Post on 21-Aug-2020
transcript
University of WisconsinUrban and Regional Food Systems2015 Vegetable Variety Screening Trials
KALE
Cultivar Company//BreederTotal/M/weight/(kg)
Avg/Weight/(gm):/10/Leaf/bunches
Avg/Disease/Damage/Score/1=low,//5=high
Avg/Pest/Damage/Score//1=low,/5=high
Avg/Mature/Height/(cm)
STDEV/Mature/Height/(cm)
Kale%Coalition Adaptive%Seeds 9.96 453 1.4 2.4 48.7 16.6
Russian%Hungergap Adaptive%Seeds 10.78 383 1.4 2 74.6 7.1
Western%Front Adaptive%Seeds 10.66 303 1.4 2.2 67.0 6.8
Darkibor Bejo%Seeds 9.66 367 1.0 1.4 72.5 5.7
Redbor Bejo%Seeds 10.70 295 1.4 1.4 116.9 12.8
Ripbor Bejo%Seeds 11.63 363 1.2 1.2 97.0 3.8
Curly%Roja High%Mowing%Organic%Seeds 13.43 336 1.0 1 125.2 24.9
Meadowlark High%Mowing%Organic%Seeds 15.20 351 1.6 1.2 94.6 12.9
Red%Russian High%Mowing%Organic%Seeds 10.31 324 1.8 2.2 71.2 8.8
Westlander High%Mowing%Organic%Seeds 11.22 385 1.6 1.4 101.3 19.0
Hudson%Valley%Dino Hudson%Valley%Seed%Library 4.58 198 1.2 3.2 75.2 17.7
Wild%Garden%Mix Wild%Garden%Seed 11.27 410 1.8 2.2 47.0 12.0
Trial Notes: 15 plants of each variety were planted May 20, 2015. 10 middle plants of each variety were harvested from bottom up. Seven harvests were completed at 10 day intervals mid June to mid August.10 leaf bunches of marketable leaves were counted and weighed. Final mature height taken at end of season.
Cultivar Company//BreederTotal/M/weight/(kg)
Avg/Weight/(gm):/10/Leaf/bunches
Avg/Disease/Damage/Score/1=low,//5=high
Avg/Pest/Damage/Score//1=low,/5=high
Avg/Mature/Height/(cm)
STDEV/Mature/Height/(cm)
Cavolo%Nero Seeds%of%Italy 7.91 341 1.2 2.6 99.4 15.4
Galega%de%Folhas%Lisas Seeds%of%Italy 10.22 486 1.0 2.6 85.7 15.0
Wild%Garden%Lacinato Wild%Garden%Seed 5.11 214 1.4 2.6 74.6 12.6
Old%Growth%Palm Wild%Garden%Seed 5.25 181 1.0 3.2 91.6 15.1
Red%Ruffled Wild%Garden%Seed 10.93 357 1.8 2.4 69.8 20.9
Red%Ursa Wild%Garden%Seed 14.51 427 1.8 1.8 53.5 14.8
White%Russian Wild%Garden%Seed 12.99 427 1.6 2 51.4 15.7
Wild%Red Wild%Garden%Seed 13.59 400 1.8 1.8 30.8 10.8
Farm Farmer Species Varieties
Would2you2grow2this2again? How2marketable2is2it?
What2did2you2think2of2the2flavor? Strongest2point Major2flaws
Which2variety2was2the2best/worst?
Voss$Organics Mark$Voss kale Darkibor YES! VERY great leaf$size,$production $none best
Voss$Organics Mark$Voss kale Redbor maybe somewhat OK color texture$a$bit$tough OK
Amy's$AcreAmy$Wallner greens ErosGEndive no not$very,$for$me fine consistent$size huge worst
Wild$RidgeAnna$Metscher greens ErosGEndive yes very mild smaller$than$I$like 5
Shooting$Star$Farms Jenny$Bonde greens ErosGEndive maybe
Better$than$the$bigger$escaroles.$More$compact$is$more$desireable.$But$outer$color$is$darker$G$not$a$good$quality.
Mild.$Good$flavor.$Tough$outer$leaves$like$all$escaroles,$but$very$tasty$inner$leaves.
More$compact.$Center$selfGblanches$to$a$nice$yellow$if$spaced$at$8"$or$so.$
Eros$is$also$a$bit$dark.$Lighter$escaroles$are$more$appealing.$We$also$grew$Natacha$escarole$which$resisted$disease$better$than$Eros.$
Amy's$AcreAmy$Wallner greens
RhodosGEndive yes very!
expected$chicory$bitterness consistant$size
if$left$too$long,$middle$rots$but$outside$still$looks$good
good,$consistent$sized$head
Wild$RidgeAnna$Metscher greens
RhodosGEndive yes very mild$and$delicious
very$flavorful,$easy$to$grow tip$burn 1$(best)
Shooting$Star$Farms Jenny$Bonde greens
RhodosGEndive maybe
Good.$Has$nice,$frilly$cutGleaf$that$chefs$like.$
Good.$Bitter,$but$not$unpleasant
Good$shape;$Uniform;$can$be$closely$spaced$for$center$blanching.$Potential$for$big$heads$
Compared$to$Tres$Fine$Maraichere$(our$usual$frisee),$it$had$faster$rotting$issues$with$our$very$wet$fall.$Although$neither$were$very$resistant$to$rot.
Amy's$AcreAmy$Wallner greens
LeonardoGRaddicchio yes very!
typical$raddicchio$flavor color
smaller$than$other$raddicchio,$sometimes$too$small best
Wild$RidgeAnna$Metscher greens
LeonardoGRaddicchio yes very nice$bitterness uniform$size different$coloration 3
Shooting$Star$Farms Jenny$Bonde greens
LeonardoGRaddicchio yes Decent.$But$somewhat$big.
Typical$of$radicchio$G$stonger$early;$much$milder$after$frost.$Crunchy$leaf;$average$bitterness.
Similar$maturity$in$planting;$solid$heads;$beautiful$color.
Not$uniform$size;$rather$large$heads;$longer$season$variety$than$many$other$round$radicchios.
Of$radicchios,$Leonardo$has$best$marketability.$
one$chef$noted$how$color$changed$if$soaked$in$cold$water.$$I$didn't$verify$this$but$thought$that$was$interesting
Indigo$(hybrid)$is$smaller,$more$uniform,$earlier,$more$purple$in$color.$More$marketable,$but$not$better$in$flavor$than$Leonardo.$I$prefer$the$red$of$Leonardo,$but$
some$like$the$more$purple$coloring.$A$good$question$for$chefs.
General2Notes
Probably$won't$switch$it$out$with$our$usual$Tres$Fine$Mariachere$since$
it's$not$better$in$any$way$we$could$see.$
really$good,$much$better$than$other$winterbor$
substitutesnot$as$productive$and$has$smaller$leaves$than$darkibor$but$quality$
good
Farm Farmer Species Varieties
Would2you2grow2this2again? How2marketable2is2it?
What2did2you2think2of2the2flavor? Strongest2point Major2flaws
Which2variety2was2the2best/worst? General2Notes
really$good,$much$better$
than$other$winterbor$
substitutes
Amy's$Acre
Amy$
Wallner greens
RubroG
Raddicchio no
variable,$and$it$is$much$
larger$than$what$
restaurants$seemed$to$be$
expecting bitter,$as$expected fast$growing Huge worst
Wild$Ridge
Anna$
Metscher greens
RubroG
Raddicchio yes somewhat just$okay good$size ready$at$different$times 4
Shooting$Star$
Farms Jenny$Bonde greens
RubroG
Raddicchio maybe
A$bit$big.$Unusual$
elongated$shape$&$size$
might$make$marketing$
more$difficult.$I$like$
new/unusal$varieties.$
Similar$to$
castelfranco$types;$
Not$excessively$
bitter$like$treviso$
types$can$be.$
Texture$is$softer,$
too.
Didn't$bolt$G$even$
with$long$season;$
Pretty$coloring$
when$allowed$to$
head$and$peeled$
back.$
Long$Season$for$heads.$
Harvest$about$4$weeks$
after$Leonardo.$$Not$
uniform,$but$quite$big.
Amy's$Acre
Amy$
Wallner greens
VirtusG
Chicory no not
I$did$not$enjoy$it,$
very$bitter
no$disease$or$pest$
issues not$a$big$customer$draw
Wild$Ridge
Anna$
Metscher greens
VirtusG
Chicory yes somewhat best! size$was$great ready$at$different$times 2
Shooting$Star$
Farms Jenny$Bonde greens
VirtusG
Chicory yes
Average.$Big$size$is$hard$
sell.$Flavor$is$an$easy$sell.
Very$mild$chicory.$
Quite$good$raw$or$
cooked.$No$special$
treatment$like$
soaking$needed$to$
mellow$flavor$even$
in$late$summer.$
Still$best$in$fall,$
though. Flavor
Large$size.$Cooks$don't$
need$many!
Virtus$has$best$
flavor$of$all$in$
trial.$
Trial2Management soil2type prior2crop cover2crop
bed2preparation planting2method planting2date plant2spacing fertilizer mulch irrigation
pest2or2pathogen2treatments
Voss$Organics silt$loam leeks
buckwheat,$
oats,$peas
soil$fork$
tiller transplants$by$hand 5.22.15 18" compost straw$ drip none
Amy's$Acre clay/loam beans,$snap none
disc$
rotofiller
transplanted$3$rows/bed$
@$12"$bun$rows 6.5.15 12" compost,$fall$2014 none none none
Wild$Ridge$
Farm sandy$loam spring$successionclover tillage transplant
seed$7/11,$
transplant$8/6 3$rows$at$1' no no no no
Shooting$Star$
Farm Dubuque$Silt$Loam
$2014$
Lettuce$
2015$Spring$
brassica
Cover$
cropped$in$
2013$winter$
wheat
Rototil$and$
dibble$beds$
after$
spreading$
fertilizer Hand$transplant
Greenhouse$
seeding:$6/22/15;$
Transplant:$
7/16/2015
Radicchio$&$
Escarole:$12"$on$
center;$Endive$
(frisee)$6"$on$center
Midwest$bioGag$Veggies$
Plus$and$Veggies$NKO$@$
400#/A$each;$Soybean$meal$
@$400#/A None
Overhead$
sprinkler
Dipel$DF$
8/24$&$9/24$
for$worms
Leaf$is$softer$like$a$
castelfranco$type$G$
though$not$as$pale$and$
splashed$with$color.$
Similar$in$flavor.$
Castelfranco$is$more$
visually$appealing.
KaleVariety intensity* bitter*** color* sweet* acidity* saltiness* textureWild%Garden%Lacinato%N4.0 3.8 3.1 1.6 2.3 1.8 2.6Nashs%Green 3.5 3.6 2.7 1.6 2.5 2.0 2.9Hudson%Valley%Dino%N 3.5 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.9Wild%Red 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.0 2.1 1.8 2.6Ripbor 3.4 3.1 2.7 1.8 2.1 2.0 2.7Wild%Garden%Lacinato%G3.3 2.9 3.2 2.1 1.9 1.6 2.9Black%Magic 3.3 2.5 3.5 2.3 1.7 1.8 3.1Nashs%Red 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.8 2.0 3.0Red%Ruffled 3.3 3.1 2.5 2.2 2.1 1.7 2.5Toscano 3.3 3.2 3.2 1.8 2.2 1.5 2.7Wild%Garden%Mix 3.3 3.0 2.7 1.8 2.1 2.1 2.5Redbor 3.3 3.6 3.5 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.8Westlander 3.2 3.5 2.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 2.7White%Russian 3.2 3.2 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 2.6Sutherland 3.2 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.0 1.6 2.5Meadowlark 3.2 3.6 3.0 2.0 2.3 1.9 3.1Cavolo%Nero 3.2 3.1 3.2 1.8 2.2 1.6 2.8Red%Russian 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.6Starbor 3.1 2.5 3.0 2.5 1.8 1.7 3.3Curly%Roja 3.1 2.9 3.6 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.9Galega%de%Folhas%Lisas 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.4 1.8 2.1 2.4Kale%Coalition 3.0 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.7 2.6Old%Growth%Palm 2.9 2.8 3.3 1.9 1.8 1.7 2.8Western%Front 2.9 3.2 2.6 2.1 1.7 1.8 2.6Russian%Hungergap 2.8 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.8 1.8 2.7Hudson%Valley%Dino%G 2.8 2.4 3.1 2.3 1.7 1.6 2.8Black%Tuscan 2.7 2.6 3.3 1.9 1.9 1.6 2.8Red%Ursa 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.2 1.8 1.7 2.7Darkibor 2.4 2.5 2.6 1.8 1.8 1.5 2.6
GreensVariety intensity*** color*** texture* sweet*** acidity* bitter*** saltinessBau$Sin$mustard 4.4 3.3 2.8 1.5 2.2 2.7 1.6Osaka$Purple$mustard 4.0 3.1 2.6 1.5 2.9 3.4 1.5Virtus$radicchio 4.0 2.6 3.0 1.5 2.2 3.8 1.4HoCMiCZ$mustard 3.7 3.2 3.0 1.3 2.6 2.6 1.4Astro$arugula 3.6 3.5 2.5 1.5 2.6 3.5 1.4Eros$endive 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.0 1.9 2.2 1.5
LettuceRed$Evolution 3.3 3.1 1.9 1.4 1.6 3.0 1.4Rhazes 3.0 3.5 3.1 2.6 1.3 1.7 1.3Coastal$Star 2.7 3.3 3.1 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.5Lovelock 2.7 2.5 2.8 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.5Alkindus 2.6 3.0 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.4Wilshire 2.6 3.3 3.1 2.7 1.3 1.9 1.3Wander$Von$Stuttgart 2.6 2.4 2.5 1.8 1.8 2.1 1.7Encino 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.3 1.4 1.9 1.3Unicum 2.4 2.6 2.8 2.1 1.4 1.7 1.3Barilla 2.3 1.7 2.6 2.3 1.5 1.5 1.6
Greens
color
texture
sweetness
acidity
saltiness
bitterness
intensity
0 1 2 3 4 5
AlkindusAstroBarillaBau SinCoastal StarEncinoErosHo−Mi−ZLovelockOsaka PurpleRed EvolutionRhazesUnicumVirtusWander Von StuttgartWilshire
14
scor
e
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
color
textur
e
swee
tness
acidit
y
saltin
ess
bitter
ness
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
AlkindusAstroBarillaBau SinCoastal StarEncinoErosHo−Mi−ZLovelockOsaka PurpleRed EvolutionRhazesUnicumVirtusWander Von StuttgartWilshire
15
-0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Variables factor map (PCA)
Dim 1 (67.96%)
Dim
2 (1
7.97
%)
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
color
texturesweetness
aciditysaltiness bitterness
Representation of quality characteristics, based on crew evaluation, resulting from a principal component analysis of
all crew quality evaluation data. The length of the arrow for each characteristic is proportional to its contribution
to the variation among varieties, and the direction of the arrow is in the direction of increasing scores for that
characteristic. This shows how related the characteristics are to each other, and is also used to read the following
graph of varieties. The individual (variety) factor map on the next page plots where each variety lands relative to
these quality components
16
-1 0 1 2
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
Individuals factor map (PCA)
Dim 1 (67.96%)
Dim
2 (1
7.97
%) Alkindus
Astro
Barilla
Bau Sin
Coastal Star
Encino
Eros
Ho-Mi-Z
Lovelock
Osaka Purple
Red Evolution
Rhazes
Unicum
Virtus
Wander Von Stuttgart
Wilshire
Representation of varieties, based on crew evaluation, resulting from a principal component analysis of all crew quality
evaluation data. The position of each variety shows how it was evaluated for the di↵erent quality characteristics on
the previous page. For example, a variety that near or beyond the end of the color arrow would show particularly
intense color and a variety on the opposite side of the graph than the direction in which the color arrow points would
have poor color. This can be done for each of the quality characteristics. This graph also shows how varieties are
related to each other for the complete set of quality characteristics, and characteristics that contributed more to the
variation among varieties have greater weight in determining where varieties are positioned on the graph. This can
be helpful in making selections based on multiple characteristics at once. This graph helps us select which varieties
we send to the group of chefs we are working with for further quality evaluation
17
Kale
color
texture
sweetness
acidity
saltiness
bitterness
intensity
0 1 2 3 4 5
Black MagicBlack TuscanCavolo NeroCurly RojaDarkiborGalega de Folhas LisasHudson Valley Dino GHudson Valley Dino NKale CoalitionMeadowlarkNashs GreenNashs RedOld Growth PalmRed RuffledRed RussianRed UrsaRedborRipborRussian HungergapStarborSutherlandToscanoWestern FrontWestlanderWhite RussianWild Garden Lacinato GWild Garden Lacinato NWild Garden Mix
18
scor
e
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
color
textur
e
swee
tness
acidit
y
saltin
ess
bitter
ness
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
● ●
●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
● ●
● ●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Black MagicBlack TuscanCavolo NeroCurly RojaDarkiborGalega de Folhas LisasHudson Valley Dino GHudson Valley Dino NKale CoalitionMeadowlarkNashs GreenNashs RedOld Growth PalmRed RuffledRed RussianRed UrsaRedborRipborRussian HungergapStarborSutherlandToscanoWestern FrontWestlanderWhite RussianWild Garden Lacinato GWild Garden Lacinato NWild Garden MixWild Red
19
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Variables factor map (PCA)
Dim 1 (49.36%)
Dim
2 (2
8.26
%)
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
color
texture
sweetnessacidity
saltiness bitterness
Representation of quality characteristics, based on crew evaluation, resulting from a principal component analysis of
all crew quality evaluation data. The length of the arrow for each characteristic is proportional to its contribution
to the variation among varieties, and the direction of the arrow is in the direction of increasing scores for that
characteristic. This shows how related the characteristics are to each other, and is also used to read the following
graph of varieties. The individual (variety) factor map on the next page plots where each variety lands relative to
these quality components
20
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
Individuals factor map (PCA)
Dim 1 (49.36%)
Dim
2 (2
8.26
%)
Black Magic
Black Tuscan
Cavolo Nero
Curly Roja
Darkibor
Galega de Folhas Lisas
Hudson Valley Dino GHudson Valley Dino N
Kale Coalition
Meadowlark
Nashs Green
Nashs Red
Old Growth Palm
Red Ruffled
Red Russian
Red Ursa
Redbor
Ripbor
Russian Hungergap
Starbor
Sutherland
Toscano
Western Front
Westlander
White Russian
Wild Garden Lacinato G
Wild Garden Lacinato N
Wild Garden Mix
Wild Red
Representation of varieties, based on crew evaluation, resulting from a principal component analysis of all crew quality
evaluation data. The position of each variety shows how it was evaluated for the di↵erent quality characteristics on
the previous page. For example, a variety that near or beyond the end of the color arrow would show particularly
intense color and a variety on the opposite side of the graph than the direction in which the color arrow points would
have poor color. This can be done for each of the quality characteristics. This graph also shows how varieties are
related to each other for the complete set of quality characteristics, and characteristics that contributed more to the
variation among varieties have greater weight in determining where varieties are positioned on the graph. This can
be helpful in making selections based on multiple characteristics at once. This graph helps us select which varieties
we send to the group of chefs we are working with for further quality evaluation
21
Kale%Variety Date Number%of%Chefs
Flavor%Intensity%%%%(1;9,%
9=high)
Buy%for%yourself%%(y/n)
Buy%for%your%restaurant%%
(y/n)How%would%you%serve%it? Description%of%unique%flavor%
characteristicsStrongest%point
Major%flaws
Starbor 7.14.15 6 4.33 0.17 0.33 braised0;0everything0;0.0;0blanched0;0cooked0;0.
average0;0well0balanced0;0very0mild0with0hearty0texture0and0grass0flavor0;0kind0of0spicy0;0vegetable0flavor,0mineral,0stringy0;0confusing,0mellow;0bitterness0is0nice
hearty0leaves0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0vegetable0flavor0;0bitter
bland0;0.0;0lacking0flavor0;0grainy0;0.0;0mellowness
Wild%Red 7.14.15 6 4.83 0.67 0.83
raw,0fresh0;0raw0w/0warm0vin0;0raw0or0in0a0bright0vinaigrette0or0puree0;0blanched0w/0lemon,0salt,0oil0;0raw0;0raw
very0peppery0;0mild0flavor;0could0be0paired0w/0anything0;0mild0with0slight0peppery0flavor0and0hint0of0lemon0and0sorrel0;0.0;0veg;0crispy;0pepper;0mineral0;0.
pepper0;0.0;0tenderness,0citrus0like0flavors0;0.0;0crisp,0loved0texture0and0mild0flavor0;0.
floppy0leaves0;0.0;0.0;0grainy0;0.0;0.
Redbor 7.14.15 6 5.00 0.50 0.67
braised0;0many0ways0;0braised0;0blanched0w/0lemon,0salt,0butter0;0cooked,0brasied;0dehydrated0;0raw
onion,0mellow0;0well0balanced0;0deep0collard0like0flavor0with0lemon0sorrel0finish0;0strong0bitterness,0tough0;0tough,0bland,0mild0aftertaste0;0crispness,0clean0flavors
.0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0texture
looks0like0leaves0bruise0easily0;0.0;0.0;0bitter0;0gritty,0low0flavor0;0.
Red%Ursa 7.14.15 6 5.17 0.67 0.50
braised0;0braised0;0mildness,0would0make0it0good0for0juicing0or0smoothies0;0slow0cooked0w/0salt,0pepper,0butter0;0raw0;0raw
dandelion,0grassy0;0well0balanced0;0mild0flavor,0slight0bitter0finish0;0bitter0;0crispy,0bitter0mineral0flavor0;0.
.0;0.0;0.0;0texture0;0crispy0;0acidic0finish
grassy0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0.
Sutherland 7.14.15 6 5.33 0.83 1.00
raw,0fresh;0braised0;0raw;0braised;0wilted0;0chopped0raw0as0a0salad0or0sandwich0garnish0;0raw0w/0aioli;0cooked0w/0butter0;0raw0;0.
Nash's%Red 7.14.15 6 5.33 0.17 0.50
raw;0braised0;0brasied0w/0meat,0bacon/pork0;0fried0or0baked0to0crisp0;0would0not0serve0;0raw0;0.
beet0green,0darker0;0crunchy,0bitter,0spicy0;0spicy0to0start,0bitter0to0finish0;0bland,0tastes0like0grass0;0fresh,0mild;0a0little0sweetness0;0.
beet0green0;0.0;0peppery0flavor0;0.0;0mild0;0.
.0;0.0;0.0;0flavorless0;0needs0more0sweetness0;0.
Kale%Variety Date Number%of%Chefs
Flavor%Intensity%%%%(1;9,%
9=high)
Buy%for%yourself%%(y/n)
Buy%for%your%restaurant%%
(y/n)How%would%you%serve%it? Description%of%unique%flavor%
characteristicsStrongest%point
Major%flaws
Wild%Garden%Lacinato 7.14.15 6 5.50 0.50 0.83
brasied0;0raw0;0braized0with0bacon0or0butter0;0raw0w/0vin;0cooked0w/0butter0;0raw0;0cooked
very0mild0;0great0crispy0texture;0mild0flavor0;0asringent0finish,0earthy,0deep0green0flavor0;0lemon,0hearty0texture0;0bland,0crispy,0not0bitter0;0spicy
hearty0leaves0;0broccoli0flavor0;0great0earthy0depth0of0flavor0;0texture0;0texture0;0.
kind0of0bland0;0.0;0bitterness0;0.0;0.0;0.
Meadowlark 7.14.15 6 5.50 0.67 0.67
braised0;0braised0;0.0;0raw0w/0aioli;0cooked0w/0butter0;0cooked0;0cooked,0brasied;0raw0in0salad
dandelion,0bitter0;0bland,0no0flavor0;0very0spinach0like0flavor0;0sweet,0great0texture0;0bland,0spicy,0sweet0;0balanced,0bitter,0sweet,0acidic
pretty0hearty0leaves0;0.0;0.0;0wellGrounded0;0spicy,0texture0;0this0is0pretty0great
bitter0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0.0;0.
Nash's%Green 7.14.15 6 5.50 0.50 0.67
would0not0serve0;0soup/beans0;0braised0or0soup0with0white0beans0and0pork0;0raw,0julienned0;0raw0;0raw
great0balance0w/0bitter,0spice0;0earthy0mineral0flavor0;0mild0sweetness0;0vegetable,0bitter,0iron0;0cats;0tastes0like0a0cat0box0in0the0summer0;0.
.0;0balanced0;0.0;0
.0;0iron0;0acidic0finish
cats0;0.0;0.0;0grainy0;0.0;0.
Red%Ruffled 7.14.15 6 5.83 0.83 0.67
braised0;0raw,0brasied,0quickly0sauteed0;0.0;0blanched,0cooked0w/0butter0;0raw,0salad,0garnish0;0raw
dandelion0;0very0tender,0watery0w/0nice0smoky0finish0;0sweet0pea0like0flavor0;0bitter,0creamy0;0vegetable,0spicy,0smooth,0sweet0;0bright0finish,0lemony,0acidic
.0;0.0;0taste0and0sweetness0;0.0;0spicy,0texture0;0lemony
floppy0leaves0;0.0;0.0;0slimy0raw0mouthfeel0;0.0;0.
Black%Magic 7.14.15 6 6.33 0.50 0.50
raw,0fresh0;0brasied;0fried0;0braised0;0blanched,0cooked0w/0butter0;0cooked0;0cooked
seaweed,0blueberry0;0dry0;0peppery0and0slightly0sweet0comparatively0;0bitter,0spicy0;0bland,0bitter0aftertaste,0crispy0texture0;0spicy
flavor0;0very0dry0;0sweetness0;0.0;0texture0;0.
.0;0.0;0.0;0too0bitter0;0.0;0.
Hudson%Valley%Dino 7.14.15 6 6.67 0.50 0.83
raw,0fresh0;0brasied,0w/0spicy0peppers0;0think0sliced0and0raw0in0salad0;0raw,0julienned0;0raw0;0cooked
mild,0lemony0;0spicy,0bitter0;0grassy0with0almost0mushroom0like0earthiness0;0almost0creamy0texture0;0bitter,0minerally;0tangy0;0spicy
lemony0;0.0;0.0;0texture0;0mineral0;0.
.0;0too0spicy0;0.0;0.0;0too0bitter0;0.
Curly%Roja 12.8.15 3 3.33 0.67 0.67
raw0in0a0salad,0very0lightly0dressed0;0slightly0more0fiborous0version0of0Redbor.0Serve0braised0;0chips/salad
nutty0after0taste0;0not0as0unique0as0Redbor,0more0grassy0and0bitter0;0mild,0pretty0versital0
color0;0apperance0;0pretty0color
lack0of0flavor(can0be0stregnth)0;0NA0;0no0major0flaws
Kale%Variety Date Number%of%Chefs
Flavor%Intensity%%%%(1;9,%
9=high)
Buy%for%yourself%%(y/n)
Buy%for%your%restaurant%%
(y/n)How%would%you%serve%it? Description%of%unique%flavor%
characteristicsStrongest%point
Major%flaws
Redbor 12.8.15 3 4.33 0.67 1.00
briney0soup0with0cabbage0;0salads0;0fried,0roasted.0Dense0but0not0overly0fiborous0texture,0would0be0good0for0crispy0prep.0
great0flavor,0can0be0very0versatile/0veggie0flav0;0milder0;0earthy0carrot0like0sweetness0with0a0hint0of0red0beet
not0too0strong0or0flavorless0;0pretty0color0;0texture0mild0flavor
none0;0no0major0flaws0;0NA
Meadowlark 12.8.15 3 5.33 0.67 1.00
possibly0a0fried0garnish0for0soup0;0salad,0nice0texture0and0flavor0raw.00;0soup,0main0ingredient
citrus0and0buttery0;0green0and0fresh,0but0not0too0bitter,0nutty0finish0;0strong0kale0earthy0flavor
mildness0;0texture,0finish0;0strong0flavor
NA0;0NA0;0N/A
Westlander 12.8.15 3 6.33 0.67 0.67
cook0possibly0in0our0spin0art0dip0to0add0texture0and0body0;0braised0or0juiced0;0salads
mild0at0first0with0a0strong0lingering0flavor0;0green0and0bitter,0very0little0sweetness,0zinc0finish0;0good0kale0flavor0with0a0little0sweetness
after0taste0;0NA0;0sweet0after0taste
strong0flavor0;0bitter,0astringent0finish0;0N/A
Ripbor 12.8.15 3 6.67 0.67 1.00
brothy0soup0vegetarian0lasagna0;0braised0with0a0touch0of0sugar0or0stewed0to0over0come0the0bitter0flavor0;0many0uses
citrus0and0not0too0fiberous0;0grassy,0but0bitter.0Pleasing/mineral0and0copper0finish0;0great0balanced0flavor
strong0flavor0right0away0;0NA0;0balanced
NA0;0bitterness0;0N/A
Darkibor 12.8.15 3 7.00 0.67 0.67
raw0with0a0creamy0dip0maybe0a0lightly0dressed0stew0;0dense0texture,0would0stand0up0to0braising0or0roasting,0would0be0good0juiced0;0soup0or0broth,0not0a0main0ingredient
earthy0veggie0;0broccoli0flavor,0fresh0and0green.0Not0as0bitter0on0finish,0grassy,0minerally0;0intense0flavor,0slightly0bitter0aftertaste
crip0;0brocoli0flavor0;0intense0kale0flavor
none0;0slightly0metalic0finish0;0bitter0after0taste
Grand 5.44 0.54 0.67
Greens%VarietyOsaka0Purple 7.14.15 2 9 1 1 w/0cured0meats pure0mustard,0raw0cauliflower
Bau0Sin7.14.15 4 8 1 1 great0pairing0w/0anything0
acid0;0braised0;0raw
pure0mustard,0raw0cauliflower0;0spicy,0crisp,0mineral0;0so0spicy,0fresh0wasabi0taste
0;0spice0;0so0good,0mustard0spice
Ho0Mi0Z 7.14.15 2 7 1 1 raw,0cooked,0roaster spicy,0crisp,0mineral spicePhodos0Endive 7.14.15 2 7 1 1 raw mellow,0sweet0crisp0texture