An evaluation of U.S. tart and sweet cherry producers trait prioritization: Evidence from audience surveys

HortScience

Volumn 49, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 931-937

  Yue, Chengyan ^a   Karina Gallardo, R ^b   Luby, James J ^a   Rihn, Alicia L ^a   McFerson, James R ^c   McCracken, Vicki ^d   Oraguzie, Nnadozie ^e   Weebadde, Cholani ^f   Sebolt, Audrey ^f   Iezzoni, Amy ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission   (United States)

^d WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Fruit size; Ordered probit model; Productivity; Stone fruit

Indexed keywords

EID: 84905087128     PISSN: 00185345     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.21273/hortsci.49.7.931     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Alpuerto, V. E., G. W. Norton, J. Alwang, and A. M. Ismail. 2009. Economic impact analysis of marker-assisted breeding for tolerance to salinity and phosphorous deficiency in rice. Rev. Agr. Econ. 31: 779-792.
2. Brown, S. K., A. F. Iezzoni, and H. W. Fogle. 1996. Cherries, p. 213-225. In: Janick, J. and J. N. Moore (eds.). Fruit breeding, tree and tropical fruits. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
3. Census of Agriculture. 2007. Fruits and nuts: 2007 and 2002. 16 Apr. 2014. .
4. Davis, C. G. and J. M. Gillespie. 2004. What role does specialization play in farm size in the U. S. Hog Industry? Southern Agr. Econ. Assn. Annu. Mtg., Tulsa, OK.
5. Dever, M. X., R. A. MacDonald, M. A. Cliff, and W. D. Lane. 1996. Sensory evaluation of sweet cherry cultivars. HortScience 31: 150-153.
6. Fuglie, K. O. and T. S. Walker. 2001. Economic incentives and resource allocation in U. S. public and private plant breeding. J. Agr. Appl. Econ. 33: 459-473.
7. Greene, W. H. and D. A. Hensher. 2008. Modeling ordered choices: A primer and recent developments. New York University, New York, NY.
8. Hall, R. H., H. L. Collier, M. L. Thomas, and M. G. Hilgers. 2005. A student response system for increasing engagement, motivation, and learning in high enrollment lectures. Proc. 11 th Amer. Conf. Info. Syst. p. 1-7.
9. Hennessy, D. A., J. A. Miranowski, and B. A. Babcock. 2004. Genetic information inagricultural productivity and product development. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 86: 73-87.
10. Iezzoni, A. F. 2005. Acquiring cherry germplasm from central and eastern Europe. HortScience 40: 304-308.
11. Kappel, F., B. Fisher-Fleming, and E. Hogue. 1996. Fruit characteristics and sensory attributes of an ideal sweet cherry. HortScience 31: 443-446.
12. Knopf, D. 2011. U. S. peach production down 2 percent from 2010 apricots down 9 percent from last year. Natl. Agr. Stat. Serv., USDA. 29 May 2012. .
13. Lancaster, K. J. 1966. A new approach to consumer behavior theory. J. Polit. Econ. 74: 132-157.
14. Long, L. E., M. Whiting, and R. Nunez-Elisea. 2007. Sweet cherry cultivars for the fresh market. Pacific Northwest Extension Publication #604.
15. Luby, J. and D. Shaw. 2001. Does marker-assisted selection make dollars and sense in a fruit breeding program? HortScience 36: 872-879.
16. Lusk, J. L. 2007. Economic value of selecting and marketing cattle by leptin genotype. J. of Agr. and Res. Econ. 32: 306-329.
17. McCarter, M. W. and A. Caza. 2009. Audience response systems as a data collection method in organizational research. J. Mgt. Organ. 15: 122-131.
18. NASS. 2013. National statistics for cherries. 9 Aug. 2013. .
19. Powe, B. D., R. C. Faulkenberry, L. Harmond, and D. L. Cooper. 2009. Evaluating the use of an audience response technology system to collect research data among African American elders. Ageing Intl. 34: 60-66.
20. Song, G. Q., G. A. Lang, K. C. Sink, and S. V. Dolgov. 2008. Cherries, p. 161-188. In: Kole C. and T. C. Hall (eds.). A compendium of transgenic crop plants. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ.
21. Stehr, R. 2001. Screening of sweet cherry cultivars in northern Germany. ISHS Acta Horticulturae 667: IV International Cherry Symposium.
22. Sy, H. A., M. D. Faminow, G. V. Johnson, and G. Crow. 1997. Estimating the values of cattle characteristics using and ordered probit model. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 79: 463-476.
23. Tamm, L., A. Häseli, J. G. Fuchs, F. P. Weibel, and E. Wyss. 2002. Organic fruit production in humid climates of Europe: Bottlenecks and new approaches in disease and pest control. Proc. XXVI Intl. Hort. Congr.: Sust. of Hort. Syst. in the 21st Century 638: 333-339.
24. Tano, K., M. Kamuanga, M. D. Faminow, and B. Swallow. 2003. Using conjoint analysis to estimate farmer's preferences for cattle traits in West Africa. Ecol. Econ. 45: 393-407.
25. Timm, E. J. and D. E. Guyer. 1998. Tart cherry firmness and quality changes during mechanical harvesting and handling. Appl. Eng. in Agr. 14: 153-158.
26. USDA. 2011. Tart cherry production up 40 percent. NASS, USDA. 29 May 2012. .
27. Wearing, C. H., J. D. Hansen, C. Whyte, C. E. Miller, and J. Brown. 2001. The potential for spread of codling moth (Lepidoptera tortricidae) via commercial sweet cherry fruit: A critical review and risk assessment. Crop Prot. 20: 465-488.