Contribution of Health Attributes, Research Investment and Innovation To Developments in The Blueberry Industry

This article was downloaded by: [Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile]
On: 16 March 2015, At: 04:51

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK
International Journal of Fruit

Science
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wsfr20
Contribution of Health
Attributes, Research
Investment and Innovation to
Developments in the Blueberry
Industry
a
Richard Carew , Wojciech J. Florkowski & S. He
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Pacific AgriFood Research Centre , Summerland, British
Columbia , BC , Canada , VOH120
b
University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural

and Applied Economics , Griffin , GA , 30223 , USA
Published online: 13 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: Richard Carew , Wojciech J. Florkowski & S. He (2005)

Contribution of Health Attributes, Research Investment and Innovation to
Developments in the Blueberry Industry, International Journal of Fruit Science, 5:4,
95-117, DOI: 10.1300/J492v05n04_10
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J492v05n04_10
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
Downloaded by [Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile] at 04:51 16 March 2015
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Contribution of Health Attributes,

Research Investment and Innovation
to Developments in the Blueberry Industry:
A Canada-U.S. Comparison
Richard Carew
Wojciech J. Florkowski
S. He
ABSTRACT. This paper examines how the United States and Canadian
highbush and lowbush blueberry industries have changed over the last
two decades. Production increases have been driven by a combination of
changing consumer preferences for healthy foods and the development
of new cultivars that have opened new production regions, expanded
fresh market opportunities, and created new food products. Canada has
found it advantageous and economical to invest its research effort in the
development of the lowbush blueberry, exploiting its health protective
properties. The United States has concentrated its research effort on
highbush cultivars to lengthen the harvest window and promote diversification opportunities in the Southern United States. Highbush production expansion in the Pacific Northwest has relied very little on new
cultivar development and improvements in yield but more on increases
in cultivated area. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@
haworthpress.com> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> 2005 by
The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
Richard Carew is affiliated with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Pacific AgriFood Research Centre, Summerland, British Columbia, BC, Canada VOH120.
Wojciech J. Florkowski and S. He are affiliated with the University of Georgia,
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Griffin, GA 30223.
Address correspondence to: Richard Carew at the above address (E-mail: carewr@
agr.gc.ca).
International Journal of Fruit Science, Vol. 5(4) 2005
Available online at http://www.haworthpress.com/web/IJFS
2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1300/J492v05n04_10
95
96
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE
KEYWORDS. Canada, U.S., blueberry, health attributes, research effort, production trends
INTRODUCTION
Blueberries are one of the horticultural crops grown in both Canada
and the United States whose economic importance has rapidly increased since the late 1990s. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, blueberries are considered healthy food since they are high in fiber,
potassium, and vitamin C, and contain important phytonutrients that
may help prevent diseases and improve vision (Warner, 2004). Blueberries are one of the top ten foods listed by Perry (2004) as important for
the maintenance of human health. The combination of health benefits,
increased consumption, stronger prices, and the recent introduction of
northern and southern highbush cultivars have augmented the expansion of the blueberry industry (Sjulin, 2003).
The blueberry plant is native to North America with several species
grown in Canada and the United States. Most of the blueberry production
in Canada is lowbush blueberries (Vaccinium angustifolium), while
highbush (Vaccincum corymbosum) and rabbiteye (V. ashei Reade) are the
dominant species in the United States. The public R&D system in Canada
devotes the majority of its research effort to improving native lowbush
blueberry stands and determining the nutritional and health attributes of
naturally occurring phenolic compounds. Plant patenting of low-chill
southern highbush cultivars and the development of exclusive license arrangements for specific regions of the United States have emerged as a
strategic intellectual property activity undertaken by U.S. Land Grant Universities to optimize their returns on investment in plant breeding.
Since 1998, significant increases in blueberry production have occurred in both Canada and the United States. Production expansion in
North America has been associated with greater increases in yield in the
United States and harvested area expansion in Canada. Whether production expansion has been driven by the development of improved
cultivars is difficult to quantify. The combination of innovation advances in freezing technology and product convenience have helped to
shape market demand in the 1990s. Increases in blueberry consumption
may have resulted from publicity about the health benefits (e.g., antioxidant activity) and the creation of new products. This paper describes
how increases in blueberry production and expanded consumption have
evolved in both Canada and the United States, and analyzes whether in-
Carew, Florkowski, and He
97
creased prices, the introduction of northern and southern cultivars, and

the creation of health or food processing inventions have spurred improvements in the North American blueberry industry. The structure of
the paper is as follows: The pattern of blueberry production and factors
such as yield and harvested area shaping changes in both Canada and
the United States are examined in the first section. Consumer preferences for blueberry and changes in the structure of demand are examined in the second section. The U.S. and Canadian trade patterns are
described in the third section. The nature of innovation, research and development (R&D) investment and intellectual property policies in both
jurisdictions are examined in the fourth section to determine how they
have impacted the releases of new cultivars and measures to protect
intellectual property such as patents.
CANADA AND U.S. BLUEBERRY PRODUCTION TRENDS
Canada and the United States account, respectively, for 29% and
54% of the world blueberry production (USDA, 2003a). Data from the
2001 Census showed that the Canadian blueberry harvested area has increased by 21.4% compared with the 1996 Census (Statistics Canada,
2003a). Over the 2001-2003 period, the average value of Canadas
blueberry production was about $64 million per year in U.S. dollars,
which was less than one-third that of the United States at $216 million
(Statistics Canada, 2003b, USDA, 2003b).
Highbush or cultivated blueberries account for roughly 60% of total
blueberry production in North America. The bulk of cultivated blueberries in North America are grown primarily in the province of British Columbia, Canada and the U.S. States of Michigan, New Jersey, North
Carolina, Oregon, and Washington (USDA, 2003a). While Michigan
accounts for roughly a third of U.S. cultivated blueberry production,
British Columbias cultivated blueberry production accounts for a third
of Canadas total blueberry production. Most wild blueberry production
is concentrated in the state of Maine and the Canadian provinces of
Nova Scotia and Quebec. The majority of wild blueberry production is
used in the processed market. Dried and frozen berries are ingredients
used by food manufacturing companies to make a variety of products.
The share of cultivated blueberry production devoted to the fresh or processed market varies. For Washington and Oregon, the processed market is very important. In New Jersey about 80 percent of the blueberry
crop is sold as fresh, making this share the highest among major-pro-
98
ducing regions in the United States. All Florida blueberry production is

marketed as fresh, while a substantial portion of the North Carolina production is also sold on the fresh market. For British Columbia, most of
the production is devoted to the fresh market.
Because of the seasonal pattern of production, the availability of
blueberries in North America originates from the southern states
(Florida, Georgia) in the spring months, the Pacific Northwest (Oregon,
Washington, British Columbia) and the Northeast (New Jersey, North
Carolina) in the summer months. Although fresh blueberries are available for roughly eight months of the year across the United States and
Canada, the peak season is from mid-April through early October, when
the majority of North American fresh blueberries are harvested.
There are more than 30 different cultivated blueberry cultivars grown in
British Columbia and the United States. Some of the important cultivars in
British Columbia are Bluecrop and Duke (B.C. Ministry of Agriculture,
Food, Fisheries and Industry Competitiveness Branch, 2003). Other well
established cultivars in British Columbia include Earliblue, Weymouth, Reka, Spartan, Northland, Jersey, Brigitta and Elliot.
Apart from Brigitta and Reka which were developed in Australia
and New Zealand, respectively, the majority of highbush varieties
grown in British Columbia were developed by plant breeders in the
United States. In the United States, Star, Emerald, Millennia, Blue
Crisp, and Windsor are the most desired cultivars in the Southeast
and Southwest and some areas of California (Hartman, 2002). Well-established cultivars in Michigan are Blueray, Bluetta, Bluejay,
Elliott, Jersey, and Rubel (Hancock, 2001). The most widely
grown northern highbush cultivars are Bluecrop, Duke and Elliott
(Trinka, 1997). Bluecrop became the most popular variety in North
America about 25 years ago in part due to its high fruit yield. Duke
which was released in 1987 has had a great impact on the North American blueberry industry. This cultivar is noted for its early ripening, late
bloom, large size, firmness, and storage quality. Elliott has become
popular in the last decade due its late harvest, high yields, firm fruit, and
good storage.
Over the last two decades, Canadas blueberry production has increased by roughly 300% from 18,000 metric tons (t) in 1980-82 to
70,000 t in 2001-03. The majority of this increase was primarily due to
harvested area expansion which jumped from 6,600 hectares (ha) in
1980-82 to 24,100 ha in 2001-03 (Table 1). U.S. blueberry production
increased by 133% from 51,600 t in 1980-82 to 120,100 t in 2001-03,
which was due primarily to yield increases (Figure 1) and harvested
99
area expansion particularly in the southern United States. U.S. blueberry yields were similar to Canadas in the 1980s but subsequently
have increased since 1990. U.S. blueberry yields increased by about
90% from 4t/ha per year in 1991-93 to 7t/ha in 2001-03. Sjulin (2003)
reported significant yield increases in New Jersey, Oregon, and North
Carolina over the past 25 years. Canadian average blueberry yields
were 2t/ha per year in 1991-93 compared with 3t/ha in 2001-03.
It is apparent from Figure 1 that, while U.S. average yields have increased over the last two decades, British Columbia and Washington
State yields have been stagnant. This may be attributed to the exhaustion of the genetic yield potential of older cultivars (e.g., Bluecrop)
that comprise the majority of production in the Pacific Northwest
TABLE 1. Canadian and U.S. fresh blueberry production and harvested Area,
1980-2003.
Year
Canadian
Production
(000Mt)
Canadian
Harvested Area
(000Ha)
US
Production
(000Mt)
US
Harvested Area
(000Ha)
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
13.6
18.0
23.2
22.5
17.1
22.4
16.6
29.8
31.8
27.5
36.1
35.9
39.0
39.7
40.6
43.0
49.1
43.9
34.6
66.5
60.6
67.7
64.9
78.6
5.4
6.2
8.2
7.8
5.9
7.7
6.6
10.3
9.7
14.1
13.7
15.1
18.2
19.5
17.9
18.3
19.9
20.0
20.0
22.5
23.9
25.0
24.0
23.3
46.4
53.1
55.2
61.0
54.5
67.3
68.8
66.9
69.1
70.0
79.9
69.9
51.3
77.2
63.8
74.0
58.7
77.1
69.4
110.9
134.4
121.7
115.3
123.3
14.8
16.0
19.7
21.7
21.0
22.4
22.1
22.2
21.6
22.3
26.4
24.8
13.6
14.8
15.0
15.4
15.3
15.7
14.1
15.9
16.3
16.1
16.6
16.3
Sources: (1) Statistics Canada, Fruit and Vegetable Production. (2) Catalogue No. 22-003-XIB, various
years; FAO, FAOSTAT Database.
100
(Himelrick and Dozier, 1994). In the Pacific Northwest, Oregon has attained the highest average blueberry yields at 10t/ha per year over the
1980-2003 period with individual yields in British Columbia and Washingtons averaging roughly 7t/ha. Higher density plantings, trellising to
improve machine harvest efficiency, and raised beds are common cultural practices in Oregon and Washington State, with a greater emphasis
on fertility management in British Columbia (Strik, 2005).
In the United States, blueberry acreage has expanded in the southern
states, which produce the southern highbush and rabbiteye cultivars.
For example, Mississippi blueberry acreage increased from 32 ha in
1981 to 595 ha in 1994 (Muhammad and Allen, 2000). In Georgia, the
number of blueberry plants in commercial plantings have more than
doubled between 1991 and 2002 (Hubbard et al., 1992; Florkowski,
2004). In Florida, with the development of cultivars requiring a low
number of chilling hours, land availability is the only major impediment
constraining blueberry industry expansion. Consequently, the southern
counties of Georgia have become an attractive location for new blueberry production sites. New expansion in the southern states is likely
to continue as a result of improvements in the marketing infrastructure,
especially assembly points providing sorting, grading, and shipping services to growers.
FIGURE1. Canada, U.S., BC, and Washington blueberry yield, 1980-2003.
CDN = Canada, U.S. = United States, BC = British Columbia, WA = Washington State

Source: (1) Statistics Canada, Fruit and vegetable production
(2) USDA Noncitrus fruits and nuts
101
Apart from the southern states, there has been substantive expansion
of blueberry production in the Pacific Northwest (Figure 2). British Columbias blueberry production expansion started in the early 1990s and
has been greater than Washingtons. The annual volume of highbush
blueberry production in British Columbia exceeded 23,000 t in 2003
(B.C. Blueberry Council, 2004) compared with roughly 6,000 t in
Washington State. The average annual production increases over the
1980-2003 period for British Columbia, Oregon, and Washington were
15.8%, 10.9%, and 8.7%, respectively. Most of British Columbia and
Washington production growth expansion were due mainly to harvested area increases.
Blueberry prices were higher in the early 2000s than in the early
1990s. Prices of wild blueberries have been consistently higher than
those of cultivated blueberries. A review of April prices, i.e., the month
when a new blueberry season begins, for frozen wild and cultivated
blueberries indicates that the price difference typically ranges from
10 cents to 15 cents per pound (when sold in 30 pound boxes). Recently,
U.S. prices of wild blueberries declined relative to cultivated blueber-
FIGURE 2. Blueberry production in the Pacific Northwest, 1980-2003.
BC = British Columbia, WA = Washington State, OR = Oregon State

102
ries, and 2002, 2003, and 2004 prices paid for cultivated blueberries
were 15 cents, 10 cents, and 0.3 cents higher than for wild blueberries.
Blueberry prices tend to vary depending on the predominant product
channel (fresh vs. processed) used, the nature of cultivars grown, climatic conditions affecting quality, and marketing options (e.g., cooperatives, local retail markets, direct marketing, pick-your-own) available to
growers. Fresh blueberry prices adjusted for inflation were relatively
higher in Washington and Oregon than in British Columbia (Figure 3).
Several hypotheses can be advanced for the price differences between
Canada and the United States including quality differences, the predominant product (fresh vs. processed) marketed, transportation costs to
major markets and the larger farm sizes in Washington and Oregon that
allow for scale efficiencies to be achieved.
Fresh blueberry prices tend to be higher than those sold for processing. At the beginning of the harvest season, fresh blueberry prices tend
to be highest and gradually decrease as the supply of fresh berries inFIGURE 3. Canada, BC, Washington, and Oregon blueberry prices.
CDN = Canada, OR = Oregon, BC = British Columbia, WA = Washington State

103
creases and the supply sources move from Florida to Georgia to the
mid-Atlantic states and Michigan. For example, in Georgia, the price
per pound received by blueberry growers for fresh fruit ranged from
$0.80 to $1.20 per pound over the 1999-2001 period compared with
$0.25 to $0.80 per pound for processed blueberries. The pick-your-own
prices are comparable with the fresh market prices and farmers have
gained primarily from savings associated with lower harvesting and
packaging costs. A number of growers have taken advantage of selling
their crop through cooperatives (e.g., Michigan Blueberry Growers).
DEMAND AND CHANGING CONSUMER PREFERENCES
Fresh blueberries are a seasonal product with per capita consumption
being relatively higher in the early 2000s than in the early 1990s. In
2002, more cultivated fresh blueberries and frozen wild ones were
marketed through U.S. supermarkets (Bliss, 2002). This reflects the
successful marketing programs retail establishments have mounted
coupled with product convenience. Fresh blueberries require little handling and preparation, and are enjoyed by consumers when eaten alone
or used with other food products such as cereals. Increase in demand for
blueberries also indicates consumer preferences for the distinct qualities of this fruit, which have been promoted because its antioxidant
properties purportedly help to maintain health and possibly prevent
some diseases (Kay and Holub, 2002; Roy et al., 2002). Studies have
also shown the consumption of blueberries may reverse age-induced
deficits in motor learning and memory (Bickford et al., 2000). Because
of these antioxidants and other beneficial compounds, blueberries are
identified by consumers as a functional food, making them a more
attractive product.
Despite the slight differences in the definition by which per capita
consumption is measured in both Canada and the United States, the demand for fresh and frozen blueberries is higher in Canada than in the
United States. Canadas definition of per capita disappearance does not
adjust for retail, household, cooking, and plate loss. The average Canadian and U.S. fresh blueberry per capita consumption was 0.34 kg and
0.11 kg, respectively, over the 1980-2002 period. For frozen blueberries, it was 0.25 kg and 0.14 kg, respectively. In general, Canadian and
U.S. domestic consumption of fresh and frozen blueberries has increased over the years in response to promotional campaigns extolling
their nutritional benefits and the growing array of products available in
104
retail stores. In the United States, the increase in frozen product consumption may have benefitted from innovations in freezing technology,
such as the use of individually quick frozen (IQF), and the increased domestic supplies of frozen blueberries resulting from large production
increases in Maine and the Pacific Northwest (USDA, 2003a).
Demand for blueberries is limited not only to fresh or frozen berries,
but to manufactured breakfast cereal products as well. Product development efforts have examined the use of blueberries as ingredients in other
foods. For example, ice cream, yogurt, and other dairy flavored with
blueberries is widely available in retail stores. Breakfast cereals colored
with lowbush blueberry concentrate have been shown to have a wide appeal by consumers (Camire et al., 2002). Blueberry product development
has also focused on products appealing to populations in other parts of the
world and, potentially, to ethnic minorities in North America (Yoshimura
et al., 2002). The expansion of the range of products using blueberries as
ingredients will increase utilized production and should bolster consumption. Despite a steady increase in blueberry production, the quantity demanded may continue to grow at a comparable pace despite very little
change in real blueberry prices in the foreseeable future.
Large retail establishments have adopted programs to strengthen the
demand for blueberries. The promotion of fresh blueberry sales has become a part of marketing programs organized jointly by major retailers
and state organizations in the United States to enhance the demand for
local produce. This was evident in 2004, with a joint effort between
Wal-Mart stores and a Mississippi blueberry packer to promote the
sales of blueberries by extolling their health attributes. Access to distribution channels and mass marketing media are a real option for blueberries because they are easy to handle compared with many other fruits.
The ease of handling lowers the risk of loss due to shrink and damage,
while packaging them in clamshell and other containers facilitates
in-store display and transportation over long distances.
CANADA AND U.S. BLUEBERRY TRADE PATTERNS
Canada and the United States are net exporters and net importers of
fresh blueberries, respectively. For the 2001-03 period, Canadas net exports of fresh blueberries to the world totaled 12 million in U.S. dollars
per year, up from a net import position of 1 million per year in 1980-82
(Table 2). The expansion of Canadas net exports of fresh blueberries has
been due to a combination of high export prices and increased export vol-
105
umes. Over the 1980-2003 period, Canadas blueberry export volumes
increased at an average annual growth rate of 14.8 percent per year.
Canada is net exporter of fresh and processed blueberries to the
United States. Figure 4 shows Canadas fresh and processed blueberry
trade with the United States. In 2001-03, the net value of Canadas fresh
blueberry trade with the United States totaled $14 million in U.S. dollars versus $33 million for processed blueberries. Though Canada ships
the majority of its fresh blueberry exports to the U.S. market, it tends to
ship its processed blueberries to a larger number of other export market
destinations. The majority of Canadas fresh blueberry exports to the
United States are cultivated blueberries while most of its fresh blueberry imports are wild blueberries. In 2003, 29.9% of Canadas fresh
cultivated blueberry exports went to California, 22.1% to Florida,
12.6% to Washington, and 9.4% to Oregon.
TABLE 2. Canadian fresh blueberry exports and imports, 1980-2003.
Year
Cdn Exports
(Mt)
Cdn Exports
(US$000)
Cdn Imports
(Mt)
Cdn Imports
(US$000)
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2,092
2,176
4,237
3,589
3,688
4,673
4,275
7,823
10,901
5,061
7,381
9,218
9,006
7,693
8,317
8,577
7,084
6,585
7,451
12,843
13,730
18,412
15,691
18,143
1,774
2,043
4,798
4,074
2,526
3,346
3,554
8,219
14,484
7,594
7,656
10,482
12,745
7,763
9,226
10,999
10,826
10,489
13,793
21,577
26,251
30,131
32,558
38,023
2,189
3,181
4,472
5,314
3,815
3,341
5,110
4,369
5,333
3,263
5,230
4,162
5,955
7,785
7,210
3,423
2,309
2,630
2,194
9,659
20,191
19,086
17,225
20,081
2,552
4,133
5,741
6,821
4,600
4,363
6,086
5,813
6,827
6,252
9,786
7,839
10,394
10,038
9,016
6,376
5,389
5,818
4,380
10,611
20,527
19,661
20,277
26,239
Sources: (1) FAO, FAOSTAT Database. (2) Statistics Canada, Trade Statistics.
106
FIGURE 4. Canada fresh and frozen blueberry trade with the United States.
Sources: Statistics Canada, Trade Statistics
Of Canadas fresh wild blueberry imports, 95.8% came from Maine,

2.1% from New Jersey, and 1.4% from North Carolina. The leading
U.S. states for Canadian wild processed blueberry exports in 2003 were
Maine (21.6%), California (20.1%), Michigan (5.9%), Massachusetts
(6.7%), and New York (9.2%). About 60% of Canada wild processed
blueberry imports originated from the state of Maine.
Table 3 shows U.S. blueberry exports and imports over the 19802003 period. The combination of higher import volumes and import
unit values are the reasons for the United States being a net importer of
blueberries. The United States average import blueberry prices totaled
$2675/t per year in 2001-03 versus $1467/t for export prices. While the
United States is the principal import market for Canadian fresh blueberries, most of its imports in the fall and winter months originate from
Chile, Argentina, and New Zealand.
RESEARCH INVESTMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Blueberry research at Agriculture and Agri-food Canada (AAFC)
over the years has focused on how to better manage the wild stands, to
understand nutrient dynamics and pest ecology, and to identify the various anthocyanins and their health effects. The little biotechnology re-
107
TABLE 3. U.S. fresh bluberry exports and imports, 1980-2003.

Year
US Exports
(Mt)
US Exports
(US$000)
US Imports
(Mt)
US Imports
(US$000)
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
3,592
5,244
7,526
7,674
4,123
4,151
8,364
10,517
4,829
5,283
18,757
13,061
6,586
8,633
8,045
4,103
3,458
3,390
3,124
10,712
19,818
18,647
16,587
19,775
2,636
5,049
6,394
6,931
3,528
4,010
4,619
6,245
7,604
2,881
12,742
9,919
13,775
13,061
12,435
9,148
9,393
9,531
8,828
16,524
25,640
23,760
25,859
31,057
2,004
2,072
4,195
3,809
4,076
5,385
4,799
7,669
11,640
6,251
7,641
9,452
9,262
7,951
8,679
8,830
8,061
7,831
8,733
14,510
16,773
22,305
21,099
23,208
1,789
2,047
5,054
4,616
3,736
5,242
6,155
10,116
16,486
9,219
9,442
12,294
13,919
8,627
10,721
13,210
14,414
15,290
19,296
29,224
38,945
49,745
59,083
69,337
Sources: (1) FAO, FAOSTAT Database. (2) USDA, Foreign Agricultural Service (Http://www.fas.usda.gov/
ustrdscripts/USReport.exe).
search effort in Canada has emphasized developing lowbush blueberry

cultivars for cool climatic conditions using in vitro and molecular techniques and traditional breeding techniques (Samir, 2004). Apart from
AAFC, an Atlantic Canada network of universities has established a
project to advance the understanding, establish evidence, and develop
intellectual property products related to health protective and disease
prevention properties of blueberries (BioAtlantech, 2003). Most of the
blueberry research in Canada is concentrated in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and Quebec. Table 4 shows the level of
research effort devoted to the blueberry industry in Canada. The majority of this research is devoted to increasing the productivity of the wild
plant stands (Penney et al., 1997, 2003; Penney and McRae, 2000) with
very little research devoted to food processing and molecular genetic
108
TABLE 4. Canadian blueberry R&D by Federal and Non-Federal agencies,

1998-2003.
Activity
1998
Federal Non-Fed.
2000
2003
Federal Non-Fed. Federal Non-Fed.
Professional person year

Soil, water mgmt. and
environment quality
Pest and disease mgmt.
Food processing
(e.g., food quality)
Engineering
Market economics
Total
1.7
(1.26)
1.7
(1.26)
2.05
(2.1)
5.41
(4.62)
1.27
(0.05)
1.0
(0.0)
0.2
(0.3)
0.5
(0.25)
2.97
(0.6)
2.18
(1.26)
1.7
(1.26)
1.11
(0.05)
1.6
(0.25)
0.5
(0.0)
2.18
(1.26)
1.68
(1.26)
0.61
(0.05)
1.0
(0.0)
3.8
(2.52)
3.21
(0.3)
3.86
(2.52)
1.61
(0.05)
Source: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Data provided by Jane-Anne Dugas.

Notes: Numbers in parentheses refer to technical person year.
A professional person year is the equivalent of one person working full-time on an annual basis on research
and can result from the accumulated total of effort by several researchers. This includes graduate students
at weighted values (i.e., Masters student has a maximum of 0.3 PPY and a PhD student has a maximum of
0.5 PPY).
transformation to develop new cultivated highbush cultivars with

improved quality traits.
Blueberry breeding in the United States has a longer history dating
back to 1910 in New Jersey (Draper, 1997) and spreading to several
regions where blueberries are now grown. Past blueberry breeding focused on problems unique to the northern and southern regions of the
United States (Draper, 1995) and recognized two essential characteristics required to enhance the competitiveness of the blueberry industry:
the short marketing window opportunity for southern growers, and the
need to develop fruit attributes that improved the shipping, storing, and
eating quality of the fruit. Improvements in winter hardiness of northern
species were attained through traditional cross-breeding techniques,
while the emphasis of southern highbush blueberry breeding programs
was concentrated on low chilling requirements, early ripening, disease
resistance, soil adaptation, and heat tolerance. Interspecific hybridization generated unexpected fruit quality improvements such as firmness
and flavor retention (Draper, 1995). Gough (1992) points out that cultivars were developed with low chilling requirements and early ripening
109
through hybridization of native species and highbush cultivars to

bolster the competitiveness of the highbush blueberry sector.
Table 5 shows the level of blueberry research effort in the United
States, which is concentrated in Michigan, Maryland, New Jersey,
Florida, and Mississippi. Institutionally, the blueberry breeding program
resembles that of other small fruit breeding programs, with few publicly
funded small fruit breeding programs (Sjulin, 2003). The breeding program devoted to the development of northern cultivars has benefited
from the cooperation between USDA and the private sector (Draper,
1997). The private sectors role was to test cultivars once they were
developed by public breeding programs. In the southern states, there is
closer cooperation between USDA and researchers located at landgrant universities.
The success of the U.S. breeding program has led to the release of
roughly 70 cultivars over the 1981-2003 period. These cultivars were
developed for varied climatic growing conditions (Table 6). All of the
cultivars released from the Florida breeding program have been protected through patents. Though the North Carolina plant breeders to
TABLE 5. U.S. blueberry R&D by Federal and Non-Federal agencies,
1998-2003.
Activity
1998
USDA
Non-Fed.
2000
USDA Non-Fed.
254
(0.5)
1547
(4.1)
1079
(2.9)
68
(0.0)
64
(0.0)
37
(0.0)
3049
(7.5)
142
(0.4)
1611
(4.9)
1133
(2.5)
175
(0.0)
87
(0.0)
21
(0.0)
3169
(7.8)
2003
USDA Non-Fed.
($000)
Soil, water mgmt. and
environment quality
Plant breeding
Pest and disease
mgmt.
Food processing
(e.g., food quality)
Engineering
Market economics
Total
184
(0.4)
1127
(5.1)
713
(1.3)
194
(1.1)
95
(0.6)
35
(0.4)
2348
(8.9)
150
(1.1)
1217
(5.0)
533
(3.0)
218
(1.1)
91
(0.4)
87
(0.6)
2296
(11.4)
143
(1.7)
1727
(18.4)
1401
(11.0)
198
(0.0)
35
(0.0)
19
(0.0)
3523
(31.0)
167
(0.6)
1542
(5.1)
1003
(4.3)
262
(1.6)
96
(0.5)
16
(0.3)
3086
(12.3)
Source: USDA, CRIS. CSREES (Data provided by Dennis Unglesbee. August 20, 2004).
Notes: Data in parentheses refer to scientist years. This is defined as an investigation leader who spends
portion of his/her time supervising scientists. Generally, the individual holds the rank of assistant professor
or greater. Other research categories such as technical years are not reported because of accuracy
reasons.
110
TABLE 6. Blueberry cultivars by year of introduction and by research

insitution.
Institution
1981-1985 1986-1990
1991-1995
1996-2000
Number of cultivars released

USDA-ARS, Md &
N.J. Agr. Expt. Sta.
Georgia Agr. Expt. Sta./
USDA
North Carolina Expt. Sta.
Michigan State Univ.
University of Florida,
Gainesville
University of Minnesota
USDA-ARS,
Mississippi
University of Arkansas
Agriculture Canada/
Kentville
2001-2003
Number of
patents1
6
3
5
2
16
1
2
2
1
Notes: 1 Patents issued over the period September 1992-September 2004.

Sources: Hort Science, Vol. 34(2), April 1999, pp. 184-185; Hort Science, Vol. 37(2), April 2002, pp. 252-253;
Lyrene, P. (personal communication) for 2002-2003 data; The Brook and Olmo Register of Fruit & Nut Varieties, 1997.
U.S. Patent and Trade Mark Office [Http://www.uspto.gov/] September 20, 2004.
date have not patented any of their released cultivars, in the last couple
of years they have required licenses for propagation (P. Lyrene, personal communication). In Canada, plant breeders rights is the preferred
method of protection. The three blueberry cultivar releases from the
Michigan State breeding program were the only ones that were granted
plant breedersrights in Canada (Canadian Food Inspection Agency,
2004). Plant Breeders Rights allow the breeder (or marketing agent)
the opportunity to be the sole marketer of planting material and to have
the ability to set royalty payments.
To optimize investment from their three varietal releases, Michigan
State University has exclusively licensed its cultivars to two companies
(one in Oregon and the other in South America) (Warren, 2003). Revenues earned from plant patents and licensing schemes have supported
breeding programs at U.S. land-grant universities since state-supported
R&D funds have become scarce. Breeding programs of perennial crops
are expensive because of the lengthy period needed to develop and test a
cultivar. Modern breeding techniques in biotechnology will accelerate
111
the transfer of complex traits over a shorter time horizon but involve extensive costs in terms of equipment and biotechnology skills.
Blueberry research in the United States has focused on optimizing production practices and developing cultivar attributes that will allow for improvements in fruit quality and shipments over longer distances. This
research effort has required more strategic priority setting since blueberries vary widely in terms of yields, maturity, winter hardiness, machine
harvest ability, berry size, storage, flavor, firmness, the ratio of soluble
solids concentration to titratable acidity, and anthocyanin content. Extensive research has been conducted on new and existing cultivars of
highbush blueberry to determine how management practices such as
fertilization, weed control, and pruning could improve fruit quality and
augment the phenolic and anthocyanin content (Dozier et al., 1991;
Perkins-Veazie et al., 1995; Magee, 1999; NeSmith et al., 2002). Storage
is an important attribute because the majority of blueberries destined for
fresh consumption require storing and long distance shipping before they
reach their final destination. The storage period of fresh blueberries can
be extended by the use of controlled atmosphere (CA) and ozone (Jun et
al., 2001) although the economic feasibility of some of these methods has
to be evaluated. If health attributes of blueberry consumption are to be
used in promoting this fruit, exploring genetic, storage, and processing
methods to bolster antioxidant capacity is a relevant research topic (Kalt
et al., 2001a; Scibisz and Mitek, 2001). Differences in antioxidant capacity between low- and highbush cultivars (Kalt et al., 2001b) may be exploited for marketing purposes.
Blueberry research in the United States and Canada has studied
new food production processes including the postharvest handling of
blueberries to understand cooling effects and storage (Jackson et al.,
1999) with modeling changes in blueberries to predict firmness and
mass loss (Tetteh et al., 2004). Postharvest handling of blueberries is
highly integrated and assures a consistent high quality, but consumers, fruit handlers and retail outlets fruit managers require continuing
training in the proper handling of fresh product. It is the competition
from other fresh fruits and vegetables that require us to develop
better blueberry postharvest handling techniques, especially, when
there is a growing body of evidence that indicates improper handling
may lower the content of substances classifying blueberries as a
functional food.
112
PROSPECTS FOR BLUEBERRY RESEARCH

AND DEVELOPMENT
In a consumer-driven market where grocery retailing and wholesaling have become highly concentrated activities, consumer expectations
are likely to determine the range of product attributes supplied by plant
breeders. Imprecise or delayed communication between consumers,
growers, and breeders will result in consumers switching to other fruits.
For example, once popular Georgia fresh peaches have experienced a
steady decline in per capita consumption during the past four decades
because other fruits have offered attributes more attractive to consumers, while the development of new peach cultivars have not kept pace
with rapidly changing market conditions. The increasing popularity of
fresh grapes and wine products in the market place is testimony that
consumers do recognize quality differences among fruits and will
change their purchasing behavior when they are convinced about the
positive health benefits. Even in the blueberry industry, there is evidence that older cultivars are being replaced by newer cultivars (Trinka,
1997; Sjulin 2003; Florkowski, 2004) with improved marketing and
product quality attributes. Therefore, breeding programs must be cognizant of changing consumer preferences in order to strengthen the
competitiveness of the blueberry industry.
In the United States, blueberries are a relatively small crop in terms
of acreage or value of production. However, as consumers become increasingly aware of the link between nutrition, food choices, health and
longevity, the relative importance of blueberries will strengthen. However, the trend over the last three decades in the popularity of small fruit
private breeding programs (e.g., strawberries) in the United States are
likely to extend to blueberries once private companies can protect their
inventions. As publicly funded research budgets have stagnated, researchers at U.S. agricultural experiment stations are likely to continue
to patent their inventions and to exclusively licence their varieties to private companies. We have seen evidence of this at land grant institutions
in Florida and Michigan.
CONCLUSION
North American blueberry consumption has been increasing as result
of promotional programs extolling their health benefits. In response to
the development of new cultivars, U.S. blueberry production has ex-
113
panded into regions of the United States, which until recently, were only
of marginal importance for commercial production (e.g., Mississippi).
Postharvest research efforts have extended beyond the traditional focus
on taste and appearance, and have included studying the health benefits
of antioxidants and other naturally occurring phenolic compounds.
Blueberry production is concentrated in several areas in Canada and
the United States. Canadian provinces bordering the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans lead the countrys blueberry production. In the United States,
the traditional producers in the Northwest, Michigan, and New Jersey,
have been joined by Georgia, Florida and other southeastern states as
supplier sources for fresh and processed blueberries. Maine has been a
supplier of lowbush blueberries.
Canadian blueberry production expansion has relied on harvested
area increases rather than on improvements in yield and cultivar development. Since the bulk of U.S. production is the highbush species, plant
breeders in the United States have focused their attention on cultivar development to expand the harvest window and promote diversification
opportunities in the southern United States. Consequently, yield gains
in the United States have been largest in states producing southern
highbush blueberries. Blueberry cultivars grown in various regions are
often different because of varied climatic and soil conditions and disease pressure. The most pronounced cultural differences are between
northern and southern states or provinces, and between cultivars grown
east and west of the Mississippi River. These differences are likely to
continue because breeding efforts have concentrated in developing new
cultivars suitable to regional growing conditions, e.g., low chill
cultivars for areas in the southeastern United States.
Research effort in new processing methods especially in the United
States has enabled the industry to supply a variety of food products
containing blueberries and thereby expanded the demand opportunities
for fresh and processed blueberries. These developments combined
with expanded harvest opportunities have contributed to increased trade
in blueberries between Canada and the United States. Most of Canadas
fresh blueberries are shipped to the United States. The trade between the
two jurisdictions is complementary in that Canadas shipments are primarily cultivated berries, while its imports consists mostly of wild blueberries. Such an exchange indicates the different marketing channels
used by importers and exporters. Further development of these two
markets will allow the blueberry industry to segment consumers and
possibly increase revenues.
114
Canadas blueberry research effort in the Maritime Provinces and

Quebec has concentrated on optimizing production practices to increase
plant productivity, while in the United States researchers have focused
on cultivar quality attributes, especially those which lower postharvest
losses, extend storage, and allow for shipping over long distances. The
increasing costs of new cultivar development has led to the patenting of
new cultivar releases developed at U.S. land-grant universities or to exclusive licensing arrangements limiting the number of plant suppliers. It
is anticipated that blueberry breeding programs may follow the example
of other breeding programs for small fruit (e.g., strawberries) driven in
part by dwindling public resources and larger financial opportunities
created through plant patenting and the commercialization of technologies. Although public breeding will continue to be important source of
progress in research areas of pest management, disease control, cultural
practices, and environmental effects, private breeding efforts will be
necessary in areas of molecular biology to sustain the development of
new cultivars and improvement in fruit quality traits.
The economic success of the blueberry industry in North America is
an illustration of how a berry crop of marginal importance a few years
ago, when measured by the volume and value of production, has created
a noticeable presence on the produce market landscape. A combination
of factors has contributed to this success, including suitable soil and climate conditions, development of new cultivars, a discovery of traits
beneficial to health, rising consumer incomes and age, and improvements in product handling and use, expanding production and consumption opportunities.
LITERATURE CITED
Bliss, R. M. 2002. Building a better blueberry. Agricultural Research. November.
[Http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3741/is_11_50/ai_94770787] Accessed June 18th, 2004.
British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries Industry Competitiveness Branch. 2003. An overview of the BC high bush blueberry industry.
Abbotsford, British Columbia. November.
B.C. Blueberry Council. 2004. About the industry. Available online: http://www.
bcblueberry.com/about/. Accessed July 16, 2004.
Bickford, P. C., T. Gould, L. Briederick, K. Chadman, A. Pollock, D. Young, B.
Shukitt-Hale, and J. Joseph. 2000. Antioxidant-rich diets improve cerebellar physiology and motor learning in aged rats. Brain Res. 866: 211-217.
115
BioAtlantech-Research and Development. 2003. Atlantic Canada Network of

Bioactive Compounds. [Http:// www.bioatlantech.nb.ca/research_bioactive.html].
Accessed 1st September, 2004.
Camire, M. E., A. Chaovanalikit, M. P. Dougherty, and J. Briggs. 2002. Blueberry and
grape anthocyanins as breakfast cereal colorants. Journal of Food Science 67 (1):
438-441.
Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Plant breeders rights applications by crop kind.
[Http:// www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pbrpov/croproe.pdf] Accessed September 20th, 2004.
Dozier, Jr., W. A., A. W. Caylor, D. G. Himelrick, A. A. Powell, and J. R. Akridge.
1991. Rabbiteye blueberry cultivar performance. Fruit Varieties J. 45 (3):
128-134.
Draper, A. D. 1995. In search of the perfect blueberry variety. J. of Small Fruit Viticult.
3 (2/3):17-20.
Draper, A. D. 1997. Blueberry breeding for the Southern United States. Fruit Varieties
J. 51 (3):135-138.
Florkowski, W. J. 2004. Georgia blueberry inventory and prospectus. The University
of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Georgia Agr.
Expt. Sta. Res. Rpt. 693.
Gough, R. E. 1992. Notes on cultivars of highbush blueberries currently planted in the
United States. J. Small Fruit Viticult. 1 (3):11-26.
Hancock, J. 2001. Blueberry varieties evaluated. Cited from paper in The Fruit Growers News, May. [Http://mtvernon.wsu.edu/frt_hort/blueberry.htm]l Accessed 18th
June, 2004
Hartmann, D. P. 2002. New blueberry cultivars for warm climates. Northland Berry
News. Available online at www.berrynews.com
Himlerick, D. G., and W. A. Dozier, Jr. 1994. An overview of the modern small fruit industry in the United States. J. of Small Fruit Viticult. 2 (3): 15-32.
Hubbard, E. E., W. J. Florkowski, G. W. Krewer, and H. J. Witt. 1992. Georgia blueberry inventory and prospectus. The University of Georgia College of Agricultural
and Environmental Sciences, Georgia Agr. Expt. Sta., Res. Rpt. 608.
Jackson, E. D., K. A. Sanford, R. A. Lawrence, K. B. McRae, and R. Stark. 1999.
Lowbush blueberry changes in response to prepacking delays and holding temperatures. Postharvest Biol. and Technol. 15 (2):117-126.
Jun, S. F. LiHua, C. F. Forney, M. A. Jordan, P. D. Hildebrand, W. Kalt, D. A. J. Ryan.
2001. Effect of ozone treatment and controlled atmosphere storage on quality and
phytochemicals in highbush blueberries. Proceedings of the 8th International Controlled Atmosphere Research Conference, Acta Hort. 600 : 417- 423.
Kalt, W., A. Howell, J. C. Duy, C. F. Forney, and J. E. McDonald. 2001a. Horticultural
factors affecting antioxidant capacity of blueberries and other small fruit.
HortTechnol. 11 (4): 523-528.
Kalt, W., D. A. J. Ryan, J. C. Duy, R. L. Prior, M. K. Ehlenfeldt, S. P. vander Kloet.
2001b. Interspecific variation in anthocyanins, phenolics, and antioxidant capacity
among genotypes of highbush and lowbush blueberries. J. Agr. Food Chem.
49 (10): 4761-4767.
116
Kay, C. D., B. J. Holub. 2002. The effect of wild blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium)
consumption on postprandial serum antioxidant status in human subjects. British
J. of Nutr. 88 (4): 389-397.
Lyrene, P. 1999. Fruit and nut register-blueberry varieties. HortScience 34 ( 2): 184-185.
Lyrene, P. 2002. Fruit and nut register-blueberry varieties. HortScience 37 (2): 252-253.
Lyrene. P. 2004. Personal communication. September 15.
Magee, J. B. 1999. Storage quality evaluation of southern highbush blueberry cultivars
Jubilee, Magnolia, and Pearl River. Fruits Varieties J. 53 (1): 10-15.
Muhammad, S. A. and J. Allen. 2000. Efficient marketing of blueberries in Mississippi
and Louisiana. J. Food Distribution Res. 31 (1): 152-158.
NeSmith, D. S., S. Prussia, M. Tetteh, and G. Krewer. 2002. Firmness losses of
rabbiteye (Vaccinium ashei Reade) during harvest and handling. Proceedings of the
7th International Symposium on Vaccinium, R. F. Hepp (editor). Acta Hort. 574:
287-293.
Penney, B. G., K. B. McRae, and G. A. Bishop. 2003. Second-crop N- fertilization improves lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium Ait.) production. Canadian J.
Plant Sci. 83 (1): 149-155.
Penney, B. G., K. B. McRae. 2000. Herbicide weed control and crop-year NPK- fertilization improves lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium Ait.) production.
Canadian J. Plant Sci. 80 (2): 351-361.
Penney, B. G., K. B. McRae, and A. F. Rayment. 1997. Long-term effects of burnpruning on lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium Ait.) production. Canadian J. Plant Sci. 77 (3): 421-425.
Perkins-Veazie, P., J. R. Clark, J. K. Collins, and J. Magee. 1995. Southern highbush
blueberry clones differ in postharvest fruit quality. Fruit Varieties J. 49 (1): 46-52.
Perry, M. 2004. Eat and be well. Newsday, June 22nd, p. B60. Available online: [http://
pgsab.pgarchiver.com/newsday/653...ionistnamethe10mostimportant
food] Accessed October 25, 2004.
Roy, S., S. Khanna, H. M. Alessio, J. Vider, D. Bagchi, M. Bagchi, and C. K. Sen. 2002.
Anti-angiogenic property of edible berries. Free Radicals Res. 36 (9):1023-1031.
Scibisz, I., M. Mitek. 2001. Changes in antioxidant capacity of highbush blueberries
during processing and storage (in Polish). Zeszyty Naukowe Instytutu Sadownictwa
i Kwiaciarstwa w Skierniewicach 9: 283-288.
Samir, D. 2004. Personal communication. June 11.
Sjulin, T. M. 2003. The North American small fruit industry 1903-2003: contributions
of public and private research in the past 25 years and a view to the future.
HortScience 38 (5): 960-967.
Statistics Canada. 2003a. 2001 Census of agriculture: fruits. Date modified. 2nd
December. [Http://www.statcan.ca/english/agcensus2001/first/farmop/08fruits. htm]
Accessed 12th July, 2004.
Statistics Canada. 2003b. Fruit and vegetable production. Catalogue No. 22-003-XIB
June.
Statistics Canada. Fruit and vegetable production (various years). Catalogue No.
22-003-XIB.
Statistics Canada. 2001. Food consumption in Canada. Catalogue No. 32-230-XIB.
Part II.
117
Strik, B. 2005. Blueberry: An Expanding World Berry Crop. Chronica Horticulturae

45(1): 7-12.
Tetteh, M. K., S. E. Prussia, D. S. NeSmith, B. P. Verma, and D. Aggarwal. 2004. Modeling blueberry firmness and mass loss during cooling delays and storage. Trans.of
the ASAE 47 (4): 1-7.
The Brook and Olmo Register of Fruit and Nut Varieties. 1997. ASPH Press. Third
Edition.
Trinka, D. L. 1997. Production trends in the cultivated blueberry industry of North
America. D.E. Yarborough, J. M. Smagula, eds., Acta Hort. 446 ISHS. pp. 37-39.
United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. 2003a. Commodity highlight: trends in the U.S. blueberry industry. Fruit and Tree Nuts Outlook/FTS-305/July 30th, pp. 12-16.
United States Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service.
2003b. Non citrus fruits and nuts. July.
United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. 2003c. Fruit
and tree nuts situation and outlook yearbook/FTS-2003. October.
Warner, G. 2004. There is potential for late-season blueberries grown in arid climates.
Good Fruit Grower. August, p. 18.
Warren, K. 2003. Licensing agreement sales provide funding for further research. The
Fruit Grower News. Issue No. 3. [Http://www.fruitgrowersnews.com/pages/2003/
issue03_12/03_12_IntellectualProperty.html] Accessed 6th September, 2004.
Yoshimura, Y., S. Ito, M. Ito, A. Yamamoto, and M. Inoue. 2002. Contents ingredients
and consumer evaluation of cookies using bran of rice for sake brewery. Research
Bulletin of the Aichi-ken Agricultural Research Center 34:17-22.

Contribution of Health Attributes, Research Investment and Innovation To Developments in The Blueberry Industry

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Contribution of Health Attributes, Research Investment and Innovation To Developments in The Blueberry Industry

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

This article was downloaded by: [Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile]

On: 16 March 2015, At: 04:51

International Journal of Fruit

Richard Carew , Wojciech J. Florkowski & S. He

University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural

To cite this article: Richard Carew , Wojciech J. Florkowski & S. He (2005)

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Downloaded by [Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile] at 04:51 16 March 2015

Downloaded by [Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile] at 04:51 16 March 2015