ARTICLES

Roasted Peanut Flavor Variation Across Germplasm Sources¹

Authors: Harold E. Pattee , Francis G. Giesbrecht

  • Roasted Peanut Flavor Variation Across Germplasm Sources¹

    ARTICLES

    Roasted Peanut Flavor Variation Across Germplasm Sources¹

    Authors: ,

Abstract

Roasted flavor is a critical factor in the acceptance of a peanut cultivar. A three-year study was made on the variation in roasted peanut flavor intensity of U.S. peanut cultivars and advanced breeding lines. An initial set of 83 entries was reduced to 71 by removing samples that showed evidence of extraneous environmental conditions, immaturity, and handling or improper sample preparation effects. All entries for the cv. New Mexico Valenicia C, representing the Valencia market type, were lost because of improper roasting or intense fruity flavor. Florigiant, Florunner, and Pronto were used as comparison standards for roasted peanut attribute values in evaluating the Virginia, runner, and Spanish market types, respectively. The positive estimated difference between control and test germplasm sources was largest within the Virginia type, with a least-square mean difference of 1.4 for roasted peanut attribute intensity. Spanish types were next with a positive estimated difference of 1.3, and runner types were lowest with a positive estimated difference of 0.5. Broadsense heritability for the roasted peanut attribute among germplasm sources was determined to be 24, suggesting a potential for improving the roasted peanut attribute level through proper breeding stratagems.

Full Article Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Roasted flavor, Arachis hypogaea, heritability, Groundnut, market-types

How to Cite:

Pattee, H. & Giesbrecht, F., (1990) “Roasted Peanut Flavor Variation Across Germplasm Sources¹”, Peanut Science 17(2), p.109-112. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-17-2-15

27 Views

1 Downloads

Published on
01 Jul 1990
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes

1The research reported in this publication was a cooperative effort of the Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture and the North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, Raleigh, NC 276957643. The use of trade names in this publication does not imply endorsement by the United States Department of Agriculture or the North Carolina Agricultural Research Service of the products named, nor criticism of similar ones not mentioned.