Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

24 Table 17. Agronomic data for selected winter varieties and selections grown under irrigation in trial B at Aberdeen, Idaho 1997-98 thru 2000-01. (excludes 1998-99) Test Plump Heading Variety or Yield Weight Barley Date Height Lodging Selection (bu/A) (lbs/bu) (%) (Julian) (in) (%) No. Trials 3 3 2 3 3 1 88Ab536-B 141.8 52.2 89 139 36 2 88Ab539-B 149.3 52.2 90 141 37 4 88Ab953 189.0 51.2 92 149 32 0 92Ab1810 136.5 52.0 90 140 37 5 92Ab1841 148.4 52.2 89 140 36 3 92Ab1843 159.4 52.2 90 143 37 2 94Ab1777 170.3 53.1 76 144 35 1 96Ab273 166.8 53.6 87 145 35 2 96Ab474 167.5 52.3 80 151 34 2 BZ 5W96-38 174.6 50.6 83 156 26 0 Eight Twelve 182.1 51.8 75 146 33 1 Kold 162.6 53.4 93 145 34 0 Plaisant 155.0 52.8 76 144 33 3 Schuyler 111.2 33.6 47 98 26 1 Table 18. Agronomic data for winter barley varieties and selections grown in trial C under irrigation at Aberdeen, Idaho, 1998-2001 Spike Test Plump Heading Plant Variety or Row Yield Weight Barley Date Height Lodging Selection Number (bu/A) (lbs/bu) (%) (Julian) (inches) (%) No. Trials 3 3 1 3 3 1 88Ab536-B 6 141.8 52.2 88 140 36 2 94Ab1269 2 169.6 53.4 99 146 30 2 94Ab1274 2 167.9 53.6 97 147 32 2 95Ab2299 2 174.1 55.7 95 150 35 2 Boyer 6 201.6 52.4 86 151 35 5 Eight-twelve 6 191.8 52.7 93 147 33 0 Fanfare 2 165.9 55.1 99 149 33 1 Pipkin 2 155.9 56.4 98 153 36 6 Plaisant 6 155.6 53.1 88 139 37 3 Puffin 2 149.0 54.4 99 146 31 6 Schuyler 6 169.4 52.3 65 150 35 3 Sunstar Pride 6 209.4 51.4 71 157 33 4
25 Table 19. Malting quality data* for winter barley varieties and selection grown under irrigation at Aberdeen, Idaho, 1998-2001. Spike Plump Malt Barley Wort Alpha- Beta- Variety or Row Barley Extract Protein Protein S/T DP amylase glucan Selection Number (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (°ASBC) (20°DU) (ppm) No Trials 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Fanfare 2 95.4 77.7 14.0 4.42 31.7 98 37.4 100 Pipkin 2 92.6 77.3 11.4 3.91 34.2 88 41.9 155 Puffin 2 96.7 76.3 12.8 4.25 33.3 103 32.1 309 Plaisant 6 90.9 77.6 11.9 3.71 31.9 106 37.8 428 88Ab536-B 6 78.5 78.6 12.1 4.65 38.7 156 49.8 187 94Ab1269 2 98.7 80.6 12.5 5.43 45.5 124 68.5 143 94Ab1274 2 97.8 81.9 12.0 5.47 47.6 122 66.9 83 95Ab2299 2 93.3 79.0 12.8 5.47 43.8 129 75.9 151 Morex** 6 75.2 79.4 13.0 6.46 52.1 155 70.8 132 * Malting quality data courtesy of USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit, Madison Wisconsin. ** Adjacent spring planted. EARLY GENERATION SELECTIONS Seventy-two barley crosses were grown at Aberdeen in 2001 as F2 populations in 230 four-row plots, eight feet in length. Over 8,400 spike selections were made in these F2 populations for evaluation in 2002 F3 barley head rows. F3 spaced plants from 2000-01 Arizona F2 populations were grown at Aberdeen in 2001 and over 4,800 spikes were selected for evaluation in 2002 Aberdeen F4 head rows. Additional F2 populations are currently being grown in Arizona for evaluation as F3 head rows at Aberdeen in 2002. Over 12,000 head rows are currently scheduled for planting in 2002, with additions expected from the 2001-02 Arizona F2 series. Certain crosses scheduled for planting in the 2002 barley head row series are listed below (* identifies a six-rowed cross and + identifies cross with barley stripe rust resistance). Crystal/Merit Colter/B2912* Colter/M83* 93Ab375/M83 93Ab688/M83* 95Ab11469/Steffi+ 96Ab8309/Steffi+ Crystal/95Ab11469 Garnet/95Ab11469 92Ab1368/Foster8 92Ab5189/B2912//Foster* 92Ab5189/M83//Foster* 93Ab375//92Ab5189/M83* 93Ab375/B2912//Foster* 93Ab375/M83//Foster* 92Ab5189/B2912//Foster* 92Ab5189/M83//Foster* 93Ab375//92Ab5189/M83
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: 23 Table 16. Agronomic data for win
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?