116 Karsai, I., K. Meszaros, L. Lang, P.M. Hayes, and Z. Bedo. 2001. Multivariate analysis of traits determining adaptati<strong>on</strong> in cultivated barley. Plant Breeding 120:217-222. Marquez-Cedillo, L.A., P.M. Hayes, A. Kleinhofs, W.G. Legge, B.G. Rossnagel, K. Sato, S.E. Ullrich, D.M. Wesenberg, and the NABGMP. 2001. QTL analysis of agr<strong>on</strong>omic traits in barley based <strong>on</strong> the doubled haploid progeny of two elite North American varieties representing different germplasm groups. Theor. Appl. Genet. 103:625-637. Costa, J.M., S. Kramer, C. Jobet, R. Wolfe, A. Kleinhofs, D. Kudrna, A. Corey, S. McCoy, O. Riera-Lizarazu, K. Sato, T. Toojinda, I. Vales, P. Szucs, and P. M. Hayes. 2001. Molecular mapping of the Oreg<strong>on</strong> Wolfe <strong>Barley</strong>s: an excepti<strong>on</strong>ally polymorphic doubled-haploid populati<strong>on</strong>. Theor. Appl. Genet.103:415-424. Germplasm registrati<strong>on</strong>s Wesenberg, D.M.., D.E. Burrup, W.M. Brown, V.R. Velasco, J.P. Hill, J.C. Whitmore, R.S. Karow, P.M. Hayes, S.E. Ullrich, and C.T. Liu. 2001. Registrati<strong>on</strong> of Bancroft barley. Crop Sci. 41:265-266. Book Chapters P.M. Hayes, A. Castro, L. Marquez-Cedillo, A. Corey, C. Hens<strong>on</strong>, B.L. J<strong>on</strong>es, J. Kling, D. Mather, I. Matus, C. Rossi, and K. Sato. Genetic Diversity for Quantitatively Inherited Agr<strong>on</strong>omic and <strong>Malting</strong> Quality Traits. In R. V<strong>on</strong> Bothmer, H. Knupffer, T. van Hintum, and K. Sato (ed.). Diversity in <strong>Barley</strong>. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam. in press Table 1. Agr<strong>on</strong>omic data for Oreg<strong>on</strong> winter barley selecti<strong>on</strong>s compared to check varieties, averaged across three locati<strong>on</strong>s (Pendlet<strong>on</strong>, Pullman, and Aberdeen; 2001). Yield Test weight Plump seed Variety/selecti<strong>on</strong> (lbs/acre) (lbs/bu) (<strong>on</strong> 6/64) 88Ab536 5366 51 78 Strider 6912 50 82 Hundred 6132 48 49 812 6474 50 74 STAB 7 5439 51 68 STAB 47 5053 51 83 STAB 113 5752 52 80 KAB37 6068 51 68 KAB47 4988 50 67 KAB51 5473 52 85
117 Table 2. Agr<strong>on</strong>omic data for Oreg<strong>on</strong> winter barley selecti<strong>on</strong>s compared to check varieties, averaged across three locati<strong>on</strong>s (Pendlet<strong>on</strong>, Pullman, and Aberdeen; 2000 - 2001). Yield Test weight Plump seed Variety/selecti<strong>on</strong> (lbs/acre) (lbs/bu) (<strong>on</strong> 6/64) 88Ab536 5278 52 82 Strider 7408 51 88 Hundred 6666 50 61 812 6756 51 80 STAB 7 5920 52 76 STAB 47 5187 52 87 STAB 113 6419 53 79 KAB37 6668 53 76 KAB47 5532 52 74 KAB51 5686 53 89 Table 3. Agr<strong>on</strong>omic data for Oreg<strong>on</strong> winter barley selecti<strong>on</strong>s compared to check varieties (2001). Yield Test weight Plump seed Locati<strong>on</strong> /Year Variety/selecti<strong>on</strong> (lbs/acre) (lbs/bu) (<strong>on</strong> 6/64) Pendlet<strong>on</strong> 2001 88Ab536 4483 49 61 Strider 6811 48 78 Hundred 6341 49 35 812 5785 49 61 STAB 7 5532 49 56 STAB 47 5384 52 81 STAB 113 5453 52 75 KAB37 6007 51 61 KAB47 5728 49 50 KAB51 4998 52 86 Pullman 2001 88Ab536 4761 50 83 Strider 6638 48 86 Hundred 5353 43 51 812 6040 48 78 STAB 7 5136 49 75 STAB 47 4342 49 87 STAB 113 5756 50 85 KAB37 5454 49 70 KAB47 5261 50 78 KAB51 5190 49 91 Aberdeen 2001 88Ab536 6854 54 91 Strider 7286 54 83 Hundred 6701 52 61 812 7598 53 82 STAB 7 5650 54 74 STAB 47 5424 53 82 STAB 113 6048 54 79 KAB37 6744 54 73 KAB47 3947 51 73 KAB51 6230 54 77
- 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 and 120: 111 for traits that are difficult/e
- Page 121 and 122: Germplasm Development: 113 Crosses:
- Page 123: 115 • All lines in spring yield t
- 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