Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

12 The testing of the selection 85Ab2323 has been continued. It has performed especially well in field trials on dryland at various locations in northern and southern Idaho in recent years. Agronomic data from Tetonia are shown in Tables 2 and 3. This selection may have potential as a variety in some production areas of Idaho. Although the University of Idaho Foundation Seed Stocks Committee approved the selection for release in December 2000, a variety name has not yet been assigned. Table 1. Agronomic data for selected two-rowed varieties and selections grown in trial A under irrigation at Aberdeen, Idaho, 1999-2001. Yield (bu/A) Test Plump Heading Average Weight* Barley* Date* Height* Lodging* Entry 1999 2000 2001 1999-2001 (lbs/bu) (%) (Julian) (in) (%) No. Trials 3 1 1 1 1 1 Bancroft 141.2 135.0 143.9 140.0 54.8 91 176 36 90 Baronesse 139.3 174.4 163.5 159.1 54.4 94 176 34 15 B 1202 135.6 130.0 149.9 138.5 55.2 96 176 33 28 Camas 153.8 153.2 160.8 155.9 57.0 91 174 34 0 Crest 147.9 133.3 153.2 144.8 55.3 92 175 34 19 Criton 146.2 126.1 149.2 140.5 55.1 99 176 35 1 Galena 152.3 149.8 148.2 150.1 56.6 93 179 33 3 Garnet 159.4 140.4 154.3 151.3 56.2 98 175 36 1 Harrington 149.8 113.0 143.1 135.3 53.9 84 175 34 76 Merit 144.0 136.8 143.7 141.5 53.7 78 179 36 23 Metcalfe 143.5 120.0 141.0 134.8 55.9 93 176 38 60 Moravian 14 138.9 138.4 133.1 136.8 56.4 94 171 27 0 Moravian 37 146.1 133.2 139.7 139.7 56.6 99 177 29 3 MT910189 ---- 134.2 144.9 ---- 55.2 89 174 34 93 Orca 120.4 139.1 132.3 130.6 55.6 97 167 32 5 CDC Stratus ---- ---- 122.4 ---- 55.8 96 181 31 3 Xena ---- 160.4 168.8 ---- 55.9 98 178 36 15 85Ab2323 158.0 115.9 150.4 141.4 55.0 94 175 35 46 90Ab241 149.6 140.5 151.2 147.1 54.8 97 175 35 21 91Ab6526 166.3 121.0 148.2 145.2 53.9 93 175 37 65 93Ab859 143.4 154.4 150.9 149.6 56.6 99 176 36 30 94Ab12990 ---- ---- 150.7 ---- 56.3 92 174 37 0 95Ab11469 162.8 137.4 155.2 151.8 54.9 97 172 36 23 95M4623 ---- 131.1 144.6 ---- 54.4 96 176 37 63 95SR149C ---- 149.7 152.7 ---- 52.9 83 179 36 78 95SR316A ---- 116.5 152.6 ---- 54.7 90 179 36 53 98Ab11720 151.8 118.7 156.9 142.5 53.4 91 179 33 38 98Ab11771 ---- ---- 143.6 ---- 54.4 92 174 33 58 98Ab11865 ---- 163.2 163.9 ---- 55.3 91 179 31 3 98Ab11993 ---- 134.3 158.9 ---- 53.6 96 176 33 50 98Ab12019 ---- ---- 156.7 ---- 53.6 92 178 30 18 *2001 data only
13 Table 2. Agronomic data for selected two-rowed varieties and selections grown in trial A under irrigation at Tetonia, Idaho, 1999-2001. Test Plump Heading Yield Weight Barley Date Height Protein Oil Entry (bu/A) (lbs/bu) (%) (Julian) (in) (%) (%) No. Trials 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 85Ab2323 115.0 53.4 93 194 30 11.8 2.2 90Ab241 110.0 51.6 95 195 27 9.3 2.0 91Ab6526 123.1 53.8 95 193 33 12.6 2.2 93Ab859 112.2 53.7 94 196 28 11.5 2.1 95Ab11469 110.0 53.4 95 192 29 12.0 1.8 B 1202 107.7 51.3 86 194 28 12.6 2.1 Bancroft 108.5 52.5 88 193 29 11.4 2.2 Baronesse 119.7 51.7 83 193 24 11.8 2.2 Camas 121.0 54.3 92 191 28 12.7 2.1 Crest 110.3 52.9 92 193 28 11.9 2.2 Criton 115.2 52.5 97 194 28 10.7 2.3 Galena 104.9 52.4 85 198 27 10.3 2.3 Garnet 112.2 52.0 95 195 31 11.3 2.1 Harrington 100.9 52.1 83 195 28 11.1 2.2 IdaGold II 105.3 52.7 89 197 26 11.0 1.9 Merit 108.8 51.6 84 198 30 11.6 2.2 AC Metcalfe 111.8 52.6 89 194 30 12.0 2.0 Moravian 14 109.2 54.2 90 189 26 11.8 1.9 Moravian 37 115.1 53.7 96 196 26 10.2 1.7 Orca 95.6 53.3 98 188 29 11.5 2.2
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: 11 ‘Triumph’, ‘Valier’, ‘
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 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?