Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

126 BARLEY IMPROVEMENT IN WASHINGTON S.E. ULLRICH, V.A. JITKOV, J.A. CLANCY, M.C. DUGGER, A. KLEINHOFS, D.V. WETTSTEIN Department of Crop and Soil Sciences Washington State University Objectives and Rationale The WSU barley breeding program's primary objective is to release new varieties that are higher yielding, better adapted and/or with higher quality than the comparable varieties currently being grown in the state. Agronomic traits, malting and brewing quality, and nutritional quality are evaluated during selection. The majority of breeding lines are 2row, and 6-row spring types as these are used most commonly in rotations. There has been a shift to more emphasis on 2-rows vs 6-rows in the last few years. Barley is an important agricultural commodity in Washington State and has had an average rank of 16 th over the last 5 years among the top 40 commodities produced in the state. Barley is the 3 rd most important agronomic field crop behind wheat and hay. Washington ranked 4th among states in barley production 1997-2001. Barley production in Washington was over 21 million bushels from 430,000 acres seeded in 2001. The average statewide yield for 2001 was 50 bu/a primarily from dryland production. Baronesse, planted on nearly 73% of the state's barley acreage was the leading cultivar in 2001. Malting types were planted on about 10% of the acreage (about 43,000 acres), and winter types on about 1%. The recommended malting types grown in rank order were Harrington, Morex, and Garnet. There is much greater potential for malting barley production in Washington than is realized. The gap between feed and malting types has primarily been due to the level of industry activity in the state and the dominance of one feed cultivar (currently Baronesse, previously Steptoe). The major drive in recent years has been to replace Baronesse with public and hopefully a malting type varieties. Methodology 1. Germplasm Development Modified pedigree-bulk, single seed descent, and doubled haploid breeding techniques are employed along with molecular marker assisted selection techniques in collaboration with A. Kleinhofs. Parent building, as well as line development, occur utilizing Midwestern varieties for the 6-row quality base, western U.S. and Canadian varieties for the 2-row quality base and European varieties for diversity in combinations with adapted western genotypes and for export quality base. Although most European varieties are inferior to North American varieties in malting quality by U.S. standards, there is potential to derive U.S. export types. The adaptation of some European 2-row cultivars to western U.S. conditions has been very good in recent years as well. Adaptation factors primarily include yield, lodging resistance, and barley stripe rust resistance. Cooperation particularly among the Pacific Northwest (Idaho, Oregon and Washington) breeders has been occurring through annual research review meetings and germplasm
127 exchanges. Spring and winter barley germplasm exchanges also occur with several major Canadian, Brasilian, and European breeding programs. 2. Agronomic Testing Yield trials were conducted at 15 major nursery sites in 2001, but two nurseries were not harvested due to drought conditions. More advanced lines were also tested in USDA winter and spring regional nurseries for assessment of environmental adaptability. In addition four on-farm tests of six varieties coordinated by Great Western Malting Co. was conducted in 2001 making it the 12th year of on-farm variety testing in Washington. Cumulative precipitation in eastern Washington in 2001 was well below average, with planting and harvest of spring varieties about average. Yields and quality were about average due to the favorable distribution of rainfall during the growing season in the Palouse, but well below average in the central part of the state. In spite of a relatively mild winter, barley stripe rust was at a relatively low level for the third year in a row throughout the inland PNW. Winter and spring barley volunteers survived well in Washington due to the mild winter. 3. Malt Quality Evaluations Selections that appear to have good agronomic potential are included in replicated yield trials with grain from these trials malted and analyzed by the USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit at Madison and in industry laboratories. 4. Barley Quality Evaluations Barley from lines and cultivars in replicated yield trials and other studies (i.e., fertilizer, cultural practice, nutrition trials, etc.) as well as early generation breeding lines are often tested for total protein, beta-glucan content, moisture, plumpness and kernel and test weight in our laboratory. Results 1. Spring Barley Farmington (WA9504-94) was released in 2001 jointly with Oregon, Idaho, and the USDA-ARS. This 2-row has displayed good agronomic and malting quality potential (Tables 1-3), as well as partial resistance to stripe rust. Its yield is equal or greater than that of Baronesse in higher rainfall and irrigated areas of eastern Washington. It significantly outyields all other currently grown cultivars in Washington. Grain of WA9504-94 from the 1999 harvest was entered into the AMBA Pilot Scale Testing Program, but was unacceptable for further testing. However, it was submitted again in 2001. Adaptation is particularly good in the higher production zones of eastern Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Another 2-row, WA8682-96 (no name yet) will be released in 2002. It has wider adaptation than Farmington, and is expected to compete well with Baronesse over most of eastern Washington (Tables 1and 2). Over 26 site-years, 2000-2001, WA8682-96 had greater or equal yields compared with Baronesse at 13 of the 15 nursery sites. It has high test weight and kernel plumpness compared to other commercial cultivars. It also has
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 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: 125
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?