Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

16 Table 6. Agronomic data for selected two-rowed varieties and selections grown on dryland at Tetonia, Idaho, 1997-2001. Test Plump Heading Yield Weight Barley Date Height Protein Oil Entry (bu/A) (lbs/bu) (%) (Julian) (in) (%) (%) No. Trials 5 5 5 5 1 3 3 85Ab2323 87.2 52.9 95 194 21 13.4 2.3 90Ab241 77.7 50.5 94 195 21 13.8 2.3 94Ab12990 83.7 53.8 93 192 26 13.3 2.1 Bancroft 83.5 51.9 90 194 23 12.7 2.0 Baronesse 82.4 51.5 90 194 22 13.1 2.1 Camas 86.2 53.6 90 193 23 13.3 1.9 Chinook 84.4 52.7 87 194 24 14.3 2.1 Clark 75.3 51.3 86 195 23 15.0 2.0 Criton 83.1 51.4 96 194 22 14.8 2.0 Harrington 77.2 51.4 83 195 24 14.3 2.2 Hector 84.8 52.4 86 194 21 14.9 1.9 Munsing 73.5 52.0 85 191 20 18.1 1.9 Targhee 84.7 51.9 91 194 23 14.2 2.3 Table 7. Malting quality data* for selected two-rowed varieties and selections grown in six irrigated trials at Aberdeen, Idaho, 1996-2001. Plump Malt Barley Wort Alpha Beta Barley Extract Protein Protein S/T DP Amylase Glucan Entry (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (ºASBC) (20ºDU) (ppm) 85AB2323 94 80.2 13.6 5.25 39.7 127 48.5 271 90AB241 97 80.6 13.1 5.12 39.9 128 63.8 284 B 1202 95 79.0 13.9 4.92 36.3 116 52.8 184 Galena 94 79.2 12.7 4.19 33.5 104 38.7 321 Garnet 97 80.4 13.4 5.43 41.9 142 58.2 170 Harrington 86 78.7 13.4 4.62 35.4 101 46.3 378 Merit 91 80.9 12.9 5.20 42.0 142 69.5 178 Moravian 14 93 78.9 13.1 4.29 33.7 110 39.3 277 * Malting quality data courtesy of USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit, Madison Wisconsin.
17 Table 8. Malting quality data* for selected two-rowed varieties and selections grown in five irrigated trials at Tetonia, Idaho, 1995-97 and 1999-2000. Plump Malt Barley Wort Alpha Beta Barley Extract Protein Protein S/T DP Amylase Glucan Entry (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (ºASBC) (20ºDU) (ppm) 85Ab2323 89 79.0 13.5 4.57 34.4 155 46.0 360 90Ab241 91 79.3 12.8 4.40 35.6 158 57.6 242 Bancroft 83 78.1 13.6 4.36 32.9 155 45.3 417 B 1202 83 77.4 13.8 4.43 32.9 129 50.7 392 Crest 90 78.1 13.3 4.82 36.9 128 57.6 365 Crystal 82 77.6 14.6 4.59 32.2 161 55.9 528 Garnet 92 78.7 13.6 4.44 33.7 170 52.8 291 Harrington 78 77.6 12.9 3.86 30.1 108 40.5 537 * Malting quality data courtesy of USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit, Madison, Wisconsin. Table 9. Malting quality data* for selected two-rowed varieties and selections grown in seven irrigated trials at Aberdeen, Idaho, 1997-2000 and Tetonia, Idaho, 1997 & 1999-2000. Plump Malt Barley Wort Alpha Beta Barley Extract Protein Protein S/T DP Amylase Glucan Entry (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (ºASBC) (20ºDU) (ppm) 85Ab2323 92 79.8 13.3 5.05 39.2 141 48.7 321 90Ab241 95 80.7 12.3 4.95 41.2 140 64.0 221 93Ab859 95 80.3 12.4 4.88 41.0 149 58.7 295 B 1202 91 78.8 13.3 4.73 36.6 122 54.5 246 Crystal 89 79.1 13.7 4.99 36.8 147 60.6 395 Garnet 95 80.2 12.9 5.06 40.4 151 57.6 221 Harrington 83 78.3 12.7 4.18 33.6 96 42.6 423 * Malting quality data courtesy of USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit, Madison, Wisconsin.
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: 15 Table 4. Agronomic data for sele
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?