/24/95
8/24/95
9/01/95
9/11/95
9/01/95
8/22/95
8/24/95
8/24/95
9/11/95
8/24/95
8/22/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/01/95
8/31/95
9/01/95
9/11/95
9/13/95
9/01/95
9/08/95
9/01/95
9/11/95
9/01/95
1674
981
2995
1290
2600
313
1003
583
1000
2125
1067
1000
533
907
1465
0
0
906
939
1200
597
0
1400
1400
0
1647
738
1544
990
3225
0
0
50
1120
538
277
1152
1226
1038
800
640
683
1500
0
5.0
3.1
5.6
5.6
6.9
5.9
5.2
4.8
6.0
6.9
6.1
12.15
11.10
8.70
7.6
8.70 11.6
6.45 11.7
10.35 10.3
106
3.6
11.15
4.2
10.65 6.3
10.85
5.1
8.35 13.6
11.85
5.4
11.55
9.5
9.40
9.4
149
12.3
11.15
4.5
6.0
6.1
6.1
6.4
3.8
6.0
9.40
10.20
9.80
199
232
11.75
12.55
188
1.2
10.50 8.7
9.45 10.7
8.10
7.0
10.70 6.1
10.05 6.0
84
3.2
9.75 14.3
10.90 17.1
12.60
8.3
10.95
8.3
10.20 9.5
12.10 8.7
354
7.1
12.95
6.3
10.65
8.2
11.35
7.2
8.75
14.90
240
7.75
9.30
5.85
12.55
181
ConeWt % a
MC or
n =
692
(as is basis)
5.7
5.6
4.8
2.3
2.8
2.2
4.6
6.5
4.2
5.7
5.7
4.7
5.9
5.6
4.9
5.3
5.0
3.4
4.9
4.2
4.5
2.7
3.8
4.8
5.1
4.8
6.4
6.3
6.9
6.5
1.7
5.1
7.1
3.2
3.0
2.4
3.9
2.5
3.6
7.4
70
69
64
43
65
68
64
67
67
49
72
49
66
62
58
51
60
53
69
65
44
62
60
58
58
65
56
56
55
60
74
71
67
65
75
66
81
69
26
29
0
35
29
26
27
27
0
0.24
0.25
0.24
0.23
0.26
0.25
0.26
0.23
22
23
30
26
48
26
29
25
0.24 19
0.24 46
0.24 27
0.27 46
0.24
0
0.22 23
0.23 22
0.23 25
0.28 20
0.25 22
0.24 0
0.29 24
0.26 24
0.28
0
0.24 28
0.22 25
0.28
0
0.25 23
0.24 19
0.27 19
0.24
0.29
0.28
0.41
0.24
0.26
0.24
0.27 33
0.25 25
0.25 19
0.30 32
0.20 20
0.31
0.41
0.54
0.48
0.48
0.31
0.45
0.00
0.00
0.67
0.57
0.55
0.00
0.87
0.52
0.00
0.55
0.48
0.43
0.38
0.00
0.63
0.57
0.00
0.34
0.55
41
44
49
45
70
52
54
50
0.50
0.43
0.37
0.34
0.68
0.45
0.37
0.37
39 0.53
64 0.47
67 0.44
47
55
57
52
49
47
48
0
0
46
41
46
0
50
49
0
51
48
46
43
0
44
46
0
50
52
50 0.52
38 1.03
38 0.48
82
82
67
52
84
81
45
59
0
81
59
73
59
67
61
72
0
69
74
80
56
0
63
53
62
0
36
0
50
91
70
0
72
69
68
92
81
68
66
32
6 Mo
Alpha
%
HSI Left
% B Ratio
HSI Coa Col?
7.2
42
0.25 24
43 1.35
20
6.8
41
0.22 26
43 1.07 25
5.2
54
0.26 22
38 0.72
43
5.7 55
0.20 22
40 0.62 49
3.7 62
0.21 24
41 1.17
26
4.2
57
0.22 25
41 0.93 33
4.7 54
0.31
0
0 0.00
0
4.8
51
0.19 21
38 0.50 64
and 5-Cone
Sorted by Accno (Februa ry 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Harvest
Yield
Location
P Date
Lb/Ac
237:36-40 C
9/08/95
1500
237:36-40 B
9/13/95 1425
Alluvial
B
8/31/95 1182
119:01-02 B
8/28/95
853
1995
0.83
1.10
0.66
0.00
0.84
2.33
0.00
1.08
1.52
0.97
1.64
2.07
Page
8
48.2
61.9
30.1
0.0
59.7
59.9
45.8
56.3
53.3
61.8
0.0
49.4
50.8
0.0
59.0
56.0
61.5
63.0
64.4
62.6
0.0
62.6
56.2
58.2
0.0
61.8
52.4
42.2
65.4
52.3
48.8
0.0
59.1
34.9
48.1
63.4
45.0
54.1
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
8.2 11.2 3.48
3.7
10.3
7.3
8.4
9.5
0.0
7.6
5.9
7.9
6.6
0.0
5.1
2.6
9.7
2.3
2.3
4.1
1.3
0.0
3.9
4.2
4.9
6.7
0.0
0.0
5.4
4.7
2.8
5.3
4.5
3.7
5.2
6.9
0.0
9.5
6.7
5.8
4.8
0.3
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
9.5
13.2
10.7
10.4
10.1
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.1
6.1
6.6
4.1
3.1
0.0
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.1
21.7
0.0
16.5
14.0
19.1
19.0
9.9
17.5
0.0
19.3
14.8
18.1
24.0
0.0
9.4
0.0
10.2
6.4
5.6
5.6
6.5
24.9
16.7
0.0
11.5
8.8
35.1
27.2
21.2
24.8
0.0
22.5
19.2
23.0
3.63
3.73
3.66
3.58
3.54
3.77
0.00
3.59
3.57
3.67
3.59
0.00
2.44
0.00
2.48
4.97
2.49
2.47
2.51
2.56
2.55
0.00
2.24
2.34
3.42
3.75
2.51
2.60
0.00
2.97
3.28
2.89
3.15
0.00
9.9 1.47
20.5 3.54
29.2 3.06
16.9 3.53
6.2 11.3 22.7 3.69
5.0 10.6 17.6 3.49
3.5
9.1 12.3 3.46
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
3.2
0.0
5.3 10.7 19.0 3.56
8.5 16.5 3.56
4.6
645
511
610
651
510
587
513
638
504
342
507
54
662
692
105
666
51
676
675
177
650
178
693
613
104
169
103
670
691
48
634
674
622
114
23
635
22
605
632
366
133
684
659
378
540
318
Area % Oi l Composition
Myr
Cary Farn Hum
H/C
LabNo
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
541
56.7
647
3.9 9.3 13.2 3.36
39.9
36.7
0.70
29.7
0.00
0.0
0.36- 44.2
0.79
53.4
0.54
46.2
1.12
0.00
0.64
0.96
0.59
1.15
1.04
0.91 0.00
0.71 0.39
0.85 0.36
1.85 0.77
0.85 0.46
1.02 0.00
0.00 0.00
1.19 0.66
0.00 0.00
1.92 0.60
0.96 0.37
0.90 0.00
1.26 0.48
0.00 0.00
1.10 0.00
1.23 0.00
1.47 0.00
2.69 0.84
1.05 0.81
3.75 0.70
0.00 0.00
1.38 0.86
0.99 0.93
1.77 1.20
1.07 0.87
0.00 0.00
2.07 1.04
0.77 0.43
1.04 0.46
2.03 0.57
1.13 0.00
1.06 0.53
0.00 0.00
2.39 0.89
1.41 0.43
Fresh Stor.
0.00 0.00
mL oil/100g
Analyses
en
21683
21683
21683
21684
21684
21684
21684
21685
21685
21685
21685
21685
21685
21685
21686
21686
21686
21686
21686
21686
21687
21687
21687
21687
21687
21687
21688
21688
21688
21688
21688
21689
21689
21689
21689
21689
21689
21697
21698
21698
21698
21700
21700
21683
21683
21683
Kirin C-827
Kirin C-827
Bianca 9046-41
Bianca 9046-41
9036-045
9036-045
9036-045
9036-045
9036-045
9036-045
9040-038
9040-038
9040-038
9040-038
9040-065
9040-065
9040-065
9040-065
9040-065
9040-065
9040-065
9041-065
9041-065
9041-065
9041-065
9041-065
9041-065
9042-003
9042-003
9042-003
9042-003
9042-003
9042-003
9042-012
9042-012
9042-012
9042-012
9042-012
9043-052
9043-052
9043-052
9043-052
9043-052
9043-052
Sunbeam 9046-20
Bianca 9046-41
Canterbury Gold
Wurttemberger
21682
21681
Identification
Number
or Nursery
Accession
B
B
B
B
B
B
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
220:11-15 C
042:09-12 C
Coleman
Coleman
Coleman
112:13-14
104:23-24
Coleman
231:31-35
242:36-40
110:15-16
232:36-40
106:23-24
Coleman
B
221:31-35 B
103:23-24 B
Coleman
B
111:11-12 B
Coleman
B
Coleman
B
102:23-24 B
241:26-30 B
Coleman
B
107:11-12 B
Coleman
B
237:26-30 B
B
Coleman
Coleman
B
112:21-22 B
241:36-40 C
Coleman
B
Coleman
Coleman
111:21-22 B
220:36-40 C
Coleman
B
111:15-16 B
110:21-22 B
102:11-12 B
Coleman
B
232:26-30 B
Coleman
224:26-30 B
Coleman
B
109:21-22 C
105:09-10 B
Y
T
Bale
9/07/95
9/07/95
8/31/95
9/06/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/06/95
8/23/95
8/31/95
9/07/95
8/31/95
8/25/95
9/11/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/11/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
8/25/95
8/23/95
9/07/95
9/06/95
8/25/95
9/06/95
8/30/95
8/31/95
8/30/95
8/30/95
9/06/95
8/30/95
8/30/95
9/06/95
8/30/95
8/30/95
8/30/95
8/23/95
8/25/95
8/30/95
9/06/95
9/11/95
8/23/95
9/13/95
8/25/95
8/29/95
9/08/95
8.65
10.15
10.70
10.55
1171
0
1195
0
0
2329
200
1344
853
768
100
100
1450
1894
6.4
6.7
7.8
7.6
7.3
4.5
4.6
4.0
4.2
6.9
4.3
4.1
4.3
4.0
5.9
2.9
3.6
2.9
3.7
2.5
2.2
2.8
6.0
3.3
6.8
145
5.0
7.95 10.9
8.65
8.9
10.05
7.5
170
4.9
195
5.4
8.05
8.00
11.85
9.15
9.85
8.80
11.50
15.70
717
896
0
2048
10.25
11.15
10.60
10.80
10.70
9.50
9.20
0
469
717
0
1519
448
751
448
1408
11.75
8.70
8.90
12.85
10.60
0
1382
0
3.2
179
14.00
2.5
2.6
3.3
2.4
9.40
10.20
9.45
13.10
163
4.4
5.4
6.4
5.8
5.9
5.5
2.5
4.3
3.1
4.3
2.2
2.1
5.4
5.3
5.5
5.3
5.5
5.3
5.1
4.4
5.9
3.0
3.9
3.8
7.7
3.7
4.6
3.8
5.3
6.4
6.1
6.5
6.7
5.7
5.5
4.6
4.1
4.4
5.6
4.0
4.6
887
200
0
5.5
5.6
5.2
4.3
4.1
5.6
5.0
4.5
4.6
4.3
6.7
Alpha
55
57
55
67
72
74
64
69
72
58
55
43
58
46
48
52
49
54
59
53
50
56
51
30
31
37
27
34
27
36
33
52
36
38
35
45
52
60
56
54
43
43
43
42
46
44
40
67
B Ratio
3.0
%
3.5
3.2
4.4
3.3
6.1
3.9
% a
5.5
9.15
9.65
11.30
1920
703
1024
1403
299
597
100
12.45
11.35
12.50
200
9.85
0
2065
0
200
1770
1642
10.60
11.15
11.50
ConeWt
MC or
0
21
24
0
27
0
0
0
22
22
26
27
37
29
28
0.28 22
0.25 28
0.23 26
0.23
0.22
0.26
0.24
0.26
0.25
0.26
0.23
0.22
0.23
0.24
0.34
0.22
0.26
0.29 0
0.24 21
0.23 27
0.24 26
0.22 23
0.22 24
0.20 21
0.25
0
0.20 27
0.25
0
0.20 25
0.25
0
0.20 21
0.22 26
0.28 26
0.27 27
0.28
0
0.25 24
0.21 25
0.23 26
0.22 22
0.23 22
0.23 27
0.25
0.23 22
0.25
0
0.22 18
0.26 25
0.21 21
0.26 18
0.46
0.39
0.63
0.00
0.64
0.55
0.00
0.68
0.65
0.00
0.82
0.00
0.42
0.51
0.00
0.71
0.42
0.36
0.00
0.40
0.40
0.43
0.00
0.51
0.00
0.45
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.36
0.38
0.40
0.75
0.69
0.47
53 0.53
46 0.42
50 0.50
51
47
47
44
42
45
0
46
45
0
40
0
36
39
0
43
42
43
0
44
46
46
42
47
0
46
0
0
0
46
45
45
51
60
55
44 0.44
47 0.61
0 0.00
0 0.00
53 0.74
46 0.67
48 0.44
42 0.47
50 0.80
HSI
6 Mo
%
46
51
64
71
62
75
64
78
67
0
76
71
0
0
47
0
71
75
0
0
68
45
77
79
0
66
60
0
54
0
40
54
55
62
0
0
79
55
68
56
0
0
46
53
69
70
42
Left
51 0.36 85
Coa CoB
0.24 27
HSI
and 5-Cone (as is basis)
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
n = 692
(at 8% mc)
Harvest
Yield
Location
P Date
Lb/Ac
227:11-15 B
9/11/95
704
230:11-15 B
8/22/95
853
1995
0.40
0.00
0.50
0.49
0.00
0.31
0.00
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.53
0.64
0.66
0.85
0.00
0.50
37.0
33.1
45.9
51.6
41.6
39.0
37.9
36.1
52.6
50.0
55.8
59.8
56.9
51.1
56.9
49.0
45.7
42.5
50.1
51.6
65.7
0.0
29.4
33.9
49.7
45.5
0.0
70.0
62.9
55.6
73.1
65.0
57.8
71.4
50.0
51.3
0.0
60.7
49.7
43.0
54.2
0.63 0.47 • 20.6
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
2.64 1.60
0.79
0.68
0.72
0.84
0.68
1.58
1.22
0.85
1.21
1.45
2.77
0.00
1.10
0.57 0.35
0.63 0.29
1.10 0.47
0.60 0.00
0.42 0.21
1.07
1.15
1.60
0.90
1.20 0.00
0.62 0.28
0.00 0.00
0.00 1.50
1.23 0.42
0.73 0.00
0.95 0.15
0.70 0.19
0.00 0.00
0.48 0.00
0.95 0.42
0.91 0.53
0.95 0.40
1.05 0.00
2.13 0.61
1.42 0.00
0.88 0.48
1.12 0.29
Page
9
8.3 15.3 3.72
0.0
0.0 0.00
3.2
3.5
2.1
5.1
4.6
0.0
3.4
3.2
0.0
2.4
3.6
4.1
5.9
6.7
4.1
3.7
5.6
5.1
4.6
5.1
3.5
3.7
2.3
2.6
2.7
2.3
2.9
4.9
5.2
6.5
5.2
4.4
3.0
0.0
8.2
8.8
9.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
4.7
8.8
8.7
7.6
8.4
9.8
0.0
8.7
7.9
0.0
6.5
18.2
19.9
19.5
21.6
16.5
16.9
18.8
21.5
20.7
22.2
14.0
15.7
8.4
9.8
10.2
9.2
9.4
18.2
15.2
16.3
14.8
16.6
11.6
0.0
17.5
0.2
17.3
0.0
0.0
10.3
12.6
7.4
15.3
17.6
0.0
12.2
11.4
0.0
8.5
12.7
15.5
21.4
23.6
14.4
12.8
20.4
19.1
17.5
18.0
13.5
12.7
8.3
9.4
9.8
8.4
10.5
17.3
19.0
22.6
18.5
15.7
10.7
0.0
25.1
25.3
30.2
0.0
0.0
2.89
3.35
0.00
0.00
3.08
0.00
3.51
3.55
3.55
3.55
3.65
3.62
3.50
3.62
3.64
3.54
3.64
3.83
3.42
3.65
3.76
3.77
3.49
3.53
3.53
3.43
3.74
3.66
0.00
3.56
3.51
3.63
3.57
3.82
0.00
2.99
3.57
3.47
3.23
7.5 16.8 3.59
7.1
7.1 3.53
9.4 25.8 3.64
9.4 18.0 3.69
5.4 11.0 19.6 3.62
7.1
4.9
4.1
0.0
111
436
495
604
90
657
137
89
136
166
679
685
672
689
680
673
167
458
317
469
165
471
678
505
88
687
500
677
135
607
694
682
499
134
597
512
671
498
87
454
686
455
681
491
400
497
Area % Oil Composition
Cary Farn Hum H/C LabNo
6.8 0.8 22.3 3.27
639
6.4 4.6 19.7 3.11
57
Fresh Stor.
Myr
1.17 0.79 48.9
1.18 0.72
55.2
1.42 0.47 58.6
0.00 0.00
0.0
mL oil/100g
Analyses
62052
62053
63008
63018
63019
63020
63021
63027
62013
62013
61020
61021
61019
61020
60042
61019
60038
60042
60033
60035
60037
60032
21704
21705
48209
48209
50024
50040
54003
56001
56002
56008
56012
56013
58016
60016
60020
60020
60021
60024
60024
60025
60027
60029
21702
21702
Number
21701
21701
or Nursery
Accession
001:41-44 C
016:41-44 C
003:41-44 C
003:41-44 C
Utah 526-5
NM 1-3
NM 2-4
NM 2-4
NM 3-1
1-3
2-2
3-1
5-1
C
C
C
C
Golding
Golding
Golding
Golding
BG x
19040M
N 48-8
N 47-35
N 47-40
N 47-42
N48-1
Defender
Density
Comet
Comet
Tettnanger
Yugo
Yugo
Savj
Savj
Shinshuwase
016:01-04
232:11-15
017:01-04
233:11-15
234:11-15
018:01-04
019:01-04
020:01-04
235:11-15
001:05-08
002:05-08
011:51-52
012:51-52
013:51-52
014:51-52
015:51-52
Sh inshuwase
016:51-52 C
C
C
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
B
C
C
C
C
C
012:41-44 C
013:41-44 C
011:41-44 C
019:41-44 C
020:41-44 C
006:41-45
017:41-44
008:41-44
010:41-44
004:41-44 C
006:41-44 C
Wyo 2-1
Wyo 3-1
Colo 6-1
Colo 7-2
Colo
Colo
Colo
Colo
Colo 1-2
Colo 1-2
013:01-04 B
Cascade
C
B
C
C
C
031:51-52
011:01-04
012:01-04
013:49-50
014:49-50
011:49-50 C
046:49-50 C
231:11-15 B
104:07-08 C
010:01-04 B
101:03-04 C
a nd 5-Cone
9/07/95
9/07/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
9/06/95
8/21/95
9/06/95
9/05/95
9/05/95
8/29/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
8/23/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
8/25/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
8/25/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
8/29/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
8/21/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
9/06/95
192
1500
400
1400
1000
1200
1600
1800
1700
800
235
100
845
597
2200
597
400
1800
1600
100
1200
400
1200
200
300
100
100
100
100
169
189
240
166
156
107
291
284
138
8.50
11.25
202
12.60
12.05
127
11.20
192
311
157
133
179
180
148
261
217
337
260
215
179
210
388
209
168
9.30
1400
704
600
600
100
153
5.6
4.6
8.2
7.8
7.7
7.4
9.6
3.7
3.0
4.7
4.8
11.9
5.0
4.8
5.4
4.3
5.1
1.3
5.0
1.8
1.7
6.1
1.6
6.9
2.6
4.7
3.2
3.0
1.8
3.8
3.5
2.4
6.3
6.5
8.2
4.9
4.3
3.2
213
6.2
3.1
5.4
6.6
4.6
9.2
4.4
3.4
7.0
4.9
% g
12.85
150
123
14.25
117
10.05
322
220
1600
600
400
341
900
725
1000
853
100
200
125
110
84
100
ConeWt
MC or
n =
692
(as is basis)
7.5
6.5
8.7
1.3
6.7
5.1
5.4
5.2
2.3
2.1
5.1
4.6
3.0
2.5
5.3
2.3
4.2
3.0
4.8
3.6
2.7
2.6
3.3
5.5
2.0
1.8
3.3
2.4
4.1
4.6
2.0
2.4
3.6
5.1
5.9
4.5
4.0
5.7
3.3
3.1
62
70
46
48
60
55
47
50
49
72
65
65
69
65
63
51
50
39
55
31
55
56
34
70
33
68
59
56
50
40
30
56
63
63
44
58
49
36
60
67
0.26
0.28
0.26
0.27
0.25
0.24
38
25
34
31
51
40
0.28 45
0.29 41
0.28 27
0.25 21
0.25 44
0.30 33
0.27 28
0.28 29
0.28 30
0.26 52
0.25 50
0.39 46
0.26 42
0.44 62
0.25 68
0.30 45
0.28 71
0.29 60
0.29 58
0.33 61
0.29 48
0.32 68
0.30 61
0.29 74
0.24 50
0.22 35
0.30 23
0.26 41
0.28 26
0.27 21
0.28 58
0.23 19
0.30 37
0.30 42
0.50
0.42
0.49
43
56
54
72
59
67
50
72
67
79
73
72
53
50
52
52
41
67
67
69
1.23
0.45
0.50
0.74
0.80
0.41
0.47
0.47
0.72
0.43
0.48
0.33
0.70
0.48
0.66
0.42
0.52
0.47
0.35
0.45
0.58
79 0.57
76 0.41
76 0.62
81 0.58
68 0.38
86 0.48
69
67
76
80
48 0.41
87 1.07
55 0.38
55 0.62
65 0.64
39 0.40
41 0.53
73 0.46
66 0.36
53 0.39
48
44
76
70
70
50
24
72
67
82
72
74
67
74
54
73
87
51
69
69
69
77
57
60
80
60
61
67
75
68
51
77
31
80
64
55
71
79
71
83
6 Mo
%
Alpha
% B Ratio
HSI Coa CoB
HSI Left
5.4 48
0.27 28
53 0.68
52
4.2
45
0.30 23
48 0.60 58
5.1
58
0.27 26
54 0.38 80
5.2 64
0.27 32
72
59 0.45
3.3 57
0.26 24
47 0.65
55
2.9 70
0.26 27
51 0.51
66
2.4 66
0.27 27
50 0.41
79
2.9 65
0.29 29
49 0.51
68
Sorted by Accno (Februa ry 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Harvest
Yield
P Date
Lb/Ac
220:01-05 C 9/08/95
50
040:09-12 C
8/29/95
50
041:09-12 C
8/29/95
50
220:06-10 C 9/08/95
50
Location
Y
T
Bale
BB 301-1
BB 504-2
Hallertauer
Backa
OB 826
73-S
BB 301-2
Fuggle H
Fuggle H
Sorachi Ace
Sorachi Ace
9036-003
9037-011
Furano Ace
Furano Ace
Identification
1.995
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.08
1.26
1.09
0.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.81
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.58
0.61
0.64
0.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00"
0.00
0.00 0.00
1.04 0.33
0.00 0.00
1.18 0.47
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
1.06 0.68
1.51 0.28
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100g
Page
10
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
36.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.3
0.0
50.9
55.4
48.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
38.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.9
0.0
0.0
7.6
7.6
7.5
6.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.7
0.0
6.8
0.0
6.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
3.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
26.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.9 19.4 3.04
5.9 22.9 3.02
3.8 21.8 2.88
0.0 0.0 0.00
0.0 0.0 0.00
4.3 20.2 2.70
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
8.7 2.56
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.1
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
0.2 34.4 3.55
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
5.3 20.9 3.06
0.0
0.0 0.00
3.3 18.1 2.72
0.0
0.0
0.0
301
322
28
295
309
293
279
275
348
578
27
127
53
59
581
26
287
273
323
91
251
244
306
25
336
235
229
525
280
269
266
92
286
289
98
298
282
263
304
288
58
24
426
430
445
Area % Oi I Compos it ion
Myr
LabNo
Carv Farn Hum H/C
0.0
442
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
121
0.0
108
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
50.6
50.7
Analyses
—I
64010
8411-157
8411-150
8254-165
8254-167
8254-244
8254-253
8254-267
8411-015
8411-025
8411-027
8411-029
8411-040
8411-042
8411-049
8411-064
8411-135
8154-274
8252-115
66056
68052
68052
66056
66052
66052
66054
66054
66055
66055
66050
66051
65104
66050
65102
65102
65101
65009
65101
64107
65009
64100
64026
Petham Golding
Petham Golding
Call" cross
Calicross .
First Choice
First Choice
Smoothcone
Smoothcone
Pride of Ringwo
Pride of Ringwo
Progress
Alliance
Alii ance
Cluster (L1)
Cluster (L1)
Cluster (L8)
Zattler 7K4910P
Backa x 19062M
BG x 19182M
Bullion
Northern Brewer
BG x 19058M
BG x 19058M
Talisman
Talisman
64008
64020
Zattler 2L1180P
64007
64007
Identification
BG x 58015M
19105 x 19173M
19105 x 19058M
19105 x 19058M
63032
64003
Number
or Nursery
Accession
1
045:51-52 C
003:05-08 B
004:05-08 B
028:51-52 C
239:21-25 B
005:05-08 C
236:11-15 C
006:05-08 B
041:05-08 B
033:09-12 C
237:11-15 B
012:05-08 B
009:05-08 B
010:05-08 C
238:11-15 C
014:05-08 C
239:11-15 C
240:11-15 C
015:05-08 C
016:05-08 C
241:11-15 C
017:05-08 C
242:11-15 C
103:31-32 B
104:31-32 B
108:31-32 C
215:36-40 B
216:36-40 B
109:31-32 C
110:31-32 C
111:31-32 B
112:31-32 B
101:33-34 B
102:33-34 B
103:33-34 B
104:33-34 B
105:33-34 C
106:33-34 B
108:33-34 B
109:33-34 B
110:33-34 B
044:51-52 C
021:51-52 C
017:49-50 C
019:51-52 C
9/05/95 1300
9/06/95
200
9/06/95
300
9/05/95
400
9/05/95
600
8/29/95 1589
8/21/95
412
9/06/95
800
9/13/95 1941
9/06/95 1600
9/08/95 2000
8/21/95
853
8/21/95 1052
9/06/95 1600
9/11/95 1411
8/29/95
619
8/21/95
341
9/06/95 1400
9/08/95 1900
9/06/95 1700
9/08/95 2200
9/08/95 2000
9/06/95 1500
9/06/95 1600
9/08/95 1800
9/06/95
600
9/08/95 1000
8/25/95 1663
8/25/95
1024
9/07/95
200
9/11/95
742
9/11/95
896
9/07/95
200
9/07/95
400
8/25/95
1450
8/25/95 1067
8/25/95 1109
8/25/95 1962
8/25/95
960
8/25/95 1749
9/07/95
400
8/25/95 2069
8/25/95
1386
9/08/95 1173
8/25/95 1024
9.6
8.6
5.5
4.4
5.0
2.6
5.3
6.8
1.0
1.5
9.00
9.20
144
8.35
8.90
9.00
9.15
8.70
9.30
8.00
8.70
158
209
9.30
10.60
9.85
131
254
9.40
178
124
184
199
182
146
188
183
122
4.0
6.1
6.6
6.7
4.6
5.9
7.6
6.9
8.0
6.6
6.8
4.7
3.3
6.0
2.8
6.5
7.9
7.0
7.4
8.6
6.8
9.4
5.6
5.0
7.2
9.2
5.4
6.0
6.5
11.5
5.2
55
3.9
3.6
3.1
3.7
4.2
4.4
3.1
3.3
3.1
3.2
5.3
4.3
6.6
6.3
6.1
7.7
2.1
4.5
5.0
51
65
4.9
3.9
3.8
2.5
68
60
68
60
64
61
58
56
72
68
61
35
53
43
50
64
59
27
66
78
76
56
56
47
75
73
60
57
57
72
60
61
61
64
4.3
7.2
6.5
2.4
7.5
6.9
2.1
2.0
4.8
2.1
8.3
3.9
119
12.8
7.90 5.8
7.45
7.5
186
2.8
8.0
2.6
11.30
15.70
16.70
n
=
692
(as is basis)
43
45
41
0.25
0.31
0.26
0.26
0.24
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.27
0.24
27
28
23
32
27
27
27
28
25
26
0.32 18
0.25 23
0.23 24
0.27 15
0.26 15
0.23 17
0.24 24
0.22 27
23
0.27 32
0.26 29
0.27 33
0.24
0.28
0.30
0.27
0.24 32
0.25 32
0.26 40
0.26 35
0.24 32
0.25 29
0.23 44
0.28 45
0.28 56
0.28 51
0.23 41
0.22 40
0.35
0.34
0.49
0.42
0.73
0.36
0.50
0.62
0.49
0.70
0.65
0.50
0.34
0.33
0.33
0.34
0.34
49 0.42
52 0.40
49 0.49
55 0.36
53 0.44
51
49 0.35
58
47
47
31
36
43
33
40
47
51
47
49
60 0.46
54 0.44
46 0.50
64
65
68
65
54 0.36
52 0.41
58 0.48
58 0.00
54 0.00
69 0.29
69 0.34
74 0.47
66 0.30
77 0.53
64 0.91
83
76
87
68
83
74
74
79
79
85
86
54
67
65
48
82
58
56
72
49
75
67
71
77
84
86
67
82
0
0
65
85
90
87
70
64
31
Alph a
6 Mo
%
% B Ratio
HSI Coa CoB
HSI Left
4.8
59
0.30 64
82 0.71
50
4.4
18
0.31 31
55 0.94 37
5.8
21
0.30 32
59 0.53 64
8.1
24
0.25 28
55 0.52 65
3.4 61
0.30 21
47 0.41
76
4.8
48
0.28 20
40 0.37 82
3.0 62
0.28 30
54 0.40 77
6.8 44
0.26 25
49 0.43 74
5.0 66
0.22 41
67 0.87 32
3.4
72
0.25 25
49 0.39 80
8.0
58
0.25 35
62 0.90 39
4.7
173
11.35
278
11.1
10.70 9.9
14.80
135
130
150
153
115
180
107
340
ConeWt % a
MC or
a nd 5-C one!
Sorted by Accno (February 6 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Y Harvest
Yield
Location
P Date
Lb/Ac
035:49-50 C
9/05/95
1200
018:51-52 C
9/06/95
700
211:31-35 C 9/11/95
1600
T
995 Bale
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.79
0.50
0.00
1.04
0.66
0.00
0.00
0.63
0.83
0.83
0.73
0.54
0.76
0.72 0.61
1.52 0.80
1.28 0.77
1.53 0.96
0.00 0.00
0.00
1.35
1.06
0.00
1.93
1.36
0.00
0.00
0.58
1.07
1.36
0.99
0.96
1.08
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.91 0.00
0.77 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
1.27 0.81
0.44 0.30
0.45 0.40
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
3.70 1.04
1.76 1.18
0.00 0.00
2.30 0.62
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Page
11
28.0
39.1
37.1
0.0
0.0
36.9
37.6
36.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.1
35.8
66.5
59.0
0.0
65.4
0.0
0.0
65.6
57.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
2.76
0.00
1.47
0.00
0.00
2.38
2.39
0.00
3.01
3.26
3.62
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.25
3.26
0.00
3.56
3.44
0.00
0.00
3.23
2.97
2.93
3.12
2.98
2.84
0.00
3.33
2.56
2.75
2.22
9.5 1.64
0.2 18.2
0.0 0.0
6.7 0.1
9.9
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
3.4
0.2 8.1
5.0 0.4 11.9
0.0 0.0
0.0
10.3
2.2 31.0
8.4
1.7 27.4
9.0
0.3 32.4
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
9.8 0.1 22.0
5.1
0.4 16.5
0.0 0.0 0.0
8.6
0.2 30.7
8.9 3.9 30.7
0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.3
0.3 36.3
9.5
0.3 28.1
10.3
0.2 30.2
9.3
0.3 29.1
7.8 0.2 23.3
7.9 0.2 22.3
0.0
0.0 0.0
7.6 0.2 25.4
6.7 0.2 17.2
7.5
0.5 20.5
12.1
0.1 26.7
6.6
0.0
5.8
0.0
145
399
146
147
623
149
144
29
299
653
324
574
31
30
319
664
524
32
351
573
352
584
586
339
321
585
354
580
138
139
402
654
618
406
401
140
141
142
143
515
215
Area % Oi l Composition
Myr
Cary Farn Hum H/C
LabNo
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
248
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
305
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
596
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
228
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
278
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
277
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
217
37.5
50.7
48.0
0.0
42.4
61.4
' 50.6
37.5
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100c
Analyses
—i
oo
79
OMeoo>i-NtO'Soor-<-(\jMMin(\j<--tM'OiooinineO'OeoNeoO"-NoiOKl^'-Oiin.jM<i>-Oi'OMeg
--•--•
__ri_r»**(\j_r.*o%tK>coroirtO*irtP_r>_r.*O^CNPOfcPCfcP_
_ _ . . . __..___
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c»,o».o^o.o.>po.r^co^o
un>o^_-^lN*«-urvr\js_ro__n«-_rt
_
«-<0>0<0«-ro<0>ONd-iri«-ro«-*d-<-r-«—«~_.'Oiri<OLnvO-._.
H
ro ro to
i^t>.r^N-ro~i-Nt>Ou-iP(\ii/.roir>p«*f^OLr.O'j-PLn<Mcoroppppppppopp^-pr^
t^ co r\i ro •
ivorvj^o>o~i-ro(\JO>N.«-o>r'i-"
" K—
— s3* _ "n > i - > a - o
_
_p
_
_
_'
• r"o
o ^ i -—o * t O
o_
pp
p_
po
o_
pp
«- co
•O CO
d)
0OBN>-'
tn
(M<M(\irororocvjrorofNirvJro r\j ro c \ i ( \ j r o r \ i r o c \ J r o r o c \ i P r o P r o p r o r o r o r o p p p p p p p p p p p « - p « - p p
a
Ul>OCO'-'0(VI>-0_lNCOO ro o
T-cor^»-ir>irio-o>rop--ip«-pro^tr^roppppppppppp_r>poo«--j-
o > O s j - ^ ' O i n o i n _ i N c o o r>- o> u n * O p r * - « - r s - s . c \ j ^ - p r o p > O P C \ i > t c o r o P O P P P P P P P P p c M P ( \ j r A j » (\ic\jr\j<\j^«-«-«-r\j
«- «-
r\j r\j cm «- ro
«-«-«-
ou
*-
cm ro »- »-
( M « - r o r o r o « - o o t ^ o i n r O ' - co p
rrOMtflO^tflONOr-OrOSN^^OOOOOOOOOOOnOn'-t-
O O O O ^ i - I O ' - ' - I O N ' J C\J S_
fNj«-^-ro«-f\jinrour.pppppropc\irvjppppppppppoppppp
«-r\j«-N-ror^co^o^a-r^«-Ln «- CO U 1 C > . ( O i n > 0 ( O ^ I M O ( O O S 0 4 t O ^ { > O O O O O O O O O O O N O ^ m > 0
S O O S l f l - t f W ' J N M N l f l ro u-i c o o * * O u - i C h r v j _ r t r o i r » p * O P N * p * o O ' i r i r o P P P P P P P P P P P C \ j p c \ i r o > -
> j c o ~ t m > * o i n o o ~ » i n s •o
ro o > o ^ o c o i r » c o r ^ > O f v J p r N j p _ a p m N a - ( \ j ^ t p p p p p p p o p p p m p m o . m
ON.%a-r\J*-0^*-mls-C\l>tf'^t ^ M ^ s a - o t o ^ r ^ o o r y o r u o r o o r j i n ^ - i n o o o o o o o o o o o o g t
in
in
s* k> -4- in
-o
^rrOK.>3-mNOmm-4-in^-m<. mroro-J-infO^O^tintn
CO
a)
03NO(>^SS(\JO.OIOWeONWNSO»vt'OM(>OOfVJOeOOrnOO»OOOOOOOOOOOONONtW^
CQ
ro^^ooo^inKch^oo^>Osf>4-inr^oo^roino^>*eoor^oino^ONOooooooooooooMoo^m
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
H
OC0e0M03<lf0Sin<^(0(>0)Sf\l>jNS(>>SinOO0«Oi>O>0N»*«-OOOOOOOOOOO'JOlr.sJ0>
(0
arNsjsfin^in>t(oNo»-oinrinSin«)'-SoonofooM«-in'Ooooooooooooso^ins
• -t- r - O
0«-0«~t-<-«-«-<-0'
t- r- «
o
o
*- o
«- o
-
ooooooooooooooooo
icoeococo^cococoi^^ocoN-cocoovcoh'-co^coco^roin'j-invj'-**
to
•H
CQ
O
x
It)
*d'Mrgf\jroror\Jc\jN*Nj.sa---hn''OinNj
~
~"
N f f v j o i n i f l e o w S s j L n s j L n o r o o p j N t r - r v j i n p j ^ o D N f N t s t o N ^ o ^ O S N T - ^ O v C h •-Ovtrotoeosj-Ntoin
roojNeo^NOifi^s
'
i
>o
.Q
u-teoroo»N-r^T-roo
~
ooooooooooooooooooooooo*-ooooooooo«-*—*-<
o«-«-ooo«-oooo
iA_nSfU(\IMS(>M^O>OOOOeOfO(>ONi-0(>inO*N^rO^O*SMNtinNNt(>inS^
st^inin^>OinNjinin^>f'ONtNt^uiinin^^st>tNt>t^^MM>*inMiAUiini^
0) o>
o
-H
ojruroruroMfNJr\iru(\jf\JcuMrucurur\i(\jrgroc\Jcuf\jrj
cn
a)
inin>*nronnMinNNinwMMn^Mrjf\j>tin>teo^NtNNONwro(>>*eON^
L
rut\jrvjroc>j(\jru(\icur\j(\jruru(\j(\j.\_cg.^
^
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
CD
a
u
u
r~-
ID
O
OK*Qt\iCOt-OSNinOO(\JS.^OW'
o.
—
m
<
OS
*— *-
LnMS^>0'OnOin^r'^r-f\JO^r-NO^NOOhO^M(\JlO»-inO^M^^Nt0^^r-0>^NOOM
L.
n
incor^^co^ON^co^o*co^co^^o*o*r^o^o*^i^^ininin^ro>o^^o^ooo'i-ooM
<U
o
m
in in
LA LTt LT.
P_r.i_.PPPPPPP_.PP_nin_r.u-iP
6
O*
CO
etf
.
.
.o*«-cOP«-N-«-coo>OLn
*-
«-«-.-.
• O
iMNinniNtMOo
o
<
-• <
rusi-N.T-pc^vtcoco^-^ONtp>ocOLf.ppco«-comr^proPropf\ir^roSPPpppppppppT-pr-roo
i «- p eg p ro p
MW-Os.uirMMNN-i-^Kiocar-^r>'0-»iM'-(\j<-ocooKioi-r~OP-i
^OS>OPPPPPPPP_.LnO^LTlNt eg ro
Oooo^-JoouMnroncO'Onui'OoooorMS
. r
o
Si
8
*->
•p
.
IOCOOOCONO>OCOCOOCONCOO'COCt)COOON<-COa>0' • O . N O t - r > o , c o o .
C-
>-
o\°
P
fC
^-±inr^r*-(\-roo*_.rvj-_"r^r*.'O-4._r.c0'OC0«-^3'«—
_r.o**OO.CM_r.co>*-roosjQ*Ln«— <ONr\jr.coinmNoON>0'Ou.
o
u
>0 t\J
nNt^>f^ONj^^^>onin^inLnin^>OininM'»_-^oS'0>0,Oin_nineons^
n)
^ns,
oo ro «Q o
mvOm<o*ominm
Noo^«-nost«-Noa^w_ni\iNOsMcOi-ONto^iniooo^in^in^f-^MeoNo^Nn»-eoiAsjw
•o
ID
•d
a
' eo m >0 co n
N*(\i«-^omsOOMKlir.«-f\JN-i_r_'
ro >o rvj m
inc\iror.vjiA^-^r.coocOr-«-
.4- «- ro
Lni/.Ln_nLTii/.Lr.Ln_.i/._nLninio
(_
O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O^O* 0*0»0*OO0*0*0*0*0*0^0*0*0*0v0*0*0*0*O0>'0*0*0'0*0*0''0*OOO0'0'0'
o
Lninin^cOcOmcOCOoOcOiAOOu. unooPoOLneocoeo^eOLnr^u^^inLn_^ineo^o3^cOT-«-eO-r(LriineOLnco»
CO
(MNNr-OOIMOOOONOrj
r\Jo^o(M(\ioooo(\jO(Mooj(\ir\ir.OT- o
«— o
«— «— o f \ i f \ j f \ i f \ i f \ i r \ j f \ j f \ i
cOeOC0O«OvO^COCKOvO«OvCOO«eOO3O'O>O>COO3O>O>O>Ove0O>COO>C0C000C0O>ONO>0K 0>.OK 0>OC0C0C0C0C0C0c0C0
<U
h-
<fl
ic0D3(0ooooooov0>0>0.>0v0,0>0ini/ii/MnLnooo4>r>}^>t^^^
c
iMMM>*st^Nt^^.trvir.r.ojrjrviNfyK)K)roMio^>*>Joooooooo
o
m
*-
in
o\
o.
H
M i f i i n i n _ \ _ \ i n _ M n i n r . S S N N.S.N-o*0^0»o^oo«>Oin_r.Lniri_nLr.iri_r.«-«— «- «— *->o*o>ororororororororo
rorororororororororororororo rorororororororororocMr\irjp>iPMr\jnj<\jrorororororororopppppppp
ir^o^«-ro^invor^co^c\irONrLri'or*-eoo,>rotn^ON-o^c\jro>a-ro>a-in^oh-eoo*p
o
o
>PP«-PPPPPPrOPPPPPPPP«-«-«-«-«-«-r-T-T-.-.-.-«-«-«-c\l
c
o
O
—
U)
0)
p*»OsojcMPNOO^rvj^coino»cg^_ncorocg>oo>t^»»^rMeo^c><o^roeM^in-ns_<M^ir\r\j^^w
</>
1- I
«-<mcm<mpppppppppp«-«-«-«-«-«-«-<m<m.*ppppppppppop»-p>-«-pppppppp
Now>ooi-t-r'NMinNNcooNMeocoo»L>ot-ooo'-r\iinO'-i-i-min<)N^soi'iO'-(>j(\j^-o»--*
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
cooocococococooooooooococooococooooooi
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
9041-001
9039-024
9039-034
9039-040
9039-041
9039-045
9040-016
9040-029
9040-029
9040-043
9040-043
9040-047
9040-063
9039-017
9039-021
9037-007
9037-007
9036-058
9037-003
9037-003
9036-056
Number
8921-003
8923-002
8923-009
8924-003
8936-022
8936-028
8940-001
8940-010
8943-010
8951-002
9004-072
9008-010
9008-042
9010-043
9011-064
9015-025
9019-025
9019-027
9030-037
9030-055
9036-006
9036-016
9036-016
9036-017
9036-031
9036-036
9036-038
or Nursery
Accession
Identification
B
B
B
B
C
B
B
B
B
C
C
B
B
C
B
C
C
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
B
C
B
B
C
C
B
C
B
111:17-18 C
112:17-18 C
110:17-18 C
116:11-12
117:11-12
118:11-12
119:11-12
120:11-12
006:39-40
012:39-40
013:39-40
102:17-18
102:09-10
221:26-30
103:17-18
104:09-10
223:26-30
104:17-18
105:17-18
106:17-18
225:26-30
106:09-10
226:26-30
107:09-10
107:17-18
108:09-10
234:36-40
235:36-40
109:09-10
108:17-18
110:09-10
109:17-28
230:26-30
111:09-10
233:26-30
103:11-12
115:11-12 B
114:11-12 B
115:07-08 B
116:07-08 B
114:07-08 B
120:05-06 B
113:07-08 B
116:05-06 C
119:05-06 B
115:05-06 B
8/28/95
8/25/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
9/07/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/28/95
8/23/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
8/23/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
8/22/95
8/23/95
9/06/95
8/23/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
8/22/95
9/07/95
9/06/95
8/31/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
1700
1514
1400
1109
200
150
300
896
747
200
1101
800
600
1300
1002
300
1024
1323
862
700
619
1600
1600
725
600
1400
683
533
960
600
400
192
640
853
981
576
896
1130
427
533
683
320
200
853
341
811
8.60
191
138
10.15
157
10.65
190
183
123
170
10.75
12.00
11.65
142
218
150
10.15
10.20
10.85
9.10
10.95
159
165
156
10.90
9.95
1.4
3.6
1.3
5.1
3.3
2.5
4.2
5.5
2.3
4.3
2.6
3.7
5.6
5.3
7.7
2.1
7.8
7.6
6.7
1.2
3.6
2.3
3.5
2.7
3.0
2.8
3.7
2.0
10.65
130
124
5.4
6.5
5.5
5.8
3.0
5.2
4.2
5.3
4.9
5.0
3.8
4.5
4.2
3.7
5.3
3.6
3.2
4.0
4.4
3.8
4.1
3.6
3.8
3.8
4.0
5.6
4.0
3.9
3.6
4.9
4.1
6.1
4.0
2.1
2.1
2.9
5.1
3.5
3.7
2.8
1.7
2.8
2.5
3.3
6.5
2.4
4.3
8.65
9.10
12.80
1.9
4.1
4.1
6.2
12.80
7.80
431
4.2
3.8
8.0
3.9
2.5
3.2
2.3
3.7
4.5
9.15
7.55
9.05
11.85
10.10
9.20
9.15
8.60
5.1
6.9
2.5
2.7
4.8
5.4
8.75
342
8.50
46
32
37
20
38
30
50
51
32
57
42
33
61
56
68
28
70
62
22
48
65
36
49
42
44
48
26
53
56
42
48
51
66
68
45
52
69
58
60
53
53
48
41
68
61
67
66
64
1.5
2.8
346
381
Alpha
% B Ratic
% a
ConeWt
MC or
692
61
68
79
77
67
74
76
73
75
23
22
25
21
17
20
21
21
21
23
23
25
21
23
24
27
25
20
24
16
23
23
20
25
21
25
24
29
0.25 71
0.30 63
0.26 58
0.27 58
0.26 52
0.22 75
0.34 57
0.23 83
0.32 72
0.26 64
6
Mo
HSI
1.20
0.41
0.83
0.48
0.73
44
41
37
42
40
41
42
42
39
1.13
0.52
1.05
0.63
0.78
0.33
0.74
0.89
0.41
44 0.55
40 0.74
44 0.61
49 0.66
42 0.84
46 0.53
48 0.60
45 0.40
52 0.69
44 0.43
44 0.35
45
51
49
36
45 1.02
38 0.65
90 0.78
41 0.51
45 0.59
88 0.95
88 0.85
88 0.63
88 1.02
84 0.47
90 0.81
81 0.55
82 0.55
79 0.91
74 0.32
86 0.90
71
89 0.43
78 0.60
77 0.80
92 0.33
83 0.41
81 0.74
88 0.42
Coa CoB
0.41 62
HSI
n =
72
28
60
31
56
46
79
48
40
63
48
55
64
53
42
68
59
81
73
51
72
43
64
49
59
33
49
41
63
50
40
36
73
40
30
58
36
57
89
31
22
73
55
79
70
44
48
75
Left
%
(as is basis)
0.25
0.24
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.42
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.24
0.28
0.29
0.24
0.24
0.32
0.23
0.28
0.27
0.25
0.23
0.27
0.24
0.29
0.27
0.27
0.25
0.26
0.22
0.20
0.26
0.27
0.23
0.27
0.21
0.31
0.24
0.33
B% mc) and 5-Cone
Sorted by Accno (Februa ry 6, 1997)
(at
Harvest
Yield
P Date
Lb/Ac
113:05-06 C
8/25/95
200
114:05-06 C
8/25/95
100
Y
T
Bale
Location
]L995
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.31
0.00
0.85
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00,
0.21
0.00
0.41
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
1.06 0.46
0.00 0.00
1.17 0.49
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
1.17 0.41
0.67 0.41
2.34 0.79
1.03 0.49
0.00 0.00
0.37 0.16
0.54 0.33
0.00 0.00
0.45 0.30
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.85 0.00
1.43 0.25
1.36 0.30
0.55 0.22
0.00 0.00
0.91 0.26
0.99 0.49
0.75 0.22
1.13 0.53
0.60 0.27
0.36 0.17
0.59 0.53
0.94 0.24
0.72 0.18
0.28 0.10
0.0
20.4
0.0
42.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
53.0
29.9
0.0
54.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
48.7
0.0
44.2
67.8
40.4
0.0
0.0
55.3
24.7
36.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
80.2
77.0
49.7
0.0
75.0
80.4
74.8
80.4
76.1
80.4
69.7
69.8
34.8
74.8
78.0
0.85
0.24
1.38
0.52
0.47
0.15
0.24
0.00
0.0
2.5 0.75
0.7
0.6
0.8
2.9
0.9
1.4
0.9
2.6 0.57
1.4 1.32
2.3 0.93
0.0 0.00
0.9 0.39
0.2 0.10
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
3.2 15.2 11.0 3.48
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
6.4
1.3 22.5 3.51
6.7 10.8 25.0 3.74
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.00
8.1 18.5 28.9 3.58
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
6.5
8.9 23.3 3.59
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
3.9 18.0 13.5 3.49
1.8 8.1
6.3 3.48
4.2 11.6 14.9 3.52
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
13
395
428
410
563
489
572
488
409
79
415
417
544
56
422
477
503
55
61
658
60
429
427
509
78
559
416
576
394
374
77
403
392
372
382
362
381
367
385
393
377
360
371
375
386
100
LabNo
H/C
0.0 0.00
102
0.0 0.00
101
2.0 1.08
373
1.5 0.78
0.9 0.74
8.4 19.7 3.17
0.0 0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
Farn Hum
I Composition
Page
9.3 11.1 32.3 3.48
7.9 11.6 27.4 3.47
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
9.1
0.8 30.8 3.40
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
2.9 15.3 10.1 3.52
0.0
0.0
1.9
1.2
6.2
0.0
3.4
4.0
2.8
1.7
1.0
1.7
3.9
4.5
3.4
2.5
1.1
l/IOOg
Area % Oi
Fresh Stor.
Myr
Cary
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.50 0.24
1.8
70.9
0.00 0.00
0.0
0.0
0.63 0.39 72.4
2.4
1.04 0.48 72.1
2.2
mL oi
Analyses
oo
o
9041-027
C
C
B
C
C
B
C
B
C
C
C
B
B
C
C
B
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
B
C
B
C
C
C
C
C
C
B
C
104:21- 22 B
105:19 20
238:26 30
108:11 12
110:11 12
240:26 30
106:19 20
242:26 30
112:11 12
107:19
221:36
103:13 14
104:13 14
223:31 -35
225:31 -35
107:13 14
226:31 35
108:13 14
227:31 35
108:19 20
109:13 14
228:31 35
223:36 40
109:19 20
110:13 14
229:31 35
110:19 20
111:19 20
111:13 14
230:31 35
112:19- 20
102:21- 22
232:31 35
102:15- 16
103:21- 22
103:15- 16
233:31 35
104:19 -20 C
106:11 12 B
242:31 35 C
241:31 -35 C
240:31 35 C
103:19 20 B
102:19 20 B
105:11 12 B
235:26 30 B
P
9041-034
9041-034
9041-036
9041-036
9041-042
9041-042
9041-051
9041-052
9041-075
9041-075
9041-086
9041-086
9041-106
9041-106
9041-110
9042-010
9042-010
9042-013
9042-013
9042-017
9042-019
9042-019
9042-024
9042-034
9042-034
9043-001
9043-001
9043-014
9043-023
9043-023
9043-026
9043-026
9043-030
9043-030
9043-032
9043-037
9043-039
9043-039
9043-054
9044-004
9044-039
9044-039
9045-013
9045-030
9045-030
9045-035
Locati on
234:26 30 C
104:11 12 B
Identification
9041-027
Number
T
Y
or Nursery
Bale
Accession
1995
Harvest
9/08/95
8/31/95
8/23/95
9/06/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/08/95
9/07/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
9/07/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
9/08/95
9/07/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/07/95
9/07/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
8/23/95
Date
and 5- Cone
853
2000
1600
800
1450
1600
683
600
725
2048
1600
683
800
800
1400
1900
1109
500
1800
1800
500
1800
1700
1600
597
747
768
1500
1600
1450
600
853
533
1200
1400
600
800
2000
1600
960
2000
1800
768
1126
640
789
1280
1600
Lb/Ac
Yield
4.8
2.8
4.3
3.3
5.1
1.9
144
10.05
8.3
4.9
9.80
120
148
9.15
91
9.05
227
10.30
103
162
162
128
151
176
219
10.65
5.2
1.4
2.3
5.3
4.8
4.1
3.9
5.2
6.8
184
121
159
10.05
9.50
7.2
6.5
148
9.30
3.2
6.8
4.6
7.6
1.9
1.6
4.1
167
94
9.65
12.85
120
9.05
1.9
136
9.30
120
9.75
6.3
103
4.7
6.0
10.95
132
182
6.0
5.6
2.8
8.20
177
216
3.3
4.1
5.9
5.9
5.7
6.2
9.10
149
9.10
9.55
94
9.60
ConeWt % a
MC or
n =
(as
692
i s basis)
1
7
51
57
71
24
21
66
54
55
52
9
8
2
2
33
49
59
66
56
55
67
65
70
58
60
33
64
55
64
48
71
59
40
27
58
22
23
44
38
49
53
60
54
48
58
64
36
3
2
8
8
3
8
9
8
1
4
1
8
17
20
24
21
20
.27
0.28
0.30
0.21
0.28
0.26
0.25
0.22
.26
.25
.34
.27
.30
.28
.22
21
24
18
26
24
25
20
23
25
22
20
22
27
23
20
.31 20
.27 26
.25 21
.31 17
0.29 22
.24 20
.25 26
0.23
0.32
0.26
0.24
0.29 27
0.22 18
0.27 22
0.20 19
0.29 22
0.29 22
0.24 21
0.21
0.25 20
0.30 17
0.26 25
0.24 21
0.24 19
0.27 20
0.23 24
0.25 25
42
49
48
50
37
41
48
43
49
50
48
0.32
0.41
0.36
0.69
0.43
0.58
0.39
0.74
0.51
0.58
0.80
48 0..68
41 0.67
42 0..47
45 0..43
44 0..41
51 0..40
45 0..57
45 0..52
44 0..36
43 0.37
43 0..48
40 0..32
45 0.31
46 0.45
37 0.45
40 0.44
34 0.44
41 0.68
40 0.71
39 0.37
39 0.62
43 0.37
39 0.41
34 0.34
45 0.50
40 0.54
44 0.46
39 0.39
46 0.35
45 0.36
44 0.59
44
79
76
83
51
66
60
89
48
66
60
52
53
68
67
82
76
77
60
63
73
69
82
87
72
72
52
50
78
79
74
65
57
76
78
67
63
71
83
71
84
45
Alpha
6 Mo
%
% B Ratio
HSI Coa CoB
HSI Left
4
56
0.27 23
88 0.53 64
.6
63
0.23 18
41 0.31
86
3
57
0.24 18
40 0.34 85
.3
48
0.23 23
42 0.38 78
37
0.21 19
36 0.38 74
41
0.27 23
43 0.56 61
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
0..18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.21
0..00
0..00
0..34
0..00
0.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.85
0.00
0.82
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
0 .00
1.27
0.00
2 .27
0.31
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.00
0.60
00
00
00
00
75
50
00
00 0.00
.88
37
0..00
0..00
0.46
0..00
0..57
0.00 0.00
74 0.51
00 0.00
0.37 0.23
0.87 0.65
0.00 0.00
0.66 0.28
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.74 0.43
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0 00
0.93
0.00
0 .00
0 .38
0 00
0 .00
0 .00
0 00
0 41
0.48 0.27
0 66 0.19
0 45 0.30
0 16 0..36
0.00 0.00
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100g
Page
0.0
0.0
52.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
42.9
0.0
52.9
0.0
0.0
44.0
53.9
0.0
66.5
0.0
0.0
65.
0.
0.0
46.
0.
31.9
0.0
0.
43.
0.
0.0
36.2
44.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
38.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
54.8
0.0
42.2
15.0
5.5
0.0
7.5
0.0
0.0
5.1
9.7
0.0
5.5
0.0
0.0
0
6.4
0.0
0.0
12.2
H/C
3.58
2.00
0.00
3.56
478
562
624
80
483
70
560
LabNo
14
0.0
0
0.00
564
407
18.5 16
3.51
460
0.0 0
0.00
558
0.0 0
0.00
405
0.0 0
0.00
557
0.0 0.0 0.00
431
17.6 18.7 3.43
62
0.0 0.0 0.00
556
0.5 33.8 3.49
63
0.0 0.0 0.00
554
16.5 17.7 3.47
486
0.0
0.0 0.00
396
0.
0.0
0.00
530
14.9 21.
3.47
502
18.3 22
3.67
496
0.0 0
0.00 . 539
0.0 0
0.00
548
13.1 18.6 3.60
457
0.0 0.0 0.00
547
14.2 16.5
44
81
0.0
0.0
00
549
3.2 10.0
47
453
00
421
0.0
00
536
0.0
0.00
550
3.2 20.7 3.50
482
12.2 11 9 3.52
82
0.0 0 0 0.00
551
11.4 4
3.56
479
0.0 0
0.00
413
0.0 0
0.00
411
0.0 0
0.00
533
0.0 0
412
0.00
5.0 19.5 2.83
83
0.0
0.0 0.00
532
0.0
0.0 0.00
420
0.0
0.0 0.00
397
13.7 21.1 2.80
490
0.0 0.0 0.00
545
12.2 13.9 2.54
64
0.0
0.0 0.00
1.8 21.9 3.42
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.8 43.3 3.55
0.0 0.0
6.2 14.9 22.2
6.5 17.2 23.3
6.8 15.4 13.5
0.0
Cary Farn Hum
Area % Oil Composition
Myr
33.4
37.7
Analyses
co
9045-079
9046-017
9046-017
9046-036
9046-037
9046-037
9046-065
9046-065
9046-085
9046-085
9046-092
9046-092
9046-096
9046-102
9046-102
9046-103
9046-104
9046-107
9048-046
Number
9045-041
Identification
Location
105:21-22
106:21-22
109:15-16
231:36-40
225:36-40
234:31-35
104:15-16
106:15-16
236:31-35
226:36-40
107:21-22
107:15-16
237:31-35
227:36-40
238:31-35
108:15-16
228:36-40
229:36-40
108:21-22
230:36-40
Harvest
C
B
C
C
B
C
C
C
B
B
C
C
B
B
C
C
C
B
B
C
9/07/95
8/23/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
8/31/95
8/31/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
9/06/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
9/08/95
8/23/95
9/08/95
MC or
9.80
1280
1600
1700
703
1800
10.15
180
195
124
172
1800
1500
1800
1800
703
2069
10.25
9.80
190
160
9.95
165
235
11.25
4.6
5.0
4.1
5.3
5.6
6.0
4.4
4.8
6.1
6.0
5.6
6.3
6.3
4.2
5.1
3.0
3.9
8.7
8.1
2.5
ConeWt % a
229
199
12.65
10.55
170
165
2000
597
2901
1400
1200
1800
640
640
300
Lb/Ac
Yield
7.8
3.3
6.5
7.0
4.3
4.9
3.8
3.9
7.5
8.4
8.8
6.6
3.1
6.5
7.7
2.4
2.7
4.2
5.3
3.2
55
56
49
52
46
46
59
42
36
44
46
42
49
56
58
75
40
42
73
37
X B Ratio
Alpha
and 5-Cone
Sorted by Accno (Februa ry 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
P Date
T
Y
or Nursery
Bale
Accession
1995
692
0.28 27
0.25 23
0.30 28
0.28 24
0.27 22
0.22 20
0.28 23
0.21 23
0.21 22
0.24 27
0.23 24
0.26 26
0.23 24
0.23 26
0.40 29
HSI
6 Mo
44 0.40
50 0.70
39 1.14
36 0.50
42 1.09
42 0.87
42 1.23
43 0.48
39 0.55
39 0.69
39 0.70
45 1.18
51 1.33
48 0.73
43 0.59
48 0.38
53 0.48
43 0.86
40 0.47
69 1.18
Coa CoB
=
0.32 44
0.20 22
0.25 23
0.29 29
0.26 24
HSI
n
51
30
40
81
28
58
69
43
24
42
26
62
54
44
41
20
69
78
26
59
Left
X
(as is basis)
Stor.
0.00
0.32
0.98
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.73
0.00
0.00
0.84
0.66
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.56
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.71 0.57
0.00 0.00
Fresh
0.00
0.64
1.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.85
1.27
0.00
0.00
1.56
1.77
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.34
mL oil/100g
Myr
0.0
Page
15
37.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
52.5
0.0
44.0
0.0
51.4
0.0
0.0
33.5
43.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
6.2
0.4
4.6 17.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.6 10.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.7 0.3
0.0
0.0
22.0
15.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.2
0.0
0.0
34.1
0.0
3.50
3.57
0.00
0.00
3.54
3.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.45
0.00
0.00
2.68
0.00
0.0 0.00
4.5 11.6 15.6
5.9 12.3 20.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
65
538
537
543
86
555
542
481
85
546
531
553
506
484
534
561
Area % Oi I Composition
Cary Farn Hum
H/C
LabNo
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
404
39.2
12.1 14.9 13.8 1.14
84
22.2
12.2
0.3 34.8 2.85
69
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.00
552
Analyses
ro
co
Wye Challenger
Ah iI,Yugo
Apolon, Yugo
Buket, Yugo
Buket, Yugo
Wye Viking
21240
21240
Zenith
Zenith
Pacific Gem
Pacific Gem
21609
21667
21670
21678
21698
21678
21670
21676
21677
Yeoman
21499
21499
21609
Kitamidori
Eastern Gold
Eastern Gold
Bianca 9046-41
Hallertauer Mag
Hallertauer Mag
Toyomidori
Omega
Yeoman
21373
21498
21498
7006-398
7006-398
Banner
Perle
21283
21287
21373
Olympic
21225
Nugget
21227
21193
21193
21182
Galena (43-16)
Galena (43-16)
Nugget
Brewers Gold VF
21112
21116
21182
236:01-05
016:09-12
238:01-05
239:01-05
227:16-20
008:05-08
036:01-04
228:16-20
242:01-05
032:01-04
022:09-12
222:06-10
229:06-10
233:16-20
242:21-25
112:15-16
241:16-20
034:01-04
242:16-20
035:01-04
232:21-25
017:13-16
011:09-12
023:13-16
240:06-10
224:11-15
225:11-15
036:09-12
226:11-15
110:15-16
Brewer VF
N.
Wye Target
Wye Target
Brewer VF
N.
21093
21093
21112
Bullion, 10A,VF
21056
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
226:16-20 B
012:09-12 B
6806-080
21051
21055
21050
21043
Harvest
Yield
9/11/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
9/13/95
9/11/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
9/11/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
8/31/95
8/29/95
8/29/95
9/11/95
9/13/95
8/31/95
8/22/95
8/21/95
9/06/95
8/29/95
9/13/95
9/08/95
8/21/95
8/22/95
8/31/95
8/31/95
9/11/95
9/01/95
9/13/95
£/23/95
2995
1344
981
1290
3225
2125
739
1038
1120
1195
981
640
3029
6.7
4.7
4.3
9.20 12.1
11.15 14.8
11.25 12.9
10.20 11.1
10.45 10.8
7.85 10.0
10.35 10.3
6.45 11.7
7.95 10.9
8.70 11.6
9.45 10.7
9.75 14.3
10.90 17.1
8.35 13.6
8.10 13.7
5.5
6.8
7.9
10.5
10.7
13.1
2.5
5.1
7.1
6.5
5.7
5.6
5.7
4.3
3.5
3.6
5.2
7.2
5.3
5.4
6.3
4.7
4.7
5.3
12.5
13.1
13.1
62
72
65
67
68
67
81
74
71
75
66
65
76
75
76
61
63
64
67
66
68
70
67
73
71
62
6.3
68
70
14.4
10.0
5.8
4.5
9.0
12.4
10.7
70
73
67
4.9
64
5.9
3.7
5.3
5.2
3.7
3.7
0.24 30
0.22 29
0.25 23
0.23 26
0.24 27
0.26 27
0.24 46
0.23 39
0.25 25
0.27 25
0.27 28
0.25 24
0.24 46
0.24 22
0.24 18
0.27 27
0.25 24
0.23 36
0.22 26
0.25 23
0.24 25
0.24 32
0.24 34
0.24 29
0.23 41
0.22 43
0.26 44
0.25 35
0.25 40
0.27 27
0.23 39
0.23 24
0.29 50
0.26 22
0.25 24
0.22 25
0
54 0.00
58 0.52
45 0.34
49 0.37
55 0.47
48 0.45
64 0.47
44 0.43
66 0.35
47 0.31
47 0.31
69 0.37
43 0.38
50 0.35
50 0.34
53 0.53
50 0.40
64
84
81
67
72
92
91
70
76
83
81
82
65
74
39
58
79
60 0.81
47 0.57
55
31
67
68
54 0.55
57 0.85
45 0.50
60 0.66
54 0.41
0
68 0.00
62
49
57
69
74
40
68 0.58
64 0.47
63 0.77
51 0.44
63 0.43
38
81
76
50 0.36
58
0
54
52
64 0.89
44 0.48
48 0.62
47 0.54
72 0.00
HSI
68
68
74
78
%
Left
6 Mo
Cog CoB
56
Alpha
HSI
n
(as is basis)
B Ratio
4.9
%
11.1
10.6
11.0
875
1525
1941
1169
853
1160
444
626
12.15
7.20
12.90
16.30
17.95
15.80
10.75
15.45
9.85
13.35
11.50
15.35
10.65
11.00 10.5
8.80 11.1
8.05 10.1
1898
3336
1604
1621
3039
2252
1638
1419
427
1422
2022
13.55 10.6
24.65 12.9
11.35 10.5
ConeWt % a
15.70 10.2
9.55 11.4
MC or
and 5-Cone
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Lb/Ac
Location
P Date
711
018:05-08 B 8/29/95
8/29/95 1476
227:01-05 B
640
004:09-12 B 8/21/95
8/29/95 1003
033:05-08 B
Y
Identification
Number
T
or Nursery
Bale
Accession
1995
High Alpha Lines
Page
1
54.6
61.1
48.8
61.8
1.63 1.47
2.09 0.92
3.24 1.30
1.89 0.95
1.80 0.99
1.78 0.88
1.07 0.87
0.42
0.95
1.14
0.58
39.9
29.7
36.7
29.4
1.52 0.96
1.64 1.15
0.84 0.70
2.07 1.04
1.10 0.50
1.05 0.81
3.75 0.70
2.59 0.95
3.01 0.68
3.33 0.93
1.49 1.03
2.60 0.86
2.44
1.29
0.98
1.32
2.51 0.95
1.52 0.00
0.90 0.00
62.6
61.9
0.2
0.2
0.0
7.0 1.29
3.03
2.77
3.54
3.43
6.6 27.2 3.75
3.1 24.8 2.60
0.2 16.5 3.63
0.1 14.0 3.73
0.1
8.8 2.34
9.5
4.1 21.2 2.51
8.4
8.2 17.5 25.1 3.08
3.7
7.3
5.8
4.5
3.7
12.3
16.1
14.5
19.0
20.0
6.2 1.63
5.1 1.51
3.10
12.4 3.07
0.3 20.5 3.54
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
4.0
5.8
4.1
5.5
6.4
4.1
2.0
1.2
3.8
3.4
0.1 31.3 3.25
6.4 16.4 17.6 2.77
4.5
4.6 14.1 3.11
2.2
8.9
5.9 2.67
0.0 11.9 2.78
4.3
9.7
7.1
5.4
3.1
7.1
651
90
510
610
645
22
48
634
625
517
669
615
493
39
17
668
641
485
521
463
472
520
529
636
519
465
656
617
7.3 2.16
0.9 0.08
36
462
11.7 2.65
8.7 1.89
7.2 2.25
0.2 6.6 2.11
0.1 16.2 2.30
0.1 16.8 2.38
0.2
3.4
11.7
2.26 0.69
1.39 0.70
3.2
0.1
0.2
4.4
4.6
55.9
62.3
60.1
57.9
52.2
53.7
51.9
63.4
37.2
47.3
58.3
55.5
65.7
72.8
75.1
60.2
49.2
52.7
46.5
2.08 1.45
1.59 0.82
67.2
Area % Oi I Composition
mL oi /100g
La-No
H/C
Myr
Carv Farn Hum
Fresh Stor.
516
41.8
6.1
1.8 19.9 3.28
0.83 0.55
468
3.4 10.7 7.6 2.22
2.12 0.67 55.5
5
9.8 7.6 2.48
65.8
3.1
1.20 0.61
473
4.5
5.9 6.5 1.44
52.6
2.43 0.00
0.1
9.3 1.70
609
5.5
3.32 0.96 68.6
7
6.0
0.1 16.6 2.76
1.58 0.84 60.5
Analyses
CO
co
21182
21183
21193
21220
21670
21677
21678
9402-011
9402-036
9402-037
9402-042
9402-080
9403-046
9403-071
9403-103
9404-001
9404-015
9404-027
9404-048
9404-052
9404-054
9404-067
9404-070
9404-078
9404-092
9405-006
9405-007
9405-011
9405-034
9405-050
9405-072
9405-073
9405-103
9406-002
9406-003
9406-004
9406-010
9406-012
9406-023
9406-026
9406-096
9406-124
9406-131
9406-142
9408-066
9409-020
9410-033
21056
228:16-20 B 9/13/96
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
241:01-05
240:16-20
225:11-15
226:11-15
001:95
029:70
002:89
002:94
004:68
006:71
007:64
008:64
009:94
010:76
010:88
011:77
011:81
011:83
012:64
012:67
012:75
012:89
013:66
013:67
013:71
013:94
014:78
015:68
015:69
016:67
016:88
016:89
016:90
017:64
017:66
017:77
017:80
019:83
020:82
020:89
021:68
027:69
029:74
032:77
Nugget
Eroica VF
Hallertauer Mag
Kitamidori
Eastern Gold
8/30/96
9/03/96
9/03/96
9/03/96
8/22/96
9/10/96
9/10/96
9/10/96
9/11/96
9/11/96
9/13/96
9/11/96
9/11/96
9/11/96
9/10/96
9/11/96
9/11/96
9/11/96
9/13/96
9/13/96
9/13/96
8/23/96
9/13/96
9/13/96
9/13/96
9/13/96
8/26/96
9/13/96
8/26/96
9/10/96
8/26/96
8/26/96
8/26/96
9/13/96
8/26/96
9/13/96
8/26/96
9/16/96
9/13/96
9/16/96
9/13/96
9/13/96
9/17/96
9/17/96
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
227:16-20 B 9/13/96
013:05-08 B 9/09/96
Galena (43-16)
Eroica (34-5)
LI
0
Location P Date
ConeWt %
13.35 12.
10.80 15.
17.30 12.
16.80 17.
11.60 14.
10.85 18.
9.20 12.
8.80 14.
6.70 14.
7.25 13.
7.40 13,
14.20 14
8.50 12
9.80 12
10.75 12
10.00 12
9.50 13
10.25 12
10.10 14
8.70 13
9.50 12
10.70 12
10.00 12
10.60 15
8.80 13
8.90 15
9.90 16
11.00 14
11.00 12
9.90 13
12.30 13
8.65 13
11.40 12
10.30 12
10.10 12
10.15 14
9.75 13
10.70 16
10.60 12
10.10 13
10.30 15
10.75 12
9.10 13
11.35
9.85
8.95 12
8.70 13
8.95 13
MC or
60
___.
6 Mo
%
Alpha
HSI Left
HSI Coa CoB
B Ratio
0
64 0.00
0.23 37
68
6. 0
0
62 0.00
0.23 39
65
8. 4
0
65 0.00
0.22 37
73
4. 5
0
52 0.00
0.24 26
78
4. 8
0
69 0.00
0.25 44
75
4. 6
0
42 0.00
0.25 23
73
6. 8
0
43 0.00
0.24 22
73
4 8
0
47 0.00
0.22 28
5 ,2 73
0
57 0..00
0.21 32
74
4
0
52 0..00
0.23 24
71
5
0
49 0..00
0.24 23
70
5
0
45 0..00
0.22 24
68
6
0
46 0..00
0.21 22
69
5
0
57 0..00
0.23 35
72
4 8
0
55 0..00
0.23 33
68
5 8
0
54 0..00
0.24 28
66
6 4
0
54 0..00
0.22 33
72
5 1
0
54 0..00
0.23 28
4..1 75
0
62 0.00
0.23 40
5.,1 74
0
52 0.00
0.21 31
72
5.
0
49 0.00
0.23 23
70
5.
0
44 0.00
0.23 24
74
4.
0
54 0 .00
0.22 30
71
5.
0
52 0 .00
0.23 26
83
3.
0
47 0..00
0.22 22
73
4.
0
56 0,.00
0.21 34
70
6.
0
61 0 .00
.23 38
74
5.
0
44 0 .00
.23 23
70
6.
0
50 0..00
.26 23
72
4.
0
50 0 .00
.23 24
74
4.
0
57 0 .00
.24 37
75
4,
0
58 0 .00
.23 34
66
6 8
0
45 0,.00
0.25 23
4 .1 75
0
46 0 .00
0.27 24
80
3
0
58 0 .00
0.20 34
75
4
0
59 0 .00
0.24 36
81
3
0
58 0..00
0.22 27
77
4
0
59 0 .00
0 .23 34
75
5
0
68 0 .00
0 .24 43
77
3
0
47 0.00
0.23 23
75
4
0
53 0.00
0.25 30
76
5
0
47 0.00
0.23 26
74
4
0
54 0.00
0.23 29
4 .1
77
0
48 0.00
0.24 30
69
5 .3
0
56 0.00
0.23 30
77
3 .8
0
42 0.00
0.21 22
68
5 .7
0
57 0.00
0.22 35
3 .9 78
0
56 0.00
0.25 30
3 ,4 80
n =
and 5-Cone (as is basis)
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
(at 8% mc)
Bullion, 10A.VF 022:16-20 B 9/03/96
Identification
1996 Bale
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.21 0 .00
1.55 0 .00
3.24 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
2.57 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
2.44 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
1.98 0 .00
2.36 0 .00
0.00 0 .00
0 .00 0 .00
0 .00 0 .00
0 67 0.00
0 00 0.00
0 69 0.00
2.00 0.00
,23 0 .00
,57 0 .00
.52 0 .00
.00 0 .00
09 0.00
00 0.00
2.19 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
1.34 0.00
.95
1.74
.87
1.36
2.15
1.31
1.58
1.35
2.72
0.00
.86
.48
Fresh Stor.
mL oil/100g
Page
,0
.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
53.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0
35.8
0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.4
0.0
0.0
5.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
,0
0.0
49.5
0.0
43.4
63.1
32.3
1.81
0 .0
0 0
0 .0
0 ,0
0 .0
339
338
150
127
130
160
52
223
226
216
299
321
384
317
300
319
240
288
292
293
329
327
353
112
331
383
322
324
77
289
71
246
68
64
70
325
45
330
47
367
334
372
359
361
379
357
279
87
LabNo
00
00
42
,00
,00
,56
.00
.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
00
00
00
2.08
0.08
2.28
0.08
3.57
3.46
2.59
3.22
0.00
0.00
3.36
0.00
45
46
,49
,00
.00
0
.00
0.0
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
14.6 2.38
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0.0 0.00
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
0 0 0.00
9.7
7.6
0.8
8.7
0.9
16.9
31.7
19.5
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.6 25 .4
0.0 0 .0
0.0 0.0
0.1 13.6
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
8.6
3.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.0
59.3
0.0
45.9
60.3
59.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
60.0
0.0
0.2
0.1
3.7
10.1
3.8
11.4
4.7
9.1
7.6
3.1
0.0
0.0
2.5
0.0
8.4
4.1
4.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.2
59.1
67.1
72.0
62.8
5.4
Cary Farn Hum H/C
Area % Oil Composition
Mvr
66.7
Analyses
oo
035:67
036:71
044:64
044:66
044:85
044:90
044:93
047:80
035:81
035:86
032:86
033:85
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
9/16/96
9/03/96
9/06/96
9/06/96
9/06/96
9/06/96
9/09/96
9/09/96
9/09/96
9/09/96
9/09/96
9/10/96
Harvest
P Date
Location
Number
9410-042
9411-013
9411-073
9411-078
9411-089
9411-095
9414-001
9414-003
9414-022
9414-027
9414-030
9415-001
Identiification
T
Y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Lb/Ac
Yield
9.10
10.55
11.30
15.05
9.95
10.00
12.3
13.3
12.9
12.1
12.5
12.5
8.15 13.7
8.00 14.4
8.10 12.9
7.20 12.6
9.70 17.1
8.75 12.8
ConeWt % a
MC or
60
is basis)
6.4
3.2
3.4
2.6
3.4
5.1
5.3
6.3
5.6
5.2
83
78
80
66
72
78
72
70
70
71
0.23 56
0.23 32
0.24 42
0.25 23
0.23 41
0.22 23
0.25 24
0.22 23
0.23 32
0.23 41
0.00
53 0.00
66 0.00
72 0.00
47 0.00
61
45 0.00
45 0.00
40 0.00
53 0.00
64 0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6 Mo
X
Alpha
HSI Left
X B Ratio
HSI Coa CoB
4.3 80
0.22 23
46 0.00
0
4.0
76
0.24 25
51 0.00
0
Bale: (at I
8 % mc) and 5-Cone (as
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
n
or Nursery
1996
Accession
High Alpha
1.24
1.01
0.78
1.08
1.16
2.44
2.02
2.05
1.60
0.00
2.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Fresh Stor.
0.00 0.00
mL oil/IOOg
Page
2
33.2
0.0
42.6
0.0
50.4
59.8
0.0
59.1
29.3
39.2
5.0
0.0
8.9
6.1
0.0
10.1
9.6
0.0
3.7
6.9
0.1
1.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
5.3
32.1
0.0
16.0
0.0
14.4
11.5
0.0
9.0
1.78
1.89
0.00
1.62
0.00
1.58
3.36
0.00
6.3 1.68
14.0 2.03
178
182
185
176
233
277
232
265
281
252
Area % Oi l Composition
Myr
H/C
LabNo
Cary Farn Hum
0.0
350
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.00
53.2
3.3
0.2 11.0 3.33
122
Analyses
oo
en
86
CO —•
l-
ra
8_
CO a>
H
m»co^^N.*incoin^^Nvtr>Ki>Oi^^c>SNNCo«-mory«*c>r*c>N«-OMirir*ovOC>»-o.*rninMS
rjS™23KooT^^nMinlnoSNSSr~«ooooin^^^Orr.NNN^MNm
pppppppppppppppppppppppopppppppppppppppopppppppp
i/iminuimininin^tnininuiinini/iininmininwinininininininininininininminininininininin
_l CO
1)
a>
c
0)
u
OPPPPPOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
c.
cd
cu
_
mo^NOKiN^r\jcoco«*ino*-mon^cgo(\jwM.a->0'OM»-*-rjocgco _-tir\«-r~cMro — *ooororor>rNSf\j>0'*ry*ooos^S'0'OONuMn.*cO'Ov-^)«-o>tt-r.(\iot-in*OKi i n K i ' * i n * - « - S ( M i n i r i c o N N P j
CM - - CM —
U
CO
NIMt-OONt-IMr-NNNO
«-CMPPPPPPCM«-«-'
i-Ni-OOi-i
«- CM '
o>r^o<r^piriv»>o^^^^c>c>t^^ro^^cocMr^irir^rjr^pc>pfAj>i^^pc>inr^o»roiriri-4-^o^r-.>oo>-j
co 8 SvONcoinin^^^'JcoinirtiAininininin^>fcciinw^in^ininin«>ocoSiri^coinNincoinN^coi/iiri>o
CJ
_
_
_
_
_
eo«-eo<o«-rocoro<OPCMi«cM>i-«-ro~»o«-proo«-r^c\j-o
£ +J co*-cp^r^c>OKr^*o>o*OProroin*ocMr^p«^ro
^rororo«*~»st-«tfiri*OProPCMrororo»*-»i-CMroP — rorvipro — roP»tf — «-ProrocM
pfMPP^trouiro-*'
pppppppppppppppppppppocdpppppppppppppppppppppppop
lfl(\J»Ol^'-0*'OfvJSO<-^IOCOIOfOWOON»-<-OOOCOKll\10inO^'4M'*OO^ini^rOCO«-inN>OOCO
oVoo'io^<--"-Mio^ruc\i^SfvJr<jNf\icjincoro^^iOMM^WMN>-r\jNN
>-Jeo c>oino>Nm'Oro^^>om^^N-J<Mco>ONn<>So-j<o^inNr;ON^in^pinin^^JNinN>o
L.SSc>roSc>P.ro-ri^>o^inl^cSooch^'-PCMCocMPK^in^rM^r^-ororoprohn
j=^5ooU)roc>CMC>rorocio^ro^ro>tror^ro~»~troirivororororop»*roro^ro~*^rororororo
l- ro p
o
—- —- —- p
P
«— —
ooooooooo*-ooo«-ooooooooooooo«-o
pp—-ppppppP'
—
irvrocoeo^OPCM^^o>rvieoroc>ro<orot^peor>.pvOP«-rocM>-p>o«--*c>p>»CM~i-eoc>PCM~t"-<0'-«-CM_-i
^^-i-^u-vNOro^^oroi^rororo^Ntrorovt^NtNO^in^^in-t^roininro-^^inro-tf^in**
CQ
a>
^^r^roro^ON^^p^r^r^»-cM^r^o^eo>o<)vti^o^cMo^o^eocMC>«-inpO>rocMO^o^PO^>*ro>tN-i^proro
cMCMcMroro-3 — rM-*CM------cvj~»rvj----'-CMCMrocMCMrMCMCMtMCM--roroiMCMrAiro--c^
CQ
__J
_-
oOv*ocooNOinN«-fOin(NJinNONM>on^oONinNiriOvOCQNNrjnnoo^ojpvao^L •4-, (\j in co *
__
_._
_
_ _
_ ^> in in cm •
g
• K
o
r\ir\jr\Jcg(\jru^cof\icurvJcururocut\JcurjcMt\jr^
a.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
NuirOstONCO>ON^_^O^ON(>eO^ONOO>OMNNr-^OOONtN^NSOMCOOCONM^(>Ost-^ir\_'CO
•rl
£|CiCSfcg:_|CiS£fcRK.£S_Kip^^
co
-i
i
0
a
01
^
3
l-l
o
—
(0
<
DC
inro^Meo>d,>4-N4-in^OMin^ONt>tineo^'^eo^f\jeo^r^fNJCOro
<
en
<Xi
H
i in *o n* oj
c
u
ID
^NT-O^^OO^OM«-(>0^{\JstNOOvtN>OlO(>^^0(gNQ^>OOOCONSNM*-^N(\lfO(>MO^
ro «— ru
u^M^ro^inrviui_n^^st_^inin<)NSN«^S-SNvO^S^h-NrvS^O
(\jru»orON*r>-ooo*^osOLnrninONfr^ror^^ocor\j>d-o^
in^in^!0>-^in^ro^nro^f^NtroMrorj^ro^t\i
>.
XI
Tff
«-f-oo^fvJoo-^(^l^oo^^t^oN^Ju^«-^t^o^eo^^n^too^^or->J^^-^*oN^o*ONN^^oooeo^o>o^c^
•M
roM^%o>*o^_nNO>4-inKCKrnCN^^^roinNOcoeoS-<)O^CNin>o«
pj __ _^^oJiNi^^T-forOhO^r^i^^^^^-^u^^^ininNO^^inu^in
_nininininin_^ininininLnLninLnin_ninininin_ninu^Ln
OJ
<_
>
*-> f \ j ^ r \ j c ^ a c > ^ ^ 0 « r j M M r o c h C ^ ^ r o w r - t - ^ t - t - N r - ^ N 0 j N N N W f \ J N N N
_.
(0
CO __
rSrSrSrSrSrSrS^rSSS^rSrSrSrSSSr^^r^r^SSrSrSSfSS^rSSSrSrSrSrSrSrSrSrSrSrS^rSrSrSrS
-*-J^-J-t<t'4>t<J-~C0C000-^NC\JWNWr>J>fvI^>I^>»-»^>C)'0>0-0>0-0OOOOOg(DOOOOO
_^u^_^_\iriiri_^in_%iniriiri_^iriiriiri__-OvO>0_inu^iriinini/^
Mrorororororororou-i^-N-r-f-u-iro — — — — — «-rorororororororoir\_-iminin_>o>oooooooo>o>o>r^
Kir!ir\in-^iniri_iinin-\uriiri_i_i_^<O*0^>O__u"iirii/>iri_i-»i^
ouiseo>*^c>^in(^oo^^M^<>^NMNtso^o-n^ineoo>^Ncoo>--ico-MgNNsft-rijKir\i
oooo?r?rjNNr-mn^<fMooooo^ri-f>i-»-jSSS5!3!3SaS22J
TrJ-JJ-iKKfifiK^!
jpppppppopppppppppppppppppppoopoppppppppp
pppppppp
CO
1
1
CO
u.
X
^
co CO
C_> 3
CO
CM
CO —
_
i
>xFC
m
x
P
P
co o
co
X
X
—
u)
CO 01
X
1-
o
+J
c.
01
1
1
_
cj
3
_
CO 4-
_
CJ CO
3PS~=_z_ c _ z _ £ _ z _ £ z _ E _ z E z - z z _ _ z z z s : z : £ z
c>_^proptin»*^--rMCMc3^i^^roinOro»*0^iniriiriro^sfcMfMcoro & ro •_ . .iffff.
. .
p — fAjrorjvtOPc6cocMiri^tt\J.rocMc\iinifi>oooeo_'OcOPfMO>ro — «*cmio S. cm co ro p — p
ppp«»rorOcj>-p«-PCMP"-p — — — — — — — — «-p — — --PP--OP
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
t
i
i
p
p
p
cm «- - - «-
......
.
pN.ro>o_<o-cM>o>or-r-rorocMr\icMfM(MCMCMf\iroro~»^i,>i'~*c> — ~-cMtMCM»*>*'>ON-fj_-t
c m p p p p p — » p p p p p — — - p p p p p p p p p p o p p p p - - — - — - — - —-—-—- P
P
P
P
0?5f?_i§ci™rofpoS5r?5roP*ro5^Proin5r?c5c5rAJror5§
oi :
o
o
<
p p p p p p — «- p
— «-»-«- --^cMroroMrorororoMrororohnrorororororororororororororororororororo
^^^^^^^--CMCMr^CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMScMCMfMCMCMCJCMCMrjCMCMC^
64028M
64031M
64102M
64103M
51114M
52042M
52047M
63011M
63012M
63013M
63014M
63015M
64027M
21434m
21435M
21436M
21437M
21444M
21446M
21448M
21462M
21466M
21487M
21603M
21615M
21641M
21643M
21646M
21428M
21429M
21432M
21433M
21379M
21381M
21416M
21417M
21419M
21422M
21424M
21426M
21427M
Number
Accession
or Nursery
Lupulin Analyses
Wye OB 79
Harvest
X
X
Alpha
Sum
SP0
PermeaCrush
(hrs)
bility
(3
hr)
CoB
Coa
HSI
a+B
Date
a •acids B •acids Ratio
0.47
Identification Location
4.7
0.356
48
28
0.226
79.8
55
35.9
43.9
041:59-60 7/19/95
0.26
0.9
7506-057M
2.084
26
15
0.201
78.9
28
56.7
22.2
049:59-60 7/13/95
0.21
2.5
7506-182M
0.628
39
19
0.228
71.1
49
36.5
34.6
013:61-62 7/21/95
0.26
6.6
7007-275M
0.422
59
36
0.250
75.8
75
18.9
56.9
014:61-62 7/21/95
0.40
4.0
7610-112M
0.342
45
28
0.244
74.7
71
21.8
52.9
015:61-62 7/21/95
0.08
7.7
7613-004M
0.384
49
30
0.254
75.9
72
21.1
54.7
018:61-62 7/21/95
0.24
2.2
7614-052M
0.948
55
34
0.242
69.8
45
38.5
31.3
019:61-62 7/21/95
0.51
3.1
7701-032M
.338
0.
43
20
227
54 75.6
34.7
40.8
021:61-62 7/21/95
0.03
1.0
7703-031M
0..796
39
22
246
62.8
51
30.6
32.2
022:61-62 7/13/95
35
4.2
7704-012M
0..339
55
32
234
75.1
54
34.9
40.3
023:61-62 7/21/95
23
2.5
7706-040M
0..405
42
19
200
81.0
42
47.3
33.7
024:61-62 7/21/95
55
1.4
7710-033M
.488
0.
39
24
203
40 80.5
48.2
32.3
025:61-62 7/14/95
52
3.5
7715-015M
0..314
49
27
0.227
79.0
54
36.5
42.5
026:61-62 7/13/95
11
2.6
7717-019M
0..322
33
18
0.232
76.5
55
34.7
41.9
027:61-62 7/13/95
,06
1.6
7717-022M
.820
0.
65
43
0.230
70 82.6
24.9
57.7
028:61-62 7/13/95
0.27
2.7
7721-049M
0..313
56
35
74 77.2 0. 246
20.4
56.7
029:61-62 7/13/95
0.09
3.7
7722-019M
0..358
54
32
247
0.
79
50
39.7
40.0
030:61-62 7/14/95
0.25
2.2
7727-004M
0..455
53
30
248
0.
72
64
26.0
46.4
033:53-54 7/11/95
0.01
5.4
7302-016m
0.322
51
31
241
0.
64 75
27.6
48.0
007:59-60 7/19/95
0.13
2.2
7310-007M
0.300
45
23
0. 223
60 80
31.9
48.3
043:59-60 7/14/95
0.37
2.9
7506-081M
0..344
44
24
0.254
65
69
20.3
45.0
033:61-62 7/14/95
0.56
3.1
7703-005M
0..371
47
24
0.243
76.9
69
23.7
53.2
035:53-54 7/11/95
0.55
2.9
7302-052M
0..483
48
26
227
0.
73.6
57
31.7
41.9
036:61-62 7/21/95
0.48
4.6
7711-032M
.442
0.
56
31
0. 239
75.1
55
34.0
41.1
037:61-62 7/21/95
0.09
5.6
7702-023M
0..400
56
34
248
0.
79.6
72
22.1
57.6
055:53-54 7/19/95
28
3.2
7303-052M
0..422
47
23
0. 247
70.6
50
35.1
35.5
041:61-62 7/21/95
02
2.6
8411-099M
.316
0.
54
32
231
0.
60 77.1
30.9
46.3
043:61-62 7/14/95
50
3.4
8411-217M
0..345
37
19
0. 227
57 75.2
32.6
42.5
046:61-62 7/21/95
16
1.0
8411-263M
1..779
45
27
0. 226
68.7
24
52.4
16.4
005:55-56 7/13/95
00
0.2
1.923
221-1
38
23
280
0.
33.7
19
27.3
6.4
22
4.
19022 x 19045M 007:55-56 7/13/95
0.454
56
33
40 74.7 0. 229
44.7
30.1
,32
1.
19127 X 19173M 011:55-56 7/19/95
.329
0.
40
23
206
27 74.7 0.
54.4
20.3
0.05
1,
19012 x 19041M 022:55-56 7/19/95
0..574
63
44
63 74.8 0. 270
27.7
47.1
023:55-56 7/12/95
0.46
3
BG x 58015M
0..360
61
41
253
0.
74.2
60
30.0
44.2
024:55-56 7/12/95
0.45
3
BG x 58015M
.335
0.
65
46
251
0.
57 72.2
30.8
41.4
025:55-56 7/19/95
0.24
6
BG x 58015M
.351
0.
50
28
253
68 75.6 0.
24.2
51.4
0.40
3
BGCBG x 19062M) 026:55-56 7/19/95
0..379
58
29
0. 243
78.2
64
28.3
49.9
0.01
BG(BG X 19062M) 033:57-58 7/13/95
2
1..290
45
24
250
0.
72.0
56
31.6
40.4
0.61
BG x(BGx19062M) 034:57-58 7/19/95
4
0..327
53
33
0.248
72.6
47
38.8
33.8
0.30
2.4
BG(BG x 19062M) 037:57-58 7/19/95
0..485
64
40
0.234
48 73.1
38.0
35.1
006:57-58 7/13/95
0.10
1.3
Wye #321
0..467
64
43
0.208
78.5
44
43.8
34.7
007:57-58 7/13/95
Sorted by Accno (February 6, 1997)
19 95
50
64
67
64
54
79
65
48
85
57
66
46
47
76
81
63
78
64
87
74
56
45
46
50
78
62
86
48
72
88
67
59
82
51
51
65
54
87
43
61
77
Calc.
Remain
Hum/
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Mvrcene
2.32
2.91
0.99
1.23
2.76
2.36
1.34
1.00
2.15
1.55
1.59
2.21
24
40
05
19
47
63
,36
2.82
2.77
0.03
2.23
.60
.23
.51
.79
1.51
85
00
53
06
90
.04
.21
.28
1.39
1.83
2.11
2.03
2.36
Cary
Page
5045
5085
5075
5074
5083
5078
5089
5030
5081
5084
5048
5031
5024
5028
5032
5052
5006
5070
5047
5051
5007
5080
5086
5058
5088
5049
5087
5042
5039
5062
5068
5011
5016
5071
5073
5044
5056
5065
5038
5043
Serial No.
5060
Laboratory
2
-~4
co
MAR 0_ '05 14'SC GAD HOT TflRrC
88
P. !
© T h e South African Breweries Hop Farms (Pty)Ltd.
T.l.phon. 0441 707006/fi
Di«rl_t ft«,™. r p
T...T* (0441) 707550
^"'.lP.O.
n"Z'',_£
Box. 1488
6530 George
jjfidwf
jtfjJW wy~
Sfi /WiTSVicuitur.
2 March 1995
V^CTvf,
v^HflJl
' /» JlAfr'AM*' • ,AJ,,^fiiJnMAf„«
Dept. crop science
How are you keeping? ihope you are well I ^ '
^\ K" '
hSnT-^hS^wt^J U^od^af
Dh_VvTSt Uith anoth~ 9°°d «op on
complain about:
g
" Pr«vlou» years, but not much to
-
Ill^&e^i^o^1^^1/"0^.^
fro*> Y°" SO"?
ago. They
various
Quarantin?0p?oc«a..es'.and ^ P'—Aly
goj^tim«through
thS
authorities to hold oni lu ttaw .i«n^.l^Md*,i.tllfl quarantine
these
nematodes and th™ original &*^J?£l9&l\™u *°r* *bout
SHoK
-^fai^^^^^
elimination of them Lhro__h
?i?_»o
i,.F,£
of _J^
V~
f **'**•
l- !&ft^.asra_u^
small a portion of the plant ««possible To?testing L asf ™?
3" a?rt rfoU_^*ve of the Presence.01 tne nematod«R in these plants
SKASSn^h^iSSStheir habits'3prettd' ^-tKiSrSS
4. Do you have any suggestions or advice regarding this matter?
i_toOVftd £?_fr_oiate aryL ne_.lp vou can 9ive us in this matter.As it is
soon m$'i££?M/Vady Xlook f0—d *> h««ing from you «
(IV
^ j,
Mr. Cerrie BriteT
Research and Development Co-ordinator
,
AIT1]/ U/'I^U
_:
—
—
t
^___
:
/
/
^tfV,
wiU Complicate the
l7 PWh»te_r ¥& lotions are the following:
Warm regards
.^
^ .
D 7J 1? * <?
lUXifr ken/i*
•/ •<£*'»'I'MAx,Mr* foait^
'
Dm*™: 0J.V«« DuHouun
C.0±.Cot.
G.M. UHI,
Dm. l_r.
LP. V^MIWaV,
Com.»v. I.H.W.
I.R.C. rlW
PMt |AIB
fAkanuu)
—.• (Ouch),
m-_>m G.
w. WW*
i.ihuot (Ml).
I0!ft^, UMO.
WW, UJk
BOTANY AND PLANT PATHOLOGY • EXTENSION PLANT PATHOLOGY
Oregon State University
Cordley Hall 1089 • Corvallis, Oregon 97331-2903
Telephone 503-737-3472
Fax 503-737-2412
March 22,1995
Al Haunold
USDA-ARS hops program
Oregon State University
CORVALLIS OR 97331
Nematode levels in OSU hop field plots from which
hop rhizomes were sent to South Africa.
The sample for nematode testing was received in the Plant Clinic on March 6, 1995 from the hops cultivars
planting of USDA hop yards.
Rhizome and accompanying bud-shoot samples are reported interms of relative abundance.
PCN#
Field or
Stem and Bulb
Nematodes
Nematodes
plot designation
Ditvlenchus
Aphelenchnidp.x
Hersbrucker Spaet
41
Foliar
very few
none
very few
rare
plot #222:21-25
Tettnanger
plot #222:1-5
42
Some comments on aspects of this examination:
Number: In neither variety were there the quantities of nematodes I would expect if they were
pathogenic upon hops. I removed individual buds from the plants, examined them separately
and was unable to detect nematodes in them. Iwould be very comfortable taking softwood cuttings
Taxonomy: Although, ofcourse, I cannot say that I saw exactly the same nematodes asthe
inspectors in South Africa, my examinations did not entirely confirm their diagnoses. The foliar
nematode is close to Aphelenchoides subtenuis, but itdoes not fit entirely comfortably within
that species. Prof. Harold Jensen had not found Oregon collections that he could identify as
definitely that species. OurAphelenchoides has neverbeen found oaNarcissus.- the most
commonly cited host forA. subtenuis - even though it isa crop ofsome importance inthe state.
Ditylenchus dipsaci ison the other hand found inassociation with several crops inthe state, but
has never been associated with hops. My measurements ofthe nematodes in my samples were
shorter andstouter than I would expect forD. dipsaci.
In conclusion, I would certainly concur with all efforts to propagate material that is nematode free, but still
feel there is little risk from the nematodes which probably were associated with the rough cork on the
surface ofthe rhizomes and feeding upon fungi as is characteristic ofmany species within both genera.
Sincerely,
Gene Newcom
Nematologist
GN/gn
OrKGONSTATC UNIVCnSHT
GXTGNSION
SGRVICG
Agriculture, Home Economics, 4-H Youth, Forestry, Community Develop
ment, Energy, and Extension Sea Grant Programs, Oregon State University,
United States Department of Agriculture, and Oregon counties cooperating!
The Extension Service offers its programs and materials equally to ail people.
89
90
,£z&\ United States
^XA))i Department of
^^ Agriculture
Agricultural
Pacific West Area
Research
Service
Forage Seed & Hop Research Unit
Dept. Crop and Soil Science
Crop Science Building 451B
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331-3002
Telephone: (503) 737-5841
FAX: (503) 737-1589
March 8, 1995
Gerrie
Brits
Research and development coordinator
The South African Brew. Hop Farms Ltd.
Rob Roy Farm, Blanco
Dist. George
PO Box
1498
6530 George, South Africa
FAX Nr.
fOll-27-441-707550
Dear Gerrie,
I was quite surprised about your fax message of March 2, regarding the
presence of the two nematode species
Aphenlenchoides subtemius and
Dictylenchus dipsaci in the hop shipment I mailed in late Dec. 1994.
I checked with nematologists both here and at Prosser WA and nobody has ever
heard of either of these two species being associated with hops.
to the same plots from which the rhizomes
I then «ent
of Tettnanger and Hersbrucker Spaet
were dug and we got additional rhizomes plus soil samples and they are
being investigated at the present time in our Plant Clinic.
As soon as I hear
anything definitive, I'll let you know.
Now
to
you specific questions:
1. These two varieties came from a different location, a new piece of ground we
obtained about 3 years ago . I have not noticed any damage to the plants during the
growing season nor am I aware of any nematode problem.
2. I know nothing about these nematodes, your information was the first time we
were told there might be a problem.
All rhizomes looked clean, no damage, we washed
the soil off as much as possible, but did not do a microscopic examination at the time
3.
I suggest you grow the plants in quarantine, force them into quick growth, make
soft-wood cuttings by rooting them with IBA/boron £1000 ppm) and then dstroy the
original mother plants grown from the imported rootstock and steam sterilize the pots
where these plants were grown. You should be able to get clean plants that way.
As soon as I get the information from our Plant Clinic, I let you know of the
results.
Sin
Al/MunoNld
Res.
Geneticist
BOTANY AND PLANT PATHOLOGY • EXTENSION PLANT PATHOLOGY
91
Oregon State University
Cordley Hall 1089 • Corvallis, Oregon 97331-2903
Telephone 503-737-3472
Fax 503-737-2412
March 31, 1995
Al Haunold
Dept of Crop and Soil Sciences
OSU
CAMPUS
The sample for nematode testing was received in the Plant Clinic on March 17, 1995 from the planting of
USDA hop yards.
I first did "root" extractions for all samples. I varied the procedure by separating the growing shoots and
young buds from the older rhizomes with their attached roots (very few present). There were so few
nematodes present in either tissue type that I am just combining the results below. The root samples are
simply reported as number of nematodes found. Any mathematical calculations would place their numbers
as small fractions of nematodes per gram of tissue (the usual way of expressing such data). After I had some
idea of what was in the "roots", I examined a limited number of soil samples, selecting those which had at
least a few nematodes in the roots. Those results are in the standard nematodes per quart of soil and are the
second figure under each PCN# when present.
PCN#
52
Stem and bulb
Foliar
Cyst
Field or
Nematodes
Nematodes
Nematodes
plot designation
Ditvlenchus
Aphelenchoides
Heterodera
12:7 East Main
0
53
54
55
4:9 East Main
40:8 East Main
48:18 East Main
56
10:56
1
270
0
0
1
5
0
0
130
0
3
6
0
0
2930
3
0
3
0
0
1000
0
0
0
2
0
109:9 West Main
57
2
58
24:9 East Main
0
0
0
59
106:37 West Main
0
1
0
60
46.55 East Main
0
0
0
61
26.55 East Main
0
0
0
62
34:11 East Main
3
0
0
soil results
0
0
0
Sino
Gene Newcomt
Nematologist
OREGONSTATE UNIVERSITY
EXTENSION Agriculture, Home Economics, 4-H Youth, Forestry, Community DevelopCCR\/lf-C
'^C
ment> Energy. and Extension Sea Grant Programs, Oregon State University,
United States Department of Agriculture, and Oregon counties cooperating.
The Extension Service offers its programs and materials equally to all people.
92
March 16, 199-i: Nell Christensen's (OSU Soils)—presentation to Or. Hop Comm.
1994 Oregon fertilizer trials on various farms and OSU yards.
Table 1.
Hop cone yield, alpha and beta acid percentage, and nitrogen uptake as
influenced by nitrogen fertilizer rates at four Willamette Valley locations in
1994.
Site*
Annen
Fert. N
Total
Cone
in June
Fert. N
yield
alpha
lb/a
lb/a
lb/a
%
%
USDA*
Cones
uptake
lb/a
lb/a
40
1984
4.95
3.65
49
131
50
90
2062
4.70
3.40
51
131
100
140
1961
4.40
3.33
50
144
N.S.
N.S.
N.S
N.S.
N.S.
0
75
2547
15.8
5.23
51
115
50
125
2717
16.0
5.18
52
125
100
175
2499
16.0
5.03
51
124
N.S.
N.S.
N.S
LSD 0.05
Stauffer
Tot. N
0
LSD 0.05
Leavy
beta
Nin
N.S.
N.S.
0
60
2104
16.3 a'
5.00 bJ
44
103
50
110
2057
14.9 b
4.75 c
42
102
100
160
2151
15.2 b
5.03 a
45
108
LSD 0.05
N.S.
0.9
0.12
0
0
1254 a5
16.1a
4.65
nd1
nd
50
100
2410 b
14.8ab
4.40
nd
nd
100
200
2558 b
14.5 b
4.31
nd
nd
LSD 0.05
N.S.
N.S.
466
+Hop cultivar was 'Willamette' at Annen site and 'Nugget' at all other sites.
*Treatments applied in both 1993 and 1994 (ie., 0 N treatment received no
nitrogen for two years).
sMeans followed by the same letter not significantly different at P = 0.05.
1Nitrogen uptake not determined at USDA site.
Fertilizer recommendations for 1995:
1)
Base: by mid-April right after pruning (ring each hill)
triple 15, 16 etc: 300 lbs/acre of 6 oz per hill, ringed
2)
Booster: N only—by late May or early June, Am.Nitrate (33% N)
250 lbs/acre or 5 oz per hill, ringed.
93
14000
^
D)
JUL
A
12000
E,
10000
Excessive
---•__
z
1
CO
A
k
A
♦
I
A
8000
T
O
z
6000
0
"•«—>
A
A
A
D)
A
I
S
t Adequate 1
4000
Q)
Q.
Q.
O
2000
I
0
11 Jun
2 Jul
23 July
13 Aug
Date
V USDA-def
T
USDA
•
Annen
•
Stauffer
♦
Leavy
A Smith
Experimental Sites
Figure 1.
Nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in hop petioles at five sites from early June
through August. Only points labeled USDA^ief (V) were shown to be nitrogen deficient.
A
_
,
i
,
Young
,_.jnn C|ei8tothecium
rl«i»tnthArlnm
'
li
1/ I "> li i _i
Conidiophore
Qonidia
~ Mycelium
i
cleistothecia and mycelium
of rose and peach caused by Sphaerotheca pannosa.
Overwintering
.rx—*^
Mycelium
•J
Fig. 33.
33. _ Disease cycle of powdery mildew
Fig.
'Mycelioid appendages
n
Germination
Hop powdery mildew life cycle.
Recent Foreign Hop Importation into Oregon
(note:
company was J.I. Haas Inc.)
5/31/91
Company renews PPQ form 597, permit to import post-entry hop material.
12/8/93
ODA hop quarantine goes into effect, prohibits entry of most hops.
7/94
ODA notifies NPB/USDA APHIS of new hop quarantine. A summary of
the quarantine is placed in the Federal/State Quarantine Summary.
2/06/95
Company imports 150 plants from Suffolk, Great Britain. Plant material is
inspected at Seattle and is found apparently free from pests. Material meets
all USDA requirements for entry.
Spring/95
Company representative calls ODA to notify that the shipment has arrived.
8/7/95
Company representative calls ODA to request a post-entry inspection. As of
this date, ODA has not received any reports from USDA (inspection alerts).
This has allowed the material to bepresent in the production area for nearly
an entire season without a post-entry inspection.
8/10/95
ODA alerts OHC of the shipment, seeks industry input on the situation of
imported hops and the hop quarantine.
8/22/95
ODA formally notifies USDA of the quarantine situation and the problems
with notification and asks for more to cooperation on future shipments.
10/23/95
USDA agrees to provide more cooperation.
11/9/95
ODA meets with OHC to review importation issue.
05-31-1995
09:20AM
FROM
TO
15037371589
98
JgJ Washington StateUniversity
irrigated Agrlcuhurs ReseareM «nd Extension Center
Rt. 2. Box Z953-A
Prosser. WA 99350-8687
509-786-2226
May 30,1995
FAX 509-786-M&4
Susan Hiller
Oregon Hop Commission
Salem; OR
Dear
Susan:
RE: suitability of Ridomil for control of hop downy mildsw in
Oregon
I cannot recommend the use of Ridomil for control of hop
downy mildew in the Willamette Valley of Oregon. Before I
comment further, let me clarify the historical record.
In 1992,
I tested downy mildew samples from Oregon. In the samples tested,
there was a high incidence of resistance to Ridomil (>75%) and
every yard tested had samples which were Ridomil resistant.
Tests in 1995 show some amelioration of the situation. Overall
incidence of Ridomil resistance has declined and some hop yards,
based on a sample size of only 10, had no resistant samples.
Ultimately though, we have to estimate what effect Ridomil would
have on the the downy mildew epidemic Oregon hop growers are
currently experiencing. At this time, disease increase is limited
only by the weather, not by the amount of inoculum (spores)
actually present. How much of a decrease of inoculum would there
have to be to make the epidemic inoculum-limited?
That is a very
difficult question to answer but probably about a 90% decrease in
downy mildew would buy a grower a few days of control with the
weather we currently have.
Is the incidence of Ridomil
resistance less than 10% (to allow for a 90% decrease}?
Very,
very unlikely even under the most optimistic assumptions.
When can Ridomil be used? Under good conditions and with
another year of testi ng, maybe in 1996, if the incidence of
resistance decreases
below about 20%.
Under those circumstances,
an early season appli cation could delay the need for an
application of Aliett e for a significant time.
If a grower
wishes to use Ridomil
be re-selected and an
today, Ridomil resistant downy mildew will
efficacious use of Ridomil will be delayed
for years.
In additi on, the grower will receive no benefit from
his spray and will have to apply Aliette anyway. I wish I could
sound more optimistic but that would be a lie.
Sorry,
Post^faxNote
T&M^
QTgyn \k>f 6o*e>5 )
Date
5-3o-qr cagesw \
From$uSA^ V^ \\erCo,
ovtc
U.S. Hop Industry
Plant Protection Committee
A subcommittee of:
504 Morth Maches Avenue. #11
Washington Hop Commission
Oregon Hop Commission
Idaho Hop Commission
Yakima, Washington 98901
Telephone (509) 453-4749
fax (509) 457-8561
Hop Growers of America
Ann C. George. Administrator
Chemical Residue Analyses for
Pesticide Registration on Hops
Hop Research Council -1996 Funding Request
Submitted: August 10, 1995
By: Washington Hop Commission on behalf of the
U.S. Hop Industry Plant Protection Committee
INTRODUCTION AND JUSTIFICATION
Reluctance by chemical manufacturers to incur the expense ofresidue testing and other
data development, in addition to increased liability exposure, has substantially reduced
their active pursuit of small-acreage minor crops which provide limited profit potential.
The pesticide residue analysis project for hops was established in 1988-89. A coordinated
3-state effort is in place, for efficacy evaluation, residue sampling, and laboratory analysis
of compounds, for the purpose of developing data to support the registration ofnew plant
protection products for U.S. hops.
This program has allowed the hop industry to obtain the use of new products to control hop
aphid and two-spotted spider mite. We are also pursuing products for resistance
management programs, to control secondary pests (black vine weevil, symphylan, cutworm,
etc.) and weeds, and identifying products that will work in concert with natural predators in
Integrated Pest Management programs. Issues such as economics, preharvest and reentry
intervals, worker safety, groundwater protection, and international harmonization are taken
into account.
The U.S. Hop Industry Plant Protection Committee was formed in 1989 to give guidance to
the effort, with representation from the Oregon, Idaho and Washington Hop Commissions,
and Hop Growers of America. Industry support has been vital to the success of this
program.
1996 FUNDING REQUEST
Washington State University Food and Environmental Quality Lab - Dr. Carol Weisskopf:
"Investigation of Pesticide Residues in Hop Matrices (see attached project description).
TOTAL 1996 REQUEST
page 1
$12,000
|
100
Hop Research Council -1996 Request
REVIEW OF 1994-95 RESIDUE PROJECTS
Dimethoate (Cygon) - The method was revised per IR-4 guidance and the storage stability
studies and treated samples were reanalyzed. Data has been submitted to IR-4.
1995 Budget: $10,500
1995 Actual: $10,689
Imidacloprid (Admire) - Completed storage stability study on the metabolites.?^-/^
1995 Budget: $3,500
1995 Actual: $0
6/>yv» Myz^.^ .
Hexakis (Vendex) - Repeat project, with analytical costs, up to $10,000, to befunded by
IR-4. We had completed the project, but the manufacturer requested that it be redone'with
2 applications per season instead of 3, and with a longer pre-harvest interval, in order to
lower the residue levels. Analyses are currently underway.
/Vo budget impact unless total analytical costs exceed $10,000.
Qrvzalin (Surflan) - IR-4 Leader Lab at Davis, CA has been attempting to do method
validation, with no success. Method problems will be addressed under the 1995-96
proposed project with WSU-FEQL.
1995 Budget: $14,000
1995 Actual: $0 to date
($14,000 held in reserve to complete project when method is available).
Ethoprpp (Mocap) -Method validation done by OSU did not provide acceptable ' t U\
recoveries. The WSDA Lab attempted to modify the method with little success (recoverieT
of parent compound are acceptable, but metabolite is not). Method problems will be
addressed under the 1995-96 proposed project with WSU-FEQL.
1995 Budget: $11,200
1995 Actual: $13,825 to date (method development
only - additional $15,000 being held in reserve for treated sample analyses).
Qxyfluorfen (Goal) -Analytical method was revised per IR-4 guidance to improve
recoveries. Storage stability studies and treated samples were analyzed using revised
method, and submitted to IR-4 for review.
1995 Budget: $8,400
1995 Actual: $3,710
SUMMARY
It is important that we continue to pursue full registration of new products, including
biocontrols and compounds which will allow growers to maximize the benefits of natural
predators. As growers will have few registrations available to them, resistance
management programs will become increasingly important. EPAwill continue to cancel
registrations for products as it discovers toxicology problems and other concerns.
Manufacturers will continue to remove products from the market when the expense of
scientific studies required by EPA cannot be offset with future profits from the product. We
cannot allow ourselves to be caught short, with no alternatives.
Attachment -"Investigation of Pesticide Residues in Hop Matrices" (3 pages)
page 2
JUL 25 '95 02=14PM WSU ENVIRO QUALITY
p 2/4
101
INVESTIGATION OF PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN HOP MATRICES
C. P. Weisskopf, Ph.D.
Washington State University
Food and Environmental Quality Laboratory and
Food Science and Human Nutrition
Introduction
Hops have proven to be among the most difficultmatrices for achievement ofadequate or consistent
analyzed in this matrix, anumber ofcompounds representing diverse pesticide classes have proven
unamenable to analysis. Ofthe organophosphates, recoveries ofseveral (dimethoate, methyl parathion
sTabmtv^
V metab°Hte°fCth°Pr0p)
h3VCvariety
Pr0vento
h* variablecompounds
«lowSagT
stability studies or '"J"f
method performance
evaluations. Awide
ofadditional
(oryzalin,
oxyfluorfen, 2,4-D and fluvalmate) have been similarly difficult to analyze. Several pestiddTrcStion
studies have been rejected due to these faHures in residue analyses. AgL^^Z^S
the source ofthese problems adifficult given the diversity ofcompound classes represented
To ^stigate the analytical behav10r ofagrichemical residues in hops, method failures oftwo pesticides
SK2SS? T^T^"^ ^ " "»**^ *»M"J -tabdite of°Soprop
^etm^s^s^
Justificatipn
t£0T ^ 7Ua,ble ^ UC/ata *neCeSSaiy for ^ "fiwtntion ofpesticides. This investigation should
o^nf^
^ hx°P
ofmethods
suitable for
Z
A ^^ ^^^
^ »lts
M"1mdUStiy:
metabolitedevdoPm«*
inhops; abetter
understanding
ofthethl^alyS
anSof
,nHW ofthe
JT^
^ all°W rfBdent
when forresulting
other anrJy^rr^dSan
indication
fate of agnchemicals
in and on^leshooting
hops. Direct benefits
from th^Trk would be
fte abjhty to pursue pestiode registrations for products for which adequateSytical method Zot
gently exist and areduction in the number ofstudies that need to beVedone due to failure ofanalyLl
Objectives
Sot^pbn^sValiClate aSUCCCSSfUl meth°d ^ rCSKiUe ""** °f0iyZ3lin•nd ^ M"J mctabollte of
Procedure
Possible causes for loss of analyte during either storage or extraction include-
1)
Non-covalent analyte binding to plant constituents. In this case, conventional extraction
methods would not be powerful enough to cause release of the analyte from hop matrix
constituents. This can occur in the plant tissue itselfor between the analyte and co-extracted
&SSrtSOlUte Th-^^orrnaynotbebioava1lable,dePendingon
2)
Covalent analyte binding to plant constituents. An actual chemical bond may be formed
S£T* T ^ h°P T** comP°nents- Extractionmethods may release the bound
analyte from the plant tissue, but chemical characteristics (polarity, solubility and volatihty) of
JUL 25 '95
02=14PM WSU ENVIRO QUALITY
P. 3/4
102
the complex would be different from that ofthe analyte alone. This complex would not be
earned through the extraction procedure. This form ofthe compound would probably not be
bioavailable.
3)
J
Rapid degradation. In this case, enzymes or other compounds present in the tissue would
degrade the compound, resulting in loss ofchemical structure. This would be adetoxication
procedure for most agrichemicals.
Determination ofthe point ofanalyte loss
I°ntTSC
4e f^ <*unrecora7d Pestiddes>Ae «*™*ion step at which the analyte is lost must be
yenned. The analytical extraction is initiated using untreated dried hops, the analyte is added at-one of
the procedural steps, and the extraction method carried to completion. In most studies fortification
occurs pnor to initiation ofthe procedure, and recovery through the entire method is thus tested. If
fortification was performed halfway through the procedure and analyte recovery failed, the loss would be
known to occur during the last half ofthe procedure. In this manner, each step ofthe pooedure is tested
SucS"*
C°mPTd"bSt"
S S*P *• bccn
by
Chuck Mourer^Tn^n
ofU. CDavis,
and was found toidCntifiedbe the firstThipartitioning
step identified^o^dm
betweenpolar and non-polar
For successful oryzalm recovery using the standard procedure, the analyte must be present in the polar
solvent as unbound or free oryzalin. During this step, the analyte was not found in either the polar or
non-polar layers after partitioning. During this step of the procedure there is also a"tarry" substance
present mthe solutions. The analyte, ifpresent, must be associated with one ofthese three fractions If
free oryzalm were present in the polar layer, completing the extraction would result in analyte recovery
As thrs is not the case, the polar fraction must not contain the free analyte. Additionally, co-extractants
from the hop matrix could modify the polanty ofthe solvents sufficiently to change the partitioning
behavior oforyzalm. Oryzalin present in the tarry fraction in either abound or unbound form would
prevent recovery, as the tarry fraction is physically eliminated during the partitioning. The focus ofthis
research will be mexamination ofthese three extract fractions for oryzalin, and we anticipatedm7
metabolite investigations will involve examination ofasimilar two- or three-fraction system.
Determination of loss mechanisms
s^^LC^^S?^b^^r^T*
chrc^graph-mass
SS? T * \ sfiacntly ^ ^cation levels,"qUid
this will
allow direct analysisspectrometer
ofsolvent
fractions for the;anatytes ofinterest. Determination of asolvent capable ofdissolving me tarry material
wrl allow direct analysis oforyzalin in this fraction as well. Asimilar approach wiUbe tatoiSTe
^'tb0llt ^trurnental analysis ofthese fractions w.11 firSt focus on identification and qCtSion
oft
T.mshould
HS;bakK
aPPr0aCk
bindinS
of*cfraction
c°mpounds
OCCURS
ofthe fddeT
added analytes
be accounted
for whenKn°thedegradation
proportion orpresent
in each
is determined
At this stage, significant discrepancies between the amount ofcompound added and the amount of
compound detected would be the result ofbinding or degradation. The procedures necessary to elucidate
the nature ofthese losses are difficult to predict, as they will depend on tie results ofpreJinlL
mvestigauons Many potential analyte-matrix complexes and degradation products wril also be amenable
to analysis using HPLC-MS. It should be possible to verify the magnitude ofdegradation £toiS
complex formation. It may also be possible to identify the structure ofthe matrifcomponJtto She
analytes are bound. Spectral characteristics may also indicate whether binding is covaLtTrn^Sble
After determination ofloss mechanisms in the steps at which the methods are found to fail anv earlier
steps must also be investigated. As an example,it i, known that oryzalin is lostTunrfgSa fiS
JUL 25 '95
02: 15PM WSU E.NVIRO QUALITY
P.4/4
103
partitioning step. It is not yet known whether it is actually extracted from the hops. Examination of
extract fractions in earlier steps ofthe methods will proceed as described for the step at which losses are
first identified. In this manner, the investigation will work backwards through the methods until the
efficiency ofremoval ofthe analyte from hops is examined. Any analyte binding that is discovered in
method investigations will most likely also occur in the hop cones themselves. Variations in solvents
extraction time or temperature and extraction techniques will be tested iflow extraction efficiencies are
encountered. Supercritical fluid or soxhlct extraction techniques arc examples ofstronger procedures
thatmay be investigated.
Analytical method revisions
Ifdegradation is the cause of analyte losses, traditional extraction methods will need no modification If
the cause of loss is due to extraction inefficiencies, development ofsuccessful methods for hops will'
focus on co-extractants. Selection of alternate solvents in the first extraction step may serve to reduce coextractants while still allowing analyte recovery. Performance ofcleanup procedures prior to the steps at
which compound losses occur may also prove successful. Working backwards through the methods
during loss investigations should result in asuccessful procedure. The method thus developed, while
satisfactory for this research, may be too cumbersome for regular use. Our understanding of hop-analyte
interactions should be sufficiently expanded during the course ofthis investigation to allow development
and testing ofacceptable methods under GLP standards for analysis oforyzalin, ethoprop and its M-l
metabolite, as well as insight into modifications that may be useful for successful adaptations ofmethods
of extraction for other analytes as well.
Xirne frame for specific objectives
We anticipate completion of all work and submission of adraft report, including analytical methods
within 6 months of fimding.
Budget
Salary (laboratory technician)
Material and Supplies
$7,000
$4,500
•Travel
$500
Total
$12,000
U.S. HOP PESTICIDE TOLERANCES
DOMESTIC REGISTRATIONS AND IMPORT TOLERANCES
Updated August 9, 1995 - For informational purposes only.
U.S. Hop Industry Plant Protection Committee
Contact Ann George, 509-453-4749
TYPE
TRADE NAME
COMMON NAME
EPA TOLERANCE DRY HOPS (DDtrrt
Registered for Domestic Use:
Acaricide
Propargite
Omite
30.00
Acaricide
Dicofol
Kelthane
30.00
Oxythioquinox
Morestan
* For use only on non-bearing and non-strung hops.
Acaricide
Insecticide
Diazinon
Insecticide
Imidacloprid
None*
0.75
Provado
*3.00
* Temporary tolerance to expire June, 1996. Proposed permanent tolerance of 6.0 p
should be finalized within a month by EPA.
Insecticide
Methyl Parathion
1.00
Insecticide
Malathion
1.00
Insecticide
Phorate
Rampart
0.50
Insecticide (worms)
Naled
Dibrom
0.50
Bifenthrin
Brigade*
German import to erance pending; anticipated Sept. or Oct. '95
Insecticide
10.00
Microbial
Bacillus
Insecticide (worms)
thuringiensus (kurstaki)
Pheromone (mite)
Trimethyl docecatriene Stirrup M
exempt
Fungicide
copper hydroxide & oxychloride
exempt
Fungicide
Metalaxyl
Dipel, Javelin
Ridomil
exempt
20.00
(2.00 spent)
Fungicide
Fosetyl-AI
Fungicide/Insecticide
Sulfur
Herbicide
Norflurazon
Solicam
3.00
Herbicide/Dessicant
Paraquat
Gramoxone
0.20
Herbicide
Trifluralin
Treflan
0.05
Dessicant/Defoliant
Endothall
Des-I-Cate
0.10
Growth Regulator
Gibberillic Acid
various
0.15
Aliette
45.00
exempt
page 1
105
TYPE
COMMON NAME
TRADE NAME
EPA TOLERANCE
DRY (ppm)
Section 18 Emergency Exemptions approved for 1995 crop year:
Acaricide
Abamectin
Agri-Mek
*
" Section 18 of FIFRA provides for an Emergency Exemption from tolerance while
a full registration and tolerance is being pursued.
Allowable negligible residues resulting from irrigation water
containing residues from applications near aquatic sites:
(NOTE: Direct application of these products to hop fields is not allowed )
Herbicide
2,4-D
1.00
Herbicide
Fluridone
0.10
Herbicide
Dalapon
Dowpon
0.20
Herbicide
Diquat
Reglone
0.02
Herbicide
Glyphosate
Roundup
0.10
loierances tor import purposes only (no domestic registration):
Fungicide
Triforine
Saprol
60.00
(60.00 spent)
Fungicide
Zineb
Insecticide
Cyfluthrin
Baythroid
Insecticide
Demeton
Systox
Insecticide
Ethyl Parathion
Insecticide
Disulfoton
Disyston
Insecticide
Lambda cyhalothrin
Karate
10.00
Insecticide
Methomyl
Lannate
12.00
Acaricide
Amitraz
Mitac
60.00
Acaricide
Cyhexatin
Plictran
90.00
Acaricide
Tetradifon
Tedion
120.00*
60.00
20.00
1.25
1.00
0.50
" EPA intends to revoke this tolerance in 1995
Herbicide
Dinoseb
0.10
page 2
106
August 9, 1995
Hop Pesticide Registration Efforts - Project Status
Provado/Confidor (imidacloprid): Insecticide (target - hop aphid; systemic activity). This
product is marketed under the trade name Confidor in Europe. Provado will be marketed to
the U.S. hop industry in 1995 and beyond.
Final data package was prepared by IR-4 and submitted to EPA 8/94. Germans received a
registration last spring. EPA approved a tolerance of 3.0 ppm to cover German imports 6/94;
expiration has been extended to 6/96. EPA published proposed tolerance of 6.0 ppm .with
Aug. 4, 1995 comment deadline; anticipate final tolerance to be published within a month and
registration approval shortly thereafter. This final tolerance would cover both domestic and
imported hops.
State Special Local Needs or 24(c) registrations have been granted for the 1995 growing
season in Washington, Oregon and Idaho. The use pattern includes a maximum of 2
applications per season, in order to comply with the 3.0 ppm tolerance (vs. the 6.0 ppm
tolerance which is supported by the IR-4 data, using 3 applications per season).
Additional systemic efficacy studies are being conducted during the 1995 growing season
(Keith Dorschner, IR-4 Study Director)
Aqri-Mek (abamectin); Acaricide (target -two spotted spider mite). Merck developed a new
rapid analytical method and reanalyzed samples previously analyzed at Oregon State
University. IR-4 submitted the data package to EPA in 9/94 asking for approval of a time
limited tolerance and conditional registration. EPA is ready to published the proposed time
limited tolerance, but has been asked by Merck to hold it up until the spent hop issue is
resolved. Section 18 Emergency Exemptions have been approved by EPA for all three states
allowing U.S. hop growers to use Agri-Mek in 1995.
New residue studies on dried and spent hops from 1994 are complete and the petition for the
permanent tolerance and full registration has been submitted to EPA by IR-4. The
independent third party validation of the analytical method has also.been submitted to EPA.
The German government approved a time-limited registration on 5/2/95 to allow German
growers to use the product in 1995. It will expire on 5/31/97, and will also allow U.S hops to
be shipped to Germany containing abamectin residues. (George Markle, IR-4 Study Director).
Baythroid (cyfluthrin): Insecticide (target - hop aphid). Complete data package was
submitted to EPA in January, 1992. EPA requested additional raw data documentation which
is being compiled by IR-4. (Keith Dorschner, IR-4 Study Director)
Briqade (bifenthrin); Insecticide (target - hop aphid). EPA published the final tolerance of
10.0 ppm in the May 25, 1994 Federal Register, and approved a Sec. 3registration on June 1
1995. FMC plans to petition EPA to revise the newly approved label to include aerial
application once they have a chance to review aerial efficacy data from the 1995 growing
S63S0n.
FMC submitted a revised petition to the German government in June, 1994 to request an
import tolerance; it has been recommended for approval by the appropriate German
Pesticide Project Status - page 1
107
government agencies and awaits a final vote by the German parliament, scheduled for Sept.
27, 1995. Anew Codex tolerance of 10.0 ppm was established for bifenthrin on hops in 1993
(Ken Samoil, IR-4 Study Director)
Cvqc-n (dimethoate); Insecticide (target -hop aphid; systemic activity). The final lab report
was submitted to IR-4 in February, 1995. It is currently under review. (Ken Samoil IR-4 Study
Director)
'
'
Lorsban (chlorpyrifos)- Insecticide (target -hop aphid). The data package and tolerance
petition have been completed by IR-4 and the manufacturer; currently in QA review at IR-4
D/rectori,0n t0 EPA W'" °CCUr UP°n COmpletion of the QA review- (Keitn Dorschner, IR-4 Study
Mavrik (fluvalirmte); Insecticide (target -hop aphid). The complete data package was
submitted to IR-4. IR-4 has determined that the storage stability data was too variable and
has requested that we repeat the entire project (including field plots). The USHIPPC has
placed this project "on hold" for the present time. (Keith Dorschner, IR-4 Study Director)
^7(?nm7\ ,Mitidde (tarQet" ^° Sp°tted Spider mite)- EPA aPproved Germany's request
due
to ADI
Ani^roh0JeranCHint,3/95N°ram ath3SEPA.
n° Plans t0 seek aUS- registration at this time
due to
problems and other concerns
w^Tr^T' tlnlecticide ^et -garden symphyllan). Field samples gathered in '91
ITJJc
5 e'racceptable
a9e' °SUrecoveries
V3lidated with
the analytical
methodweeks
for h°Ps.
but the WSDA
dplTn tw6t0,Ueobtain
it. After several
of additional
development work on the method with no progress, we have contacted the WSU Food and
Environmental Qual.ty Lab about working on this problem. Field plots in 1994 provided
ITudyDirlc^^ ** ^ ** ™^^ meth0d is 3Vailable' <Keith Dorschner, IRdentin lRhrXMKiS 7 f?nbutf|n "^ Acaricide (target -two spotted spider mite). Data was
wou dtak^i
d:term'ned
the pr0posed
tolerance
thoseberesidues
would
take up too large a^portion
of theirthat
reference
dose, and
askedbased
that theonstudv
XtnddW,t,? feWf aPpli^ations and a,on9er pre-ha^est interval. iR^rTpUSfflSrtudy in
h^WSDATlha^0r
Tk (?nIR-4t0 Study
$10'000)Sampl6S are Current'V be^ analyzed a
the
WSDA Lab. (Keith,hnlab
Dorschner,
Director)
2A£i Herbicide (target -broad leaf weed control). All data has been submitted to IR-4 No
rescues were detectable in the storage stability studies, which IR-4 feels may not be sufficient
EPA^totl
eHPe^a
h^"^lf the
3Sked
,R'is4 not
t0 pr°Ceed
With we
Submission
of the
**rt?"«
s to
IhhI
h,h
?th6y
d6CldeStudy
acceptable,
will
review
situation
and
decide whether to repeat the study. There is already a1.0 ppm tolerance for 24-D on hops
third
n? °? tCT co;tamination from irrigation water. Expect submission to EPA Sur^g9
third quarter'95. (Dan Kunkel, IR-4 Study Director)
G<?al fQXVfluorfrn)- Herbicide (target -broadleaf weeds). The final residue report was
submitted
to IR-4 in May, 1995. It is currently under review. (Dan i^R^^Dimc^
Round-Up (qlvpho^tP)- Herbicide (target -spot treatment of grasses &broadleaf weeds)
1991 samples were analyzed at Cornell University (Northeast Regional IR-4 Laboratory).
Pesticide Project Status - page 2
100
Storage stability studies had to be redone. These samples had to "age" in the freezer for the
same time period as the 1991 treated samples were stored before they were analyzed.
Additional samples were gathered in 1992 and shipped to Cornell. Recentfollow-up indicates
that the chemist who did Cornell's glyphosate analysis has departed, and due to a hiring freeze
in New York cannot be replaced at this time. Monsanto has agreed to finish analyzing the hop
project in July and August of this year.
(Edith Lurvey, IR-4 Study Director)
Surflan (oryzalin); Herbicide (target - grasses). Residue plots were established for the '94
growing season by Robert Parker; the IR-4 Leader Lab at Davis, CA is currently attempting to
develop an acceptable analytical method. We have approached the WSU Food and
Environmental Quality Lab about continuing developmental work on this method during the
next few months. Samples will be analyzed as soon as a method is available (Dan Kunkel
IR-4 Study Director)
PROJECTS TO SUPPORT REREGISTRATION-
Solicam (norflurazon); Herbicide (dormant treatment for weed control). Data package was
submitted to EPA in June, 1992. It had been held by EPA pending review of an animal
metabolism study. Although Section 24(c) registrations (State Special Local Needs) are in
place for Oregon, Washington and Idaho, the manufacturer hopes to use the new data to
reinstate a Sec. 3 (National) registration. It should be established by the end of 1995.
Dibrom (naled): Insecticide (target - Lepidoptera species). Residue data to support
reregistration was submitted to IR-4 in August, 1991; IR-4 has submitted the final data
package to EPA 12/94. Valent obtained 24(c) SLN registrations in WA, OR and ID for the
1995 growing season. (Bill Biehn, IR-4 Study Director)
Rampart (phorate); Insecticide (target - hop aphid; early spring treatment only). Residue
data to support reregistration was submitted to EPA in May, 1992. Additional data was
submitted in 12/93.
Methyl Parathion; Insecticide (target - hop aphid). Data package is complete and under
review; IR-4 anticipates submission to EPA during second quarter 1995. (Keith Dorschner IR-
4 Study Director)
filename: ushippc\status.wps
Pesticide Project Status - page 3
U.S. Hop Industry
103
Plant Protection Committee
A subcommittee of:
504 north ttaches Aven
Washington Hop Commission
Yakima. Washingtor
Oregon Hop Commission
Idaho Hop Commission
Telephone (509) 4;
Fax (509) 4'
Hop Growers of America
Ann E. George, Admin
June 26,1995
Anne E. Lindsay, Director
Policy and Special Projects Staff
Office of Pesticide Programs, 7501C
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 MStreet S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Anne;
We have received the 6/14/95 Federal Register notice which responds in part to the National Food
Processors Petition, and understand thatthe new policy will be adapted for individual crops. We appreciate
the fac: that the Agency is willing to implement the "ready to eat" approach to future regulatory actions.
The recent rumors of another potential hop reclassification have prompted numerous questions about our
status under the new policy from registrants, brewers, foreign hop producers, etc. Would it be possible to
obtain a memo from an appropriate individual in the Agency outlining the impact of this new policy on hops?
If such a memo could address residue data requirements under the new poiicy, itwould be most helpful.
Does it appear that EPA will be able to apply standard hydration and dilution factors to dried hop data, in
order to calculate assumed residue levels on fresh hops and in beer? Will residue data or processing
studies be required on any form ofthe crop other than dried hops?
Thank you for your efforts to minimize the impact of this new policy on oarr-esearch and registration support
program. We look forward to continuing our work with the Agency as we seek improved plant protection
programs for hops.
SinceteJy,
ton E. George
^
/J
Administrator
cc/
IR-4 Headquarters
Patrick Leavy
U.S. Hop Industry Plant Protection Committee
Senator Slade Gorton
Senator Mark Hatfield
Hoyt Jamerson
LeesVerstandig
William Bryant
110
KEHt-U'.'iVH
8100027
XFP2L PETITIOH RESPOHSB
BACKGROUND
EPA regulates pesticide residues in foods under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as well as under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The FFDCA gives EPA the authority to set legally
enforceable limits, or tolerances, for pesticide residues in food. EPA sets tolerances for
pesticide residues remaining-in raw foods under section 408 of the FFDCA. Under
section 409 of FFDCA, EPA sets a food additive regulation (FAR) for pesticide residues
in processed foods (1) where the residues result from application of the pesticide to the
raw crop and the residues can exceed the applicable raw food tolerance, or (2) where the
residues are the result of pesticide application during or after food processing- Section
409 also contains the Delaney clause which prohibits EPA from establishing regulations
to cover residues of carcinogens in processed food or feed.
EPA's interpretation of the Delaney clause as not applying to de minimis cancer
risks was rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Les v. Reillv (July 1992).
Subsequently, EPA has taken several actions consistent with the court's interpretation of
the Delaney clause.
Recently, EPA agreed to a court settlement that requires EPA to make decisions
over the next 10 years concerning certain tolerances that may be affected by the Delaney
clause and various related policy matters. The first decision required under the
settlement is on a petition filed by the National Food Processors Association (NFPA).
NFPA PETITION
On September 11,1992, NFPA filed'a petition with EPA which challenged a
number of policies under which EPA administers its tolerance-setting program. The
Agency responded with a Federal Register notice soliciting comments on many complex
issues involved with the Delaney clause. EPA has not reached a decision on the
coordination policy. EPA, however, has made decisions regarding the concentration
policy and the interpretation of the term "ready to eat". The Agency's response to these
two policy issues published in the Federal Register.
• Concentration policy
Under Section 409 of the FFDCA, an FAR is needed if the pesticide residues
from the raw agricultural commodity concentrate in the processed food form above the
raw food tolerance. How EPA decides whether there is sufficient evidence of
concentration to require establishing a 409 FAR, is therefore important in determining
whether or not the Delaney clause applies to many processed food forms.
In deciding whether residues concentrate enough to warrant a FAR, EPA will
place primary emphasis on whether processing studies show that the processing of a u
commodity results in alevel of residues in the processed food which ts greater than the
level of residues in the raw food. However, EPA believes that modifications should be
made to the concentration policy so that it is a better predictor of the livelihood that
residues in processed food may exceed the applicable section 408 tolerance. EPA will
also consider variability of the analytical method, degree of rounding involved in
establishing the section 408 tolerances, information concerning blending of crops, and
average field trial values.
. ^FAriY TO FAT r*TF> POLICY
EPA currently takes abroad interpretation of the term "ready to eat' such that
most processed foods, both for humans and animals, are considered "ready to eat . EPA
£moSta policy- ;o use acommon sense interpretation of "ready to eat'. Food will
be coSred ready-to-eat only if it can be consumed without further preparation. For
instance, potato chips are ready to eat and mint oil is not ready to eat.
If EPA finds that aprocessed food form is not ready to eat, then asection 409
FAR would not be needed for that form and the Delaney clause would not apply.
There are however, examples of human foods or animal feeds for which this
interpretation is not readily and easily applied. For example certain animal feeds are
inertly mixed'with other feed types and would not be considered ready to eat when
noSTor some feeds, mbdng might be the norm, but the feed could nonetheless
be eaten by itself. EPA will decide such ambiguous questions on acase by case basis.
Finally, having essentially created anew class of food/feed - that which is
processed but not ready to eat - EPA is also announcing its intention to establish
l^ctfor
these
food/feed
forms
under
section
701
of
the
FFDC£Th«*
*™
would be consistent with use of the pesticide in accordance with the FIFRA label and
with the raw crop having residues within the section 408 tolerance.
APPLICATION OF POLICIES
These policy modifications do not immediately impact any specific pesticides or crops. -
EPA win b^ Sing these policies to guide its decisions as it implements the Delaney
Sule according to the timetable of the court settlement. There will be opportunities to
tZn^ZZ other information relevant to the application of these policies to
individual pesticides and crops.
112
U.S. Hop Industry
Plant Protection Committee
A subcommittee of:
504 north Naches Avenue, #11
Washington Hop Commission
Oregon Hop Commission
Idaho Hop Commission
Yakima, Washington 98901
Telephone (509) 453-4749
Fax (509) 457-8561
Hop Growers of America
Ann E. George, Administrator
August 10, 1995
TO: Hop Research Council.
council
FROM: Ann George
3
RE: USHIPPC and International Harmonization Update
The attached packet ofinformation will provide you with:
♦ Updated pesticide registration and tolerance list
♦
♦
Current project status report for pesticide registration efforts
Our letter to EPA requesting clarification of the status of hops under their new
classification scheme
♦
An executive summary which outlines EPA's new classification policy
DOMESTIC PRn.lFPT.^
1. Savey Residue 8turjy -1995 trials in WA, OR and ID will provide treated samples for
analysis by the manufacturer, Gowan. We are also conducting efficacy trials in the
three states under standardized protocols (second year in OR, first year in WA and ID).
2- Briqade/bifenthrin Aerial Ffficar.y -1995 trials are underway in WA and OR. The
manufacturer intends to pursue the addition of aerial application to the label for hops if
the efficacy data is acceptable (to be effective in 1996).
3. Laboratory Status -Two projects are currently being analyzed: Roundup/glyphosate
(at Monsanto) and Vendex/hexakis (at the WSDA Lab, Yakima). Two additional projects
do not have acceptable analytical methods (Mocap/ethoprop and Surflan/oryzalin). The
WSU Food and Environmental Quality Lab, Richland, has proppsed a project to
complete method development for these two compounds.
4. EPA Status - Two projects are progressing toward issuance ofa tolerance and
registration. The proposed tolerance for Provado/imidacloprid was published in the
Federal Register last month; comment period ended Aug. 4 with no comments, so EPA
expects the final tolerance to be issued within a month at 6.0 ppm (current temporary
tolerance is 3.0 ppm). The full registration can then be issued.
EPA is ready to publish the proposed time-limited tolerance for AgriMek/abamectin, but
has been asked by Merck to wait for resolution of the spent hops issue. This is expected
pagel
113
to occur within the next month. Once the time-limited tolerance is issued a conditional
registration can be approved. IR-4 has also submitted the second data package which
will support the full tolerance and registration. EPA will begin reviewing this data
immediately.
See the attached status sheet for additional information and other compounds.
The USHIPPC is currently reviewing potential residue and efficacy studies for 1996, and
attempting to determine what compounds will best fit the "holes" that remain in our plant
protection program.
INTERNATIONAL PROJECTS
We have been successful in laying the groundwork for a number of actions, which
should allow the International Harmonization program to make major progress. We were
successful in getting all the involved parties (governments and manufacturers) to move
ahead on the AgriMek/abamectin approval in Germany for 1995, harmonizing the US
and Germany on this compound. However, the German parliament did not take final
action on the Brigade/bifenthrin import tolerance priorto adjourning for summer recess.
It has been recommended for approval by all of the necessary government agencies,
and is currently scheduled for a vote by the upper house on September 27.
The International Hop Chemical Residue Standards Database Manual was completed
and distributed to International Harmonization Task Force members. Periodic updates
will be provided as new information becomes available.
We continue to seek opportunities to work with other hop producing countries in a
coordinated fashion on these issues.
OTHER PROJECTS AND ISSUES
The Northwest Minor Crops Symposium is August 22-24, with an excellentturnout
anticipated. The hop growing and harvesting portion of the tour will be held in the
Prosser area on Aug. 22, with warehousing and pelleting featured on Aug. 23. We will
also have a presentation on the use of hops in brewing by Bert Grant on the evening of
Aug. 23, as we enjoy dinner and beverages at Grant's Pub.
In an effort to reach additional EPA staff members that are unable to attend the Minor
Crop tour, we held two on-site seminars at EPA in Washington, D.C. last spring. Aonehour session on hop growing and harvesting was provided on March 20 to approximately
40 individuals.
I provided a report on the hop industry's plant protection research and international
harmonization programs to the American Society of Brewing Chemists during their 1995
symposium in San Diego on April 9.
page 2
114
EXTENSION SERVICE
Marion County Office
Oregon State University
Marion County Health and Service Building
3180 Center Street NE, Room 1361 • Salem, Oregon 97301
Telephone 503-588-5301 Fax 503-585-4940
May 31, 1995
TO:
Oregon Hop Growers & Industry Reps.
FROM:
Gale Gingrich
Extension Agent, Field Crops
RE:
Hop Petiole Sampling to Determine Nitrogen Needs
As most of you are aware, Dr. Neil Christensen, OSU Soil Scientist, has recently done some
survey and research work on Nuptake and utilization on several area hop yards. The results
of his work have helped determine the response of the hop plant and cone yields relating to
nitrate (N03-N) in the plant petioles. Most of you have seen the results of his past two
year's research.
In an effort to assist growers more efficiently to manage their nitrogen application programs,
he and Dr. John Hart, OSU Extension Soil Scientist, have developed the enclosed guidelines
for taking petiole samples and using N03-N test results to determine whether additional
nitrogen is required for optimum hop yields. I think this information may be helpful in
planning your final nitrogen application without sacrificing yield.
If you have questions about this information, please call any one of the three of us. Neil's
number is 737-5733, John's is 737-5714, and mine is at the top of the page.
One final note. I would like to thank each of the growers who allowed us to put the
fertilizer plots in their hop yards the past couple years. We appreciate your cooperation and
patience with any inconvenience the plots caused. Your cooperation has helped make it
possible to get a good look at the effect various nitrogen rates have on yields and helped
provide information needed to more efficiently apply plant nutrients.
ORCGONSTAT* UNIVERSITY
_r wvEXTENSION A8nculturc> Home Economics, 4-H Youth, Forestry, Community Develop-
/_2,Xy SPRV/irP mC"r' Encr8y' and Extension Sea Grant Programs, Oregon State University,
•acrwiV-C United States Department of Agriculture, and Oregon counties cooperating.
The Extension Service offers its programs and materials equally to all people.
115
Directions for collecting and handling hop tissue samples
Sample collection
Collect tissue samples when hops are between %of the way to the wire and just reaching
the wire. This stage of growth generally occurs by mid June in the Willamette
Valley.
One sample per yard is adequate if field conditions and yield are uniform.
Multiple samples may be needed if the yard is over 20 acres.
Take 30 to 40 petioles randomly across the yard in a "W" or "Z" pattern.
Choose petioles from mature leaves on the main vine, 5 to 6 feet from the
ground.
Don't collect petioles from obviously different areas such as weak, weedy or diseased
areas, different soil types, low spots or different rotations.
Do not mix varieties in a sample.
Don't allow clothing to contact sap from petioles. The sap will stain clothing!
Sample handling
Put samples in paper bags for mailing to a laboratory.
Label each bag with the yard name, number or identification code.
Do not put hop petiole samples in unvented plastic bags for shipping as the samples may
mold in transit.
Avoid shipping after mid week as samples may sit over the weekend before delivery.
Laboratory analyses
Request analysis for nitrate nitrogen, N03-N.
Check with the laboratory where your samples will be sent for payment and shipping
instructions.
Several laboratories are able to analyze hop petioles for N03-N.
OSU Central Analytical Laboratory, 3017 Ag &Life Sciences Building, Oregon State
University, Corvallis, OR 97331-7306. (However the OSU Central Analytical
Laboratory may not provide results in less than one week.)
The closest commercial laboratory in Oregon that can provide rapid analyses ofhop
petioles is AgriCheck, P. O. Box 1350, Umatilla, OR 97882.
Several laboratories in adjacent states can analyze petioles for N03-N. Check with
your county Extension Service office for name and addresses.
Prepared by John Hart and Neil Christensn, OSU Dept. ofCrop and Soil Science and Gale Gingrich, OSU Extension Service, Marion
County
116
Interpretation of laboratory data
Laboratory results should be provided in parts per million (ppm) of NO3-N in the dry hop
petioles.
Small-scale N rate experiments and large-scale field demonstrations have shown no yield
increase to additional fertilizer when petioles contain more than 4,000 ppm N03-N in
June.
To determine nitrogen fertilizer needs, compare your laboratory results with figure 1.
If the ppm NO3-N for the date sampled is in the "Excessive" range, do not apply
additional nitrogen fertilizer.
If the ppm N03-N for the date sampled is in the "Adequate" range, additional
nitrogen fertilizer will generally not increase cone yield.
If the ppm N03-N for the date sampled is in the "Deficient" range, apply 50 lb N/a.
l-T.WWW
E
Q.
12,000
a.
[Excessive
10,000
CO
0
8,000
z
Adequate
6,000
0
Q)
Q.
Q.
O
4,000
2,000
Deficient
X
1
1
4
1
11
1
18 25
June
Figure 1.
1
1
1
2
9
1
1
1
16 23 30
July
1
6
1
1
1
13 20 27
August
Critical Nutrient Ranges (CNR) for nitrate-nitrogen concentrations
in leaf petioles of 'Willamette' and "Nugget' hop plants. CNRs are
based on season-long sampling of petioles in six small-plot and
seven field-scale nitrogen fertilizer rate studies in the Willamette
Valley during 1993 and 1994 growing seasons.
117
W.L. BRYANT CO.
International Affairs Management
A Confidential Report For The US Hop Industry Plant Protection Committee
August 1995
WLBCo. Delivers Hop Database to Industry
In June, W.L. Bryant Co. delivered
the hard copy and computer disks for the
USHIPPC
International
Database.
The
hard copy includes information on eleven
countries and numerous chemicals. It also
provides comparative analysis on eleven
country combinations. In addition to being
able to access information by country,
chemical or a combination of both chemical
with information on W.L. Bryant Co.
activities. The publishing of this database
represents over eighteen months of
research and development by WLBCo.
In August the first update will be
released to the industry. This update will
include a completely new chapter on Korea
along with more minor changes to other
country chapters.
and country, the database also provides a
chart outlining the US industry's
international registration priorities and
detailed
notes
on
the
status
of
US
international registrations. These notes are
regularly updated and provide the industry
Codex Tolerance for Diazinon Underway
The
WLBCo.
and
USHIPPC,
working with the Codex Joint Meeting on
Pesticide Residues (JMPR) staff director
Bill
Murray,
with
Ciba-Geigy
(Switzerland), and with the US delegation
to the JMPR secured a review of diazinon
on hops. While the tolerance still needs to
make its way through the Codex approval
process before being accepted as an inter
national standard, it is anticipated that
Codex will establish a tolerance for diazi
non of 0.50 ppm.
Establishing a Codex tolerance for
diazinon sets an important precedent for the
European Union to use in its chemical ap
authority to establish a harmonized level.
If Codex were to establish an in
ternational level, it might give the Euro
pean Commission the justification it needs
to proceed with a European tolerance in the
absence of an EU member state registra
tion.
WLBCo. priorities for 1995-96 in
clude continued monitoring of the diazinon
tolerance through the Codex approval pro
cess and continuing to work with CibaGeigy, US and European officials in sup
port of an EU maximum residue level of at
least 0.50 ppm for diazinon on hops.
proval process. USHIPPC is workingto es
tablish a European Union tolerance for the
hop/diazinon combination because diazinon
no longerhas an unofficial import tolerance
in Germany. Because diazinon/hops is not
registered in any member state, the Euro
pean Commission does not feel it has the
inside...
WLBCo. Delivers Hop Database to Industry (page 1) Codex Diazinon Review (page 1)
German Residue Tolerances (page 2) Australian Standards Monitored (page 2)
EU Standards Pending (page 2) International Hop Co-op (page3)
Aliette to be Requested for Codex Review (page 4)
Korea Revises Chemical Standards (page 4)
118
German Residue
EU
Tolerances Tentatively
Standards Still Pending
Secured
Throughout 1994-95, W.L. Bryant Co.
worked with US and European authorities in both
W.L. Bryant Co., chemical manufac
turers, German industry representatives, Dr.
Maximum
Residue
Washington, DC and Brussels to secure European
Union maximum residue levels for diazinon,
abamectin, bifenthrin, dicofol, fosetyl-al,
with US and German officials to secure bifenpropargite and paraquat. Other chemicals of
thrin, imidacloprid and abamectin tolerances in
interest include dimethoate, fenbutatin oxide and
Germany in time for the 1995 season. In the fall
ethoprop.
of 1994, and as recently as the spring of 1995,
It had been anticipated that draft levels on
assurances were made that these tolerances
these substances would have been issued by the
would be established by May. The deadline was
European Commission by the late winter or early
then moved to July. Consideration of the final
spring of 1995.
levels has now been postponed until September
W.L. Bryant Co. has been working
27.
closely with the US Mission to the European
It is anticipated that a tolerance of 2.00
Union, European Commission officials, and with
ppm will be set for imidacloprid; a provisional
manufacturers to ensure the necessary data was
tolerance of 0.05 ppm will be set for abamectin;
provided for evaluation and that maximum residue
and that an import tolerance of 10.00 ppm will
levels for hops were being considered.
be set for bifenthrin. W.L. Bryant Co. is work
Unfortunately, despite repeated requests, the
ing very closely with the US Embassy in Bonn
European Commission has not provided any
on these issues. WLBCo. is also working to en
information or updates on these chemical issues
sure that the US Mission to the European Union
since April. On August 8, the US Mission to the
in Brussels is aware of the pending German
EU notified WLBCo. that a response by the
standards.
Commission would be forthcoming by September.
In 1995-96 WLBCo. will work to en
It appears they are far behind schedule.
sure the German standards for these three chem
Based on Bill Bryant's meetings in
icals are used as precedent for the establishment
Brussels in January and on subsequent
correspondence and conversations, it appears that
acceptable maximum residue levels for dicofol
WLBCo. Monitors
(Kelthane), fosetyl-al (Aliette), and propargite
(Omite) are on schedule.
Australian Standards
The FMC Corporation remains confident
Klaus Zastrow and the USHIPPC all worked
Over the last several months Australia has
that the Commission will establish a maximum
been adjusting many of its chemical residue and
residue tolerance for bifenthrin. However, this
labeling standards. W.L. Bryant Co. has requested
copies ofthese proposed revisions. Most would not
affect US hop exports. However, Australia has
announced maximum residue levels for cyfluthrin
(Baythroid) that did not include a tolerance for
hops. On July 31, WLBCo. requested that the
Australian government include hops on the list of
products for which Baythroid is approved.
WLBCo. is working through the USDA's Office
of Food Safety and Technical Services to
communicate this request and will continue
monitoring changes in Australian regulations.
tolerance level was to have been discussed in
November of 1994. Consideration was delayed
until March 15, 1995 when it was held over until
June. The provisional approval for bifenthrin in
the United Kingdom (which expires in 1997) and
the pending import tolerance in Germany (10.00
ppm) could possibly be sufficient grounds for the
Commission and the member states to establish a
harmonized level consistent with Codex (10.00
ppm). However, the absence of a full registration
in any member state could be a barrier to the
establishment of a hop
(Continued on page S)
119
f|||l|||||!ji{
(Continuedfrom page 2)
International
(EU Residue Standards)
Cooperation a Goal for
standard.
Extensive work is continuing in order to
1995-96
secure an EU maximum residue level on diazinon.
The problem is that the Commission is unsure
whether it has the authority to establish a
harmonized
level
without
a
member
state
registration. W.L. Bryant Co. has been working
directly with the US EPA and the European
Commission to determine how import tolerances
could be established in the EU. If a commercially
acceptable level for diazinon is established an
important precedent would be set.
W.L Bryant Co. has been working with
Merck to secure a European Union maximum
residue level for abamectin on hops. The
establishment of provisional tolerances in
Germany and the US should assist these efforts. In
November, a proposed EU level of 0.02 ppm was
published. In January, when Bill Bryant met with
Michael Walsh of the European Commission,
concern about establishing tolerances for
abamectinon too many products was expressed by
Commission staff. The 0.02 ppm proposal was
discussed in this meeting with Mr. Walsh. Bill
Bryant requested that the final level be consistent
with what was being considered in the US and
Germany. Merck subsequently followed up with
the Commission supporting industry's request.
In 1995-96, W.L. Bryant Co. will work to
m
Since beginning the international
registration project, W.L. Bryant Co. has been
its
working with USHIPPC members,
manufacturers, US officials in Washington
and overseas, and with representatives of
foreign governments to secure specific
chemical residue standards. A great deal of
groundwork has been laid, and there have been
a few successes.
An international diazinon tolerance, a
key to acceptance in EU and Asian export
markets, is now working its way through the
Codex review process as a direct result of
WLBCo. efforts. Severalpeople in the public
and private sectors have worked to secure
German tolerances for bifenthrin,
imidacloprid, abamectin. It is hoped that the
EU will soon announce residue levels for these
and other chemicals.
It is hoped that the EU will soon
announce several maximum residue levels on
which the USHIPPC has been working.
The effort to secure residue levels for
specific chemicals has been an effective and
fosetyl-al and propargite will be established.
WLBCo. will also continue to encourage
necessarily defensive (and at times, stopgap)
effort. However, for the long term, efforts
should be focused not only on securing
specific tolerances, but on changing policies
and systems so that tolerances are easier to
German and UK support for EU tolerances for
obtain.
ensure that maximum residue levels for dicofol,
abamectin
and
bifenthrin.
Efforts
will
also
continue to solicit German, British and Spanish
There are three institutional changes
that need to be made. First, the EU needs to
support for an EU tolerance, or import tolerance,
have a mechanism for establishing import
for diazinon.
tolerances. Second, the EU and US need to
accept each other's data packages as
equivalent, or harmonize data requirements.
Finally, the Codex residue setting system
needs to be streamlined.
WLBCo., on behalf of USHIPPC, has
lift1!!;!"
already begun to work on these issues.
iiiil till
However, a successful effort will require
till!
support from all the major hop producers and
traders. In some cases success will require
support from other agricultural organizations.
(Continued on page 4)
120
Codex Consideration of
(Continued from page 3)
(International Co-op)
The US, UK and German hop industries,
working together on a complimentary set of
Aliette to be Requested
In the fall of 1994, WLBCo. began working
with the US Delegation to the Codex to request a
credibility than would individual efforts.
maximum residue level for Aliette on hops be
In January, Peter Glendinning (UK) and established. The request was delayed one year at the
priorities, would have more influence and
Bill Bryant met in London to discuss working
request of Rhone Poulenc. Both the US and
together to secure maximum residue levels of
mterest to both industries, and also to work for
Germany needto work with Rhone Poulencthis fall
to ensure the data will be provided, and. with their
some institutional change. Mr. Glendinning
formalized notes from this discussion in a
respective governments to ensure the appropriate
requests will bemade. This will bea priority project
memorandum in March that was forwarded to
for 1995-96.
USHIPPC, and W.L. Bryant Co. followed up in
May with a proposal for US,UK, and German
cooperation. That proposal is still under
USHIPPC consideration.
WLBCo. believes that cooperation is
, essential to accomplishing USHPPIC's short-,
near- and long-term goals. This cooperation is
integral to the USHIPPC's short term goals,
such as securing bifenthrin and diazinon
tolerances in the EU. The US request for a
bifenthrin tolerance needs Britain's support to
succeed. The diazinon tolerance would also
move closer to reality if it had written support
from Germany.
This ad hoc committee would address
the USHIPPC's immediate and near term goals
of increasing the distribution of accurate
information. If approved by USHIPPC, the
database could become a more collaborative and
international effort.
Importantly, the proposed international
committee could be a more effective and
authoritative voice for institutionalchange. This
New Korean Standards
Under Review
Since October 1993, W.L. Bryant Co. has
been working with US officials to ensure hops were
included in an ongoing Korean review of its
chemical residue standards. Inearlier drafts methyl
parathion andpropargite were proposed at below
commercially feasible standards. In June and July
new tolerances were announced. Korea accepted
the USHIPPC request on both of these chemicals.
However, diazinon and dicofol are well below the
USHIPPC and Codex levels. Levels for phorate
and cyfluthrin on hops were not established at all.
WLBCo. has already issued a request, on behalfof
the USHIPPC, to have Korea reconsider its levels
for diazinon, dicofol, phorate and cyfluthrin.
This information will be included in a new
chapter update in the WLBCo. database to be
released in late August.
would help move the industry away from
spending significant efforts on one or two
chemicals each year, and toward a system where
it is easier to get the necessary registrations.
W.L. BRYANT CO.
International Affairs Management
999 Third Avenue, Suite 1060A
Seattle, WA 98104
mmmm
121
U.K. HOP GROWERS PRODUCE 9.7 MILLION LBS. ON 7,749 ACRES IN 1994
U.K. hop production in 1994 totaled 9.7 million pounds, a 19% reduction compared to the 1993
crop of 12.0 million pounds. The country's top producing varieties (in the seeded category) were Target
at 4.1 million lbs., followed by Golding with production of 1.1 million lbs. and Challenger at 1.09 million
lbs. Last years hop acreage decreased by 5% to a levelof 7,749 acres.
With regards to '94alpha acid production, the U.K. produced 786,099 lbs., a decrease of 26% from
the 1.1 million lbs. produced in 1993. The U.K.'s best producing bitter type hop in 1994 was the seedless
version of the Target variety at 10.8% alpha.
1994 English Hop Crop
Varietv
1
Total
Production
Yields
Alpha
Total Alpha
Alpha Yields
Acres
(1.000 lbs.1
lbs/acrel
Acid (%)
Acid fibs'*
(lbs/acre>
SEEDED HOPS
Northdown
658
719
1,093
6.8
48,925
74
2,983
4,114
1,379
10.1
415,485
139
Yeoman
143
186
1,299
10.2
18,958
133
Challenger
858
1,099
1,280
6.8
74,717
87
Golding
835
1,105
1,324
4.6
50,834
61
Fuggle
715
758
1,061
4.0
30,331
42
Progress
333
310
932
5.4
16,744
50
WGV
175
185
1,061
5.9
10,939
63
Bramling Cross
107
139
1,294
6.4
8,882
83
Northern Brewer
15
14
990
8.3
1,199
82
Omega
7
9
1,175
9.3
809
109
6,935
8,685
1,252
7.9
682,954
Northdown S/L
268
298
1,112
8.3
24,703
92
Target S/L
499
682
1,365
10.8
73,621
147
39
49
1,281
7.4
3,655
95
Omega S/L
2
2
892
7.6
134
68
Zenith S/L
1
11
1.657
2J3
LQ22
142
814
1,042
1,279
9.9
103,145
127
GRAND TOTAL 1994
7,749
9,727
1,255
8.1
786,099
101
GRAND TOTAL 1993
8,154
12,007
1,472
8.9
1,065.063
146
% Difference
-5.0%
-19.0%
-14.8%
-8.9%
-26.2%
-30.7%
Target
Others
m
Total Seeded
4M
48.
98
SEEDLESS
Challenger S/L
Total Seedless
Source: Reproduced from theInstitute of Brewing's publication 'Ferment' - February
1995.
ATTENTION U.5. HOP GROWERS Don't fo rget to watch your mail
for the 1995 Sold Ahead Survey
We neec1your
participation !
publ. in Hop Growers of America Bui. Hops USA Nr. 478: Feb. 28, 1995
P
p^
1
Uffl-^Hm
WVi-Mkim.
P
IMtti ' _
S\VM (X CAVH )NI) [X] M/K-Ub
.4
BS
KM •
\X\
B63
•
(GERMAN)
[X]
vtx^s
H
T3
"•"
HI
p
Ma/55
MeH
R
r-,
Wv
"
P
|
£
| (f
•—
umvi
U<r:mM..\.<H.illitiiiiUi|i
KM*
IMUJNATION
on_\ •
l(,~,-i.„iii..n-„l ,k \l,Ui. Cv,J, . ,,<!.. .1 ,
\\VF.T\ma-T
II/65»I2
"b"'*5'
1/611 fgZ7/5Z'2KI
PROGRESS
P
[xj
i-astnm-.j.c^jkv; [xj o«Z2 ® WGV|xj <•*
Wt Northdown
Ha/57
BGI
VWeChaijenc^r
^P
• ty5V2
Kvl
•
ZATTIJKWRim' [X] ^n*,™
R
P.
H
TO J-X^67X2 I K.1N(
•
ro
PO
NBDMEX ^JOrENPlXiJNATKXM HVrVSHMMHtfx'oVN l\X 1JNVIION
(AMERICAN)
ZATTLERV_WTY[x] «EN POUJNATION
CERMAN)
•
Northern BrevverB g^ff^ffk
B
1790
(ANTEWlWa-13INC[gOB21
0
Wa*
tfHiiVW
5^
BREWERSGOLD rS()YHC>UJK»NlAN)
WYE SAM >N
Bramumg Cross ixj 1*3*2
(AMIIRKAN)
WAMIJNO [xj MANrniHAN W1U1MAIJ
i < Nsm
(KIN l\ XJJNATK IN [xj l« 1J XIN
(AMUUAN)
i960
NlXFI J1ST1 A1H.VST. IKEX XX K WOCH),KlINT
P MA\rilW.-V\\\1IJ)l-KM,MJ-. [Xi (n-lMtlJiNATKlN
I1JJ.11 k XVI•.:(M&05I^
MORRIS HAISfBURyj^O<a(^LEMAyiTn
ISSl il J >i<S
ThE rMENT)^GEOFENGUSHrtoP¥LRIEnES
123
HOPUNION USA
i'O
GROWER
BC'< W.97 •
'••AKIM-'.
DEALER
INC.
PROCESSOR
','ASHH
April 20, 1995
FIVE NEW ENGLISH HOP VARIETIES
Dr. Alfred Haunold
Oregon State University
Crop Science Department
Corvallis, Oregon 97331
Dear Al:
As promised, these are the data sheets for the new varieties released from Wve
College.
Once again my thanks for sending the Golding roots to David Grinnell at Boston
Beer.
Yours sincerely,
HOPUNION U.S.A., INC.
Gregory K. Lewis
EHP
ENGLISH ADMIRAL
Pedigree
Grand-daughter ofWye Challenger.
Maturity
Mid-late season.
Yie,d
Jl / \
29-42 zentners/hectare. ( 12 CJ3- - / ^7^~ MsA
J
Growth Habit
Vigorous, untidy.
Disease Reaction
Moderate resistance to Verticillium Wilt and Downy
Mildew.
Pickability
Easy to pick.
Drying/Packing
Cone Structure
Small, dense cones.
vt
125
Quality:
Lupulin
Aroma
Alpha-acid
11.5-14.5% w/w.
Beta-acid
5.0-6.1% w/w.
Co-Humulone
42-44% of alpha-acid.
Storageability
Moderate.
Total Oil
1.2-1.7 mls/100 grams.
Myrcene
39-48% of whole oil.
Humulene
23-26% of whole oil.
Caryophyllene
7% of whole oil.
Farnesene
2% of whole oil.
General Trade Perception
Admiral is seen as a replacement to Wye Target.
Other Information
The code number of this varietyis RH 40. Admiral
has been adopted as its name - subject to final
approval.
EHP
ENGLISH FIRST GOLD
Pedigree
Seedling ofWGV. Male parent has Golding
on pedigree.
Maturity
Mid-season.
Yield
26-38 zentners/hectare. (ljfc " MlfJ/jL
Growth Habit
Dwarf. Short laterals. Very well hopped down.
Disease Reaction
Resistant to Powdery Mildew. Moderate resistance to
Verticillium Wilt. Susceptible to Downy Mildew.
Pickability
Satisfactory.
Drying/Packing
Cone Structure
Good size firm cones.
\
127
Quality:
Lupulin
Aroma
Similar to Goldings
Alpha-acid
7.0-8.5% w/w.
Beta-acid
3.2-4.1% w/w.
Co-Humulone
31-36% of alpha-acid.
Storageability
Very good.
Total Oil
0.7-1.3 mls/100 grams.
Myrcene
27-28% of whole oil.
Humulene
20-24% of whole oil.
Caryophyllene
6-7% of whole oil.
Farnesene
3% of whole oil.
General Trade Perception
First Gold is the first "commercial" dwarfvariety to
be released with Herald and is seen as an aroma
varietysimilar to Goldings.
Other Information
The codenumber of this variety is S4. First Gold has
been adopted as its name - subject to final approval.
128
EHP
ENGLISH HERALD
Pedigree
Mostly breeding lines from Wye Omega. Distantly
related to Wye Yeoman and sister of Pioneer.
Maturity
Early season.
22-30 zentners/hectare. f 9<fC " Jo^C Jfo/«
Growth Habit
Dwarf. Very short laterals. Tendency towards yellow
leaves.
Disease Reaction
High resistance toVerticillium Wilt. Resistance to
Powdery Mildew. Some resistance to Downy Mildew.
Pickability
Satisfactory.
Drying/Packing
Cone Structure
Large heavy coarse cones.
129
Quality:
Lupulin
Aroma
Alpha-acid
11.1-12.3% w/w.
Beta-acid
4.8-5.5% w/w.
Co-Humulone
36-40% of alpha-acid.
Storageability
Total Oil
1.0-1.9 mis/100 grams.
Myrcene
32-39% of whole oil.
Humulene
18-22% of whole oil.
Caryophyllene
7-8% of whole oil.
Farnesene
Trace.
General Trade Perception
A new dwarf variety with low alpha-acid content and
good aroma.
Other Information
The code number of this variety is W8. Herald has
been adopted as its name - subject to final approval.
130
EHP
ENGLISH PHOENIX
Pedigree
Seedling of WyeYeoman.
Maturity
Early season.
Yield
.;•
22-35 zentners/hectare. / tffo " /»f^- //s/*)
• \?»-'"•••_
i'^1jig9 &£o
Growth Habit
•
Notvigorous with only slight head. Exceptionally well
hopped down.
M
m
it *
^j
«L-*
B?f
^3&
•f^
Disease Reaction
•
Highly resistant to Verticillium Wilt. Resistant to
_
Powdery Mildew. Susceptible to Downy Mildew.
Pickability
jM^
VjUUUi
Drying/Packing
1
Cone Structure
f
Light open fluffy cones.
131
Quality:
Lupulin
Aroma
Similar to Wye Challenger
Alpha-acid
8.00-11.5% w/w.
Beta-acid
4.2-6.0% w/w.
Co-Humulone
29-33% of alpha-acid.
Storageability
Verygood.
Total Oil
1.3-3.4 mis/100 grams.
Myrcene
24-32% of whole oil.
Humulene
25-32% of whole oil.
Caryophyllene
8-10% of whole oil.
Farnesene
1-2% of whole oil.
General Trade Perception
Phoenix is seen as a replacement to Wye Challenger.
Other Information
The code number of this varietyis TC 105. Phoenix
has been adopted as its name - subjectto final
approval.
132
EHP
ENGLISH PIONEER
Pedigree
Mostly breedinglines from Wye Omega. Distantly
related to WyeYeoman and sister of Herald.
Maturity
Mid to late season.
Yield
r
.
26-34 zentners/hectare. (l/Cc ^ /$/7 /J>s I<z )
Growth Habit
Semi-dwarf to 13 foot high.
Disease Reaction
Resistant to Powdery Mildew. Moderate resistance to
Verticillium Wilt and Downy Mildew.
Pickability
Easy.
Drying/Packing
Cone Structure
Firm round cones.
133
Quality:
Lupulin
Aroma
Alpha-acid
8-10% w/w.
Beta-acid
3.5-4.0% w/w.
Co-Humulone
36-40% of alpha-acid.
Storageability
Total Oil
1.0-1.8 mis/100 grams.
Myrcene
31-36% of whole oil.
Humulene
22-24% of whole oil.
Caryophyllene
7-8% of whole oil.
Farnesene
Trace.
General Trade Perception
A semi-dwarfdual purpose hop.
Other Information
The code number ofthisvariety isW 10. Pioneer has
been adopted as its name - subject to final approval.
134
June 27, 1995
Notes from an official call from the U.S. Patent Office (Jim Feyrer)
Washington, DC.
Mr. Feyrer called in connection with an application by Hop Union USA
for patent protection for Clone 26 which is proposed to be called
Columbus Hop.
Hop Union (Dr. Greg Lewsis) has submitted a patent application for
the above named hop, stating that nearly 500 acres are already being
grown of this hop in the Yakima Valley.
Apparently, Mr. C.E.
Zimmermann, Prosser, WA, who was one of the
developers of this hop, opposes granting patent status, since this
hop has already been freely distributed to several growers in the
Yakima Valley area.
Other information pertaining to "Columbus" hop shows that this is
a high-alpha hop (alpha about 14%)
with very poor storage stability.
It should be processed as soon as possible after harvest to avoid
losses of alpha acids.
The pedigree of Columbus hop has never been disclosed.
STATEWIDE
Oregon Business
135
January 1995.
MID-VALLEY
Oregon-grown hops
CORVALLIS
THE POP OF HOPS
If you could follow your favorite
beer back to its conception, you'd
probably find yourself inside the head
of Dr. Alfred Haunold.
Although he's spent the last30 years
in comfortable and relative anonymity,
the Austrian-born scientist is the al
chemist behind some of the beer in
dustry's most popular brands.
Haunold, who works for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture on the
Oregon State University campus, is
Willamette Nuggel
Tettnang
Mt, Hood
POUNDS AND VARIETY OF HOPS PRODUCED HERE IN 1993. THE
PURPLE BARS SHOW THE VARIETIES DEVELOPED BY
AL HAUNOLD.
not a brewer. He's a breeder, a master
at tinkering with Mother Nature to
create aromatic and bitter hops that
give beer its distinctive flavor.
Haunold is one of only a dozen or
so hops breeders in the world, accord
ing to Gregory K. Lewis, executive
vice president of Hopunion U.S.A.
Inc., a hops grower and dealer based
in Yakima.
"His achievement has been to pro
duce cheap hops
says Kurt Widmer, owner of Ore
gon's top-selling microbrewery, Wid
mer Brewing Co. "[This] fosters the
image that we have now of being a
local product."
To get the full, earthy flavor of spe
cialty beers, microbreweries must use
up to four times the amount of hops
than commercial brewers. If they had
that mimic the
flavor of tradi
tional hops," says
Lewis, whose
company sells to
major commercial
producers as well
as Oregon's $21.8
million micro-
brew industry.
Haunold takes
varieties, some
centuries old and
weakened with
age, and creates
stronger domestic
versions that are
more resistant to
disease and
promise greater
yields.
This is an ob-
USDA hop breeder Alfred Haunold checks fragrant cones on ex
perimental plants at Oregon State University's hop yard near
Corvallis.
vious benefit to
major producers, but it also is giving
the small guys a competitive edge.
"He has allowed us to produce beer
using more domestic ingredients,"
to import all the hops needed for
those exotic blends, the cost of an al
ready-expensive bottle of beer could
become prohibitive. M
136
HOPS U.S.A.
1U OflUiA \k£tXc*&o+. e(j \jof- Qiomw. cjj /Ww*
HAUNOLD'S HOPS: A LEGACY
OF GOOD TASTE
By Kathryn Barry Stelljes, USDA.
Dr. AlfredHaunold has developed or helped
commercialize almost every hop grown in the U.S.
today. Cone-shaped hop flowers provide beer's
bitter, refreshing taste and hearty aroma. The
June, 1995
Number 481
Hood's success, giving American microbrewers
affordable access to European-like hops. These
four varieties are related to the popular Hallertau
mittelfrueh hop. Haunold has developed two other
types of European hops renowned for their aroma-
Saaz and Tettnang-that will be ready for release in
the next few years.
Haunold also helped improve super alpha
United States alternates with Germany as the top
acid hops. Breeders believed there were two
hop producer. American hops flavor beers brewed
in more than 90 countries. "He has probably done
more for the U.S. hop industry in terms of breeding
than any other single person," says Marty Coleman,
barriers to increasing the alpha acid levels above
10 percent. First they thought the acid level was
controlled by multiple genes, making simple
hop purchaser in Yakima, Wash., for Anheuser
Busch, the world's largest brewer.
Haunold, a geneticist with the USDA's
Agricultural Research Service, has brought popular
Old World aromas to American hops, developed
naturally seedless plants, and bred hops with a
higher content of important acids than was ever
thought possible. Three of Haunold's most popular
varieties-Nugget, Willamette and Mt. Hood-were
grown on more than a third of the country's 42,000
acres of hops in 1994. In the U.S., hops grow in
Washington, Oregon and Idaho. "Beer depends on
two types of sensory components-one for aroma
and one for bitter taste to balance the sweetness of
the wort, which is derived mainly from malted
barley," Haunold says. Good bittering hops have
high alpha acid levels, while aroma hops are prized
for their fragrant oils, he says. Willamette,
Haunold's first aroma hop, was also the first
naturally seedless hop.
Normally, female hop plants produce seeds
if exposed to pollen from male plants. Processors
prefer seedless hops because the seeds can add
extra fats and may affect beer flavor. "The U.S. has
long been known as a producer of alpha-type hops.
Haunold's efforts have allowed U.S. growers to
diversify their product and double their acreage of
aroma hops," says Sean McGree, Executive
Director of the Hop Growers of America in
Yakima. The aroma hop Mt. Hood brought the
potent, filling qualities of German hops to
American growers. Liberty, Crystal and the newly
released variety, named Ultra, expanded on Mt.
(Please see HAUNOLD on page 3)
selection of the trait difficult. Second, hops with
higher alpha acid levels-above 7 or 8 percentseemed to store poorly. Typically the alpha acid
level dropped 3 to 4 percent when the hops were
stored over six months at room temperature. "I
ignored these theories," Haunold says. The result
was Nugget, a variety with 14 percent alpha acid
content thatloses only 1 percent in storage. He also
helped University of Idaho breeder/pathologist
Robert Romanko develop Galena, the most popular
American super alpha acid hop.
Haunold maintained genetic resources of
over 600 hop varieties from around the world and
helped provide new virus-free foreign hops to
American growers. Haunold also developed
ornamental hop varieties that make attractive
additions to home gardens. Blue Northern Brewer
has bluish-purple leaves instead of the normal
green. Sunbeam and Bianca have red stems and
yellow leaves. The plant produces a few cones for
use in home brewing.
Retail-nurseries sell both the ornamental
plants and many varieties of hop cones for home
brewing. Haunold, the USDA's only hop breeder,
plans to retire in June.
He's worked on hops for 30 years at the ARS
Forage Seed and Hop Research Unit in Corvallis,
Oregon.
137
6
JULY27. 18SS EUGENE WEEKLY
AGRICULTURE/Jo/m Ccvcr
Tops in
Hops
World-famous
USDA Hop Breeder
Alfred Haunold
Retires
W
hen Ailred Haunold told t
s bosses
I Oiegon Statu Linivcri.it
lh.it Ik
minted lu retire this v
^om',':, ,iround the world marled to get
Haunold ^ the only lull-lnne Dreedei ot
nopi ii' NorthAincncatind il-. probablythe
•.-, orld's leading developer of now hup
•. anctiL'b He is almost single-handedly
ie_pimsible fur putting the Pacific North
west onpar with Germany mhop produc
tionduring the past 30 year..
Hauiioid :s employed by the u _>
JjL.p-irtniL'iit OI Agiicultuic. which now
Alfred Haunold. hop breeder, in his office «l the USDA's ASriculiural Research Servicefacility in Corwllis.
which isconcentrated inthe Yaki
has a luring freeze in place, making it clucc hybrid seedlings that appear tohave acreage,
impossible fur the department tu replace the desired characteristics is only part of ma, Columbia and Willamette river val
said. Mainly hecredits himself with luck
him if he retires. Haunold has several
al, but never have a smash hit," he said
the job of creating a new breed. Years of leys. U.S. production has doubled during
deeding uvograin- still m progress that held-testing are required before growers Haunold's 30years inCorvallis, with three
times as many varieties now grown.
are ix'ingclosely watched bv brewers ar.J
ill cnm.mil commercial-scale acreage to a
gruwe:* Who' would complete them' new variety, andbrewers will agree lobuy
'.'.'ho wouio begin the ncv: phases1 i'he it. Haunold finished testing the new hop
clientele rx'gan to sweat.
ijali Haunold a! hib ottice :n the U^DA
. j;npie\ adjacent tothe Oregon State U:u•>ers:u .ampus and you're greeted witii
:n,e single word "Haunold. delivered in ,t
imagine iedeinosen and a [viol li.it and
:amiiv hop-growing secieti handed down
U.S. production
has doubled during
Haunold's 30 years
and intuition. "In plantbreeding, you can
work a lifetimeand collect a lot of materi
"Someone else can come in and in a rela
tively short period oftime, come up with
has probably done more for the [a major achievement]."
U.S. hop industry in terms of
_ ..bleeding than any other single Just out of Haunold's test fields is a
new variety, Ultra, adescendant ofthe
person." Marty Coleman, A-B's Northwest
European variety Hallertauer, as were
hop buyer, said. Because ofWillamette and
Hi
Haunold's work with other new and tradi
tional breeds, A-B has reduced its use of
Mt. Hood and several other of Haunold's
breeds. He is also working on adapting
imported hops lo 3CM0 percent, down two other popular European'hops—Saaz
Irom 'JO percent when Haunold came to andTettnang—to theNorthwest Thepro
gram isimportant toboth large and small
in Corvallis, with
Oregon.
Haunold's achievements are valued as
well by microbrewers. "We use Willamelle
impart special flavors tobeerpnow have to
an:, silver-haired man in a plaid shirt and
three times as
daco who didn't know hops irnm hen-
many varieties
lends what people consider Northwest
drive his research. "Microbrewing now
characterizes Cascade, Willamette, and Mt.
more flavorful hops, he sairj;-and.tipse
nom generation lo generation
When vou visit what you see is a pleav
pane when he took the OSU ]Obin 19t>o He
.s indeed rrom Austria, but he spent the
e.ti'A par: o\ his careei working with
now grown.
•Mie.v. in 'xebra^a ""Hops gtew wild in
•v.v iiLiiik'ijiNn. mil I didn't ;ecugni/.e them
,;; ;\vv a!:entiun to them." he savs
breed—calledCascade—and introduced it
to the industry.
Back hi the oils brewers aiuund the
world relied on European hops to
give beer itscharacteristic bitterness
and (lower;/ aroma (Beer without hups
tastes like wet Crape-Nuts.) American
and Cascade," DavidSohigian, brewmas- come from central Europe where the crop
. -irli o, ...i. :
icr al Field's BrewPub in Eugene, said. isunreliable.
Haunold admits that industrial brewers
"Cascade is one of our favorite hops. It
style lo many of our beers', especially the accounts for about onepercent ofthemar
ket," he said, but "thatshare could reach
India paleale."
five percent." Major brewe^Jia^siegirn
Teri
Fahrendorf, brewmaster at
Eugene's Sleelhead Brewery, concurs. She to make more flavorful brews .^(requure
Cascade soon put Northwest growers
opportunities bring brewers"anH growers
oi\ the hops map. Haunold followed it Hood as"wonderful" hops. "We use them to his door.
' J*1' ' '--1
with his own invention, christened
Willamette, which he released rune years
later in 1976. He calls Willamette "a quan
here at Sleelhead," she said
Sohigian said having a thriving domes
tic hops industry is important lo microbrewersbecauseconsistency and freshness
Hesaid hehelped a couple ofgrowers
get started with Kent Goldings, a tradi
tional English hop popular with micro-
tum leap" in hop breeding because it
brewers back East. "Now they've go] a
approximated the flavor ofPuggle, an old is just as important for his beers as itisfor couple of hundred acres, and some are
English variety, but could be grown in Budweiser. "Plus, you know how it's under contract logoback toEngland," he
huge quantities for brewers such as processed," he said. "You can go look atit said.
being processed, and that's really impor
lor domestic vanelies that Anheuser-ISusch.
And how has the industry coped with
tant."
hops were a poor substitute, used only m
thecheapest brews or when the Liuropean
crop tailed—which was Ireuuently. Ameri
can giants such as Anheuser-Busch were
eage'r
U.S. brewers because these hops,' which
approached Liuropean varieties in flavor
and that could be produced with consis
Other varieties developed by Haunold
or in collaboration with other researchers
Haunold is clearly proud of his
includesuch well-known hop varieties as
achievements, yet he remains modest
Haunold's first job was to finish work .Mt. Hood and Nugget. Along with
and combinations that people saidcould
tent vields
on a new hop breed that his predecessor Willamette, these varieties account for
had created Crossing old varieties to pro- more than a third of the nation's hop
about any special abilities. "Iused crosses
n't work, but it turned out they did," he
Haunold's retirement, which became offi
cial on June 30? Quite easily. They con
vinced him tokeep going tohisoffice and
lab every day until the USDA lifts' the hir
ingfreeze
'':'-' •; *
The new researcher will work
search position is in jeopardy.
Haunold worked with other re
west today. He retired June 30.
velopment of almost every major
hop variety grown in the North
Elliott said that the new ge
and Galena, and was solely behind
the
development
of
the
Willamette, Nugget" and Mt.
Idaho in the release of Cascade
j.leader with the U.S. Department
jlofAgriculture in Corvallis. "There
!:are some ARS stations that may
i'be'closed depending on congres
"Al has done a tremendous work
hops produced in the Willamette
for the betterment of hop flavor Valley each year.
and aroma. In fact, our hops are
"I'm filling in between time,"
exported to some of the most fas
Haunold said. The 65-year-old ge
tidious hop-producing companies neticist is heading for Europe
sional action."
in the world, Japan and Germany shortly, where he will tour hop!! -'• The five ARS stations that both being two of them," he said.
producing areas. .
•ithe House Appropriations Comr • -Elliott said that even though he's
• Haunold said he sees a good fu
imitteeand the Clinton Adminis- retired, Haunold is "on as a col
ture for the Northwest hop in
itration agreed should be closed are laborator" and taking care of his dustry, especially in exports. "We
!located '• iri> Brawley, Calif.; plots.
lead the world in hops with high
; Chatsworth, N.J.; Orono, Maine,
During his 30 years as a re alpha acid content," he said. "We
!Brentwood; Texas, and Houma, La. search geneticist with the USDA, produce two times as much as Ger
;'. i Elliott said that neither the Cor- Haunold was involved in one ca many on just two-thirds the
ivallis ARS station nor the hop re pacity or another, with the de acres," he added. '
j:now,"-said;,- Elliott, a research
!;any, it wants to close, according neticist, as was Haunold, will be
Jitossearch team leader Lloyd El- located in the Oregon State Uni Hood varieties. Willamettes and
jiliott. •'.
versity Department of Crop and Nuggets account for about 11 mil
i: -The position is on hold right Soil Science. .
lion of the 13.million pounds of
!-cultural Research Stations, if
jjvallis, Ore., will have to wait un- and develop better flavor and aro
ijtil Congress decides which Agri- ma, he said.
j: place the retired Al Haunold in Cor- search genetic resistance to insects searchers in Washington and
j! , CORVALLIS, Ore. — The , in the hop area alone, Elliott said,
(isearch for a hop researcher to re- and, among other things, re
U-^-
For the Capital Press
By JOHN SCHMITZ
researcher leaves big hole
CO
00
Chicago Tribune,
Sunday,
June 25, 1995
Photo for the Tribune by Pavel HoreJsl/AP
Chicago Tribune, Sunday, June 25,1995
Patrons raise a toast in a Prague pub. Czechs say their beers have
suffered as breweries have switched from Czech hops to cheaper
hops imported from Germany, the United States or China.
Section 7
constitute its own food group and
connoisseurs of fine brew can be
whose products are well known
in the West, such as Budvar,
Pilsner Urquell, Staropramen
out brews every bit as good as
and Radegast, continue to churn
found in every corner pub, this is
bad enough.
Beer is to the Czech Republic
worse."
In a land in which beer seems to
And Cepicka acknowledges
thatmost of the largest breweries
lasting beer.
very careful to keep their quality
up, but many smaller breweries
have not had the same opportuni
ties, and their quality has gotten
mous breweries like Pilsen are
ed," Cepicka said. "I think the fa
"The breweries have moderniz
they ever were.
beer."
While most trades and indus
tries have flourished under the in-
was opened and the brewmasters
took what was the cheapest—and
the quality of Czech beer suf
fered," said Zdenek Lhota, vice
president of Top Hop, one of the
country's half-dozen hop dealers.
"When you're looking at it from
an economic point of view, you'll
buy the cheapest ingredients for
the Velvet Revolution the market
brewmasters sought to reduce
costs wherever they could. And
because Czech hops cost twice as
much as many imports, they were
a good place to start.
"Traditionally, Czech beer was
brewed from Czech hops, but after
hop harvest has been slightly
below normal and prices have re-
While for the last few years the
fold.
plain. This is what Czech hops
growers and dealers are counting
on to bring brewers back into the
brewmasters can only get away
with changing their recipes so
much before loyal customers com
has its own local brew, and
Nearly every town of any size
France.
champagne, cognac or wine are to
what Scotch is to Scotland and
the purest water and highestgrade malt for their beers.
But more than any other ingre
dient, the fine aromatic hops
grown around the north
Bohemian city of Zatec—known as
Saaz in English and German—dis
tinguish Czech beer.
And while vast quantities of
those Saaz hops were exported to
the West for hard currency in for
mer times, the Czech authorities
disliked the idea of importing
something they had in such
abundance at home. So about 3,000
lous brewmasters still seek cut
1989, brewing seemed to fare bet
ter at the hands of this country's
central planners and the closed
system they operated in.
Of course, the quality of Czech
beer—generally considered among
the world's best—depends on a
long tradition of brewing, dating
from the middle ages. And meticu
nism, breweries have been free to
buy hops from whatever source
they can find. With the country's
economy reeling from transition,
visible hand of the market since
Since the 1989 "Velvet Revolu
tion" that brought down commu
less Czech hops these days, they
have also improved their brewing
techniques to make purer, longer-
Continued From Page 1
Hops
many, the United States or China.
customary recipes, using primari
ly Czech hops, to brews using
cheaper hops imported from Ger
eries have switched from their
Their conclusions are grim.
"It's definitely true that beer has
changed, for the worse," Jiri
Strejc, headwaiter at the Sklipek
pub in Prague's Vinohrady dis
trict, said against a background of
thick smoke and pot-bellied men
quaffing pints of draft.
The reason for the change? In a
word, capitalism.
More specifically, many brew
above all, the status of Czech
brewing.
beer drinkers, panels of experts
convene daily to discuss politics,
religion, the meaning of life and,
Across this nation of inveterate
PRAGUE, Czech Republic—
Special to the Tribune
By David Rocks
costs."
need to find some way to cut
their costs are going up, and they
Worldwide, a trading company.
"You have 25 brewers in the
world who can afford them. All of
market," said Richard Mattas,
managing director of Saaz Hops
Ferrari market or the Rolls-Royce
"The Saaz hops market is very
limited. You can compare it to the
would be difficult to sell at cur
rent prices.
mained high, hop dealers say that
an average or better harvest
See Hops, Page 2
eries say that while they are using
bad. Some defenders of the brew
The news, however, is not all
the worse."
of the Western beers—that is, for
rency, they buy what they can
from foreign countries, so they
buy more hops from the West I
am afraid that the quality of the
beer is changing in the direction
a professor at Prague's Institute of
Chemical Technology and a fre
quent judge at beer tastings.
"Now, if they have enough cur
"During the last 40 years, our
breweries weren't able to buy too
many products from Western
countries," said Jaroslav Cepicka,
tic product. Today, though, Czech
breweries use only about 1,000
tons of Saaz hops annually.
Czech breweries to use the domes
to 4,000 metric tons per year also
found their way into Czech brews;
central planners simply expected
Czechs hopping mad as beermakers switch to cheaper grains
from:
CO
in
LNN/ZN
MI11W0CH, 11 JANUAR 1995 , Mi. 8
140
•Dei' Massentourismus
Kehtgrosstenteilsam
Old Swiss House>
15
(Willi Buholzer, Chief Hop Buyer
vorbei...
Stadt
for Anheuser Busch in
n^U'lvhna/ni^c
Europe
*',ll"l«. "'•' <"«', vt.'r.lnhr
retires ).
•"l«'.l.nll„i,l,.„-E,nk,n,flu,
.•'/„„„..„.,,/,.,'11',/, „,„„„,,,,
Son Willi jr. follows in the
footsteps of his father.
Per Besiber des «Old Swiss Hoiue» ist auch Hopfen-Einkoufer fur grosste US-Brauerei
Willy Buholzer ist auch Hopfen-Fan
£V/.s/ Weinkenner
und -sammler. Aber
«0ld S\\ ISS
House
er kannebenso fiLr
den Bierhopfen
In
dem
1S59
e
Riegelhaus. das in
schwdrmen wie uber
Restaurant
Bordeaux-Jahrgange:
(lit:
House beherher^
Hanny und \X\]}\-
WillyBuholzer vom
zer seit 1962 fi;
(bis 1976 /.u>,i,in!
seincrn Brun.-i K
heute das Krin;:
•Old Swiss Hou.se>-.
Heriiiswii Wir.r.
linen aueh :n
:!<!-
Ati
hati> am
BuOld
hi
t)f-
-:.m: RleL'i
.-> Lu-
geleniter K»u;. ;,
n.i: in den
ahrzehnlei
i^'enen
meet derveit -•::
unter der Ajfide i.
(julc
Swiss-Kuchenchi'
ther Renz I'm-; <•.
•e:ner Sciialli-nakrall
n!en ^'ewidmet dem
aei
.lusammen
sammen
mit
:
it 1953 fur die grosste
ten. am Tisch /.'.:
der Well, die Budroduzentin
Anheu-
ten Wiener Schmi
im -Old Swiss Hm
nathch HI()(ii:M; \
werden - •> '•::
gimdhieML-.m ii.;-'
h in St Louis. Hoplen
l.s lU :Kte
en
Gut gehoplt: Die Dynaslie Buholzer om «Bud»-Zopfhohn im Restaurant Old Swiss House. Von finks: Philipp, Willy seniw, Willy
juniof undHanny Buhoher.
Zufalltg zum Hopfen-lmperium
lJer Einstieg war Zu.all der
\im:iiami Art. Willy Buhol/ej-^ Schwester Trudv heirate-
lenen August Busch, der
••r»-r, --Hi Mann von Anheuser:v;s.-;-. 'A;,r and de'" sie natur••::: .r.\ <>ld Swiss- aniachlei.
;»--•;• uingt Willv Buholzer ge-ic! m> 19.V. erstmals in
'•-•"viniLH-eti
die
ropa i\vn Huplcn-Hinkauf neu
ner
sowie Verlragsproduzenten in
der Abhangigkeit der Brooker,
der Hopfen-Rohstoflhandler,
befreien. Willy Buholzer Ting
in Munchen gewissermassen
bei Null an.
Sohn Willyuberrtimmt
Heute MilLwoch ubergibt
Willy Buholzer seine Direk-
-. >-Hotels auf verschieden<>j-r. Xulen •und so nebenbei
• ' .-;•• use Frank Sinatra ' und
jetzl eine eigene Hopfenfarm
-'•niiesslich das Ange-
mBilrf Xu nc \' >>r
zu orgamsieren Die Ainenkaner wullten sich namlieb aus
Siaaten. erlebte
"'•.".'••"
ser1. i- ;vi
anderes ai> d:--
- Bier auMnachl. Er
•-•
Leum;
direkte iiuii-.l/. •-''
tion Einkauf Eurupa seinem
Sohn Willy - dazu gehoren
im Oebiet Hallertau ruirdlich
von Munchen. dazu em eiL'e-
Huplen-Yersuchsbetneb
der gleichen Region. Zuletzt
lieferte Willy Buholzer jahrlich gut 100 000 Zentner <zu
50 Kilo) frischen und natiirli-
chen Aromahopfen in die USA.
Etwa 40 Prozent stammen
aus DeuLschland, der Rest aus
Tschechien (bdhmischer Hop-
hatte
zenswert ist - Ht-utr
einen steigenden Hopfenbedarf zu decken, obwohl die
Hektuliter!
Buholzer
ist das erne Nehen.-a
senior feiert mi Be:.-
Brauerci mehr und mehr auch
Bier-Dynasiien die
Hopfen in den USA anbauen
an semen Sohn Wi!
Hess, wo sie heute uber mehre-
der schon seit drei •
re Hopfen-Plantagen verfugt.
Hopfen-Geschatt nut
Nebenbei: Das Budweiser
aus den USA ist im -Old Swiss
profit aus den USA a
L'nd da isl net>en
House- schlicht ein -Bud" -
Luitpold von Baw
fen ist iminer noch Spitze),
aus namensrechtlichen Griin-
dem Elsass und aus Polen.
Wahrend
Buholzers
rund
den.
em echter Wiltelsb;
Nachf'ahre ..:ii laat
und zudein em
bavenscher Bu rko
genen Brauerei
Doch Willy Buholzer
meint: "Anheuser hat in den
40jahrigem Engagement stei-
USA Budweiser gebraut, be-
gerte die US-Brauerei Anheu
ser-Busch ihren Bierausstoss
vor die Budweiser (Ort in
Tschechien) auf die Idee kamen, dass ihr Name schut-
von sechs auf 110 Millionen
•
w
m