Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

112 Tri-state Extension testing : Oregon - STAB 7, STAB 47, STAB 113, KAB 37; Idaho Idaho - STAB 7, STAB 47, STAB 113 Upcoming Releases • No winter varieties were proposed for release. • We have planted Breeder’s Seed head rows of all selections the AMBA Pilot program. • One acre of STAB 7 will be increased in a spring seeding in cooperation with the Washington Crop Improvement Association in order to have sufficient seed for a plant scale test. Variety performance updates There was commercial production of Kold and Strider. Spring Barley Improvement 6-row: The consensus of discussions with western spring 6-row malting barley users was that the two most promising varieties for western production are Excel and Stander. Drawbacks to these varieties, in western production, are thin seed and susceptibility to stripe rust. Accordingly, we implemented a marker-assisted selection program to transfer stripe rust resistance QTLs from the varieties Orca (2-row) and Tango (6-row). 1,200 F5 SSD lines were evaluated for stripe rust resistance in Mexico in the summer of 2001. One hundred forty selections had rust severities < 20%. We proceeded with one cycle of greenhouse seed increase and are currently genotyping these lines to determine their stripe rust resistance allele architecture. The resistant lines are currently planted at Davis, California and Ciudad Obregon, Mexico; we will proceed with F7 head row evaluations at Tule Lake, California and (in a cooperative effort with BARI) at Fort Collins, Colorado. We will confirm stripe rust resistance this summer at Toluca, Mexico. Samples from agronomically promising lines at Tule Lake and Ciudad Obregon will be submitted for malting quality assessment, laying the groundwork for improvement of spring western 6-row. As mentioned in the preceding section on winter malting barley improvement, we are hoping to integrate our 6-row malting barley efforts so the same varieties will be suitable for fall and spring sowing. 2-row: The goal of our 2-row spring barley improvement efforts has been a public sector variety better than Baronesse. Ideally, we would like a Baronesse with malting quality. All of our spring barley improvement efforts have been conducted within a framework of disease resistance. Broad-spectrum resistance to stripe rust, and other diseases, will be an excellent insurance policy. These resistance genes will help to ensure the stability of barley production by preventing expensive and unpleasant surprises. Our strategy for spring 2-row improvement has been to pyramid resistance QTLs using marker-assisted selection. These efforts have paid off. As shown in Table 9, genotypes with multiple resistance QTL alleles have lower levels of stripe rust than lines with one or no QTL. Some of these resistance gene pyramid selections were also resistant to the reported new virulence detected at Huancayo, Peru in 2001 (Table 8). We are confirming these preliminary data with more extensive tests in Ecuador and Peru.
Germplasm Development: 113 Crosses: Due to resource constraints faced by the Tri-State Barley Commissions, and the fact that there are strong two-row breeding programs in the Pacific Northwest, we decided to de-accelerate our 2-row breeding efforts for at least one cycle. We had focused our crossing efforts on transferring disease resistance QTL alleles to Merit. In order to keep the germplasm moving through the pipeline, we sent seed of these crosses to the BARI program for advance and selection. Germplasm advance: Per crossing, we curtailed germplasm advance, with the exception of 6-row populations involving Lacey/Tango and Sara/Tango. After one cycle of greenhouse increase, and a cycle of stripe rust assessment in Mexico in the summer of 2001, we increased the BCD47/Baronesse population of 422 doubled haploid lines in New Zealand. All lines with BCD 47 levels of stripe rust resistance that are of Baronesse height and maturity will be planted in single rep yield trials at Pendleton. Cycle 1: Head rows 2001 • Due to drought conditions and the resulting water wars we were not able to grow plots in the Klamath Basin in 2001. 2002 • 105 lines BSR resistant 6-rows from the Orca/Stander/Tango/Excel SSD populations will be planted at Tule Lake. Cycle 2: Single replication yield trials 2001 • An Augmented PYT consisting of 205 lines, including checks, was grown at Pendleton. This nursery consisted primarily of double haploids derived from crosses of the stripe rust resistance gene pyramids (Ops, Ajo, Bu, and Sal) with a Czech selection (He6890). The drought stress at Pendleton, coupled with selection against short statue, allowed us to select lines for replicated trials in 2002. Malting quality data on these selections has not been received from the CCRU. • RCSLYT - 52 entries from the Hordeum vulgare subsp. spontaneum introgressions with Harrington were grown at Pendleton, Aberdeen, Pullman, Saskatoon, and Bozeman. These data, shown in Table 10, are quite exciting: the spontaneum accession clearly contributed positive alleles for seed size and weight. In some cases, this led to higher yield. Malting quality data on these selections has not been received.
Page 1 and 2:
Annual Pro
Page 3:
-i- INTRODUCTION The March 2002 <st
Page 6 and 7:
Barley Transformation G.J. Muehlbau
Page 9 and 10:
1 2000/2001 WINTER NURSERY: BARLEY
Page 11 and 12:
3 2001 Barley Stripe Rust Screening
Page 13 and 14:
5 Triumph/Tyra//Arupo, a selection
Page 15 and 16:
7 Washington (Fossum Cereals and Wa
Page 17 and 18:
9 This project is supported by the
Page 19 and 20:
11 ‘Triumph’, ‘Valier’, ‘
Page 21 and 22:
13 Table 2. Agronomic data for sele
Page 23 and 24:
15 Table 4. Agronomic data for sele
Page 25 and 26:
17 Table 8. Malting quality data* f
Page 27 and 28:
19 Six-rowed barley selections of c
Page 29 and 30:
21 Table 14. Agronomic data for sel
Page 31 and 32:
23 Table 16. Agronomic data for win
Page 33 and 34:
25 Table 19. Malting quality data*
Page 35 and 36:
Garnet/98Ab11865 Garnet/98Ab12895 9
Page 37 and 38:
29 rust resistant NSGC accessions o
Page 39 and 40:
31 DEVELOPMENT OF SIX-ROWED MALTING
Page 41 and 42:
33 backcrossing. The selfed lines w
Page 43 and 44:
35 MINNESOTA BARLEY IMPROVEMENT PRO
Page 45 and 46:
37 ADVANCED LINE EVALUATION Varieti
Page 47 and 48:
39 OTHER BARLEY DISEASES In 2001, r
Page 49 and 50:
41 Wingbermuehle, W. J., K.M. Belin
Page 51 and 52:
43 In 2001 winter/spring, over 300
Page 53 and 54:
45 assessments were made by countin
Page 55 and 56:
47 IDENTIFICATION OF NOVEL DISEASE
Page 57 and 58:
49 Unfortunately, disease levels in
Page 59 and 60:
51 BARLEY TRANSFORMATION G.J. Muehl
Page 61 and 62:
53 We have available the sugarcane
Page 63 and 64:
55 Secondly, we tried to grow F. gr
Page 65 and 66:
57 References: Issac, S. and Jennin
Page 67 and 68:
59 Huntley-dryland) with two replic
Page 69 and 70: 61 Table 2. 1992 thru 2001 Overall
Page 71 and 72: 63 performance for Montana farmers.
Page 73 and 74: 65 Blake, T,. Hensleigh P., Boss D.
Page 75 and 76: 67 settling tower cannot accommodat
Page 77 and 78: Table 3. Seedling reaction to strip
Page 79 and 80: 71 TWO-ROWED BARLEY IMPROVEMENT PRO
Page 81 and 82: Table 1. Agronomic trait comparison
Page 83 and 84: 75 mutants reduce plant vigor and g
Page 85 and 86: 77 SIX-ROWED BARLEY IMPROVEMENT PRO
Page 87 and 88: 79 this variety has decreased over
Page 89 and 90: Table 7. Malt quality comparisons o
Page 91 and 92: 83 • Management studies for malt
Page 93 and 94: 85 STUDIES ON BARLEY DISEASES AND T
Page 95 and 96: 87 With funding from the US Wheat a
Page 97 and 98: 89 MALTING AND BREWING QUALITY OF B
Page 99 and 100: 91 β-glucans, it might be most ins
Page 101 and 102: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 93 Figure 1.
Page 103 and 104: 95 Bolin, P., Schwarz, P., Jones, B
Page 105 and 106: 97 Results Results from field and g
Page 107 and 108: 99 DEVELOPING BARLEY TISSUE CULTURE
Page 109 and 110: 101 trials of plants regenerated fr
Page 111 and 112: 103 Table 2. Agronomic performance
Page 113 and 114: 105 BSMV spread between entries. Ho
Page 115 and 116: 107 involving two susceptible backg
Page 117 and 118: 109 THE OREGON BARLEY IMPROVEMENT P
Page 119: 111 for traits that are difficult/e
Page 123 and 124: 115 • All lines in spring yield t
Page 125 and 126: 117 Table 2. Agronomic data for Ore
Page 127 and 128: 119 Table 6. Malting quality of win
Page 129 and 130: 121 Table 7. Across location summar
Page 131 and 132: 123 MOLECULAR MARKER ASSISTED MODIF
Page 133 and 134: 125
Page 135 and 136: 127 exchanges. Spring and winter ba
Page 137 and 138: 129 Table 2. 2000-2001 Agronomic Pe
Page 139 and 140: 131 Table 7. Spring 2- and 6-Row #
Page 141 and 142: 133 2. Direct Seeding Cropping Syst
Page 143 and 144: 135 D.M. Wesenberg - spring and win
Page 145 and 146: 137 A STUDY OF THE MALTING QUALITY
Page 147 and 148: 139 Methods. Our malting schedule.
Page 149 and 150: 141 modification measures indicated
Page 151 and 152: 143 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE PROTEIN
Page 153 and 154: 145 Purification of a serine endope
Page 155 and 156: 147 STUDIES ON THE PROTEINASES THAT
Page 157 and 158: 149 with the proteinase T will be s
Page 159 and 160: 151 10°C increase in thermostabili
Page 161 and 162: 153 Sissons MJ and MacGregor AW (19
Page 163 and 164: µM Carbohydrate / Unit of α-Gluco
Page 165 and 166: 157 Tissue-specific gene products f
Page 167 and 168: 159 The promoters were subcloned fr
Page 169: 161 Fig. 3. Expression of Trx-Hth f
show all

Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?