Gabe15

Yield is a complex metric, as it involves not only how much fruit you get per bunch, but also how many bunches per year which is ultimately a function of suckering production behavior and pruning management, the size of the plants and how close they can be grown together (yield/acre), and the plants ability to resist pests, diseases and adverse conditions and still be productive. So, you're not going to be able to find one answer that is always true across all situations.

The biggest factor is environment. Suppose you're in a marginal banana growing area in the Southern US where Orinoco is quite common and can actually make bananas, even though it's far less productive than a Cavendish in ideal conditions, the Cavendish would never be able to make fruit, so in that case the Orinoco would be more productive than Cavendish.

If you are growing in the tropics and assuming any variety can grow equally well to their full potential, then pests and diseases can become a limiting factor and can also be viewed as an environmental stressor. Some varieties are very sensitive to corm weevils, BBTV, Panama Wilt, or Black Sigatoka to name a few common maladies, and so those varieties may be severely impacted and suffer a big yield loss.

As a case study, based on my real production data, I grow (among many others) both Dwarf Iholena and the semi-dwarf Gros Michel cultivar Cocos. The Iholena only makes around 35lb bunches on average, and the Gros Michel around 80lb. However, the Iholena fruits for the first time in about 1/2 the time of the Cocos, and can fruit up to another 2 times before the Cocos is on to its second bunch. Additionally, the Iholena can be planted at a tighter spacing, so for the same unit area and time (which in my case is a 12x300ft bed over 2 years) the Iholena has a yield potentially of around 12,600lb whereas the Cocos only around 8000lb, so regardless of bunch size the Iholena is more productive in this case.

Now if you want to throw all that aside and just talk fantasy across the board productivity, say in a magic greenhouse with absolutely perfect growing conditions and no pests or diseases ever, then the commonly accessible varieties which I would place in the top tier in no particular order would be:

-Cavendish types such as 'Grande Naine' and 'Williams'
-FHIA-1/Goldfinger
-FHIA-17
-Tall forms of Namwah/Pisang Awak



I think that is an oversimplification. Some tetraploids do make huge bunches, but not all of them, and some of them are relatively slow, so their yield over time isn't particularly high. For example, for me FHIA-25 typically makes 120-140lb bunches which are objectively huge but they are always the last to fruit after planting by many months, and don't fruit again very quickly. Grown right next to them in the same conditions, Dwarf Cavendish only makes around 50-60lb bunches, but can make 3-4 of them in the same amount of time as it took the FHIA-25 to produce 1. So, the Dwarf Cavendish (a triploid) is more productive overall than FHIA-25 (a tetraploid), in my conditions.


Namwah/Pisang Awak is a triploid FYI.

__________________
Growing bananas in Colorado, Washington, Hawaii since 2004. Commercial banana farmer, 200+ varieties.