Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

48 were resistant to all six diseases. These accessions have been crossed to a susceptible malting barley cultivar to study the genetics of multiple disease resistance. Evaluation of H. vulgare × H. bulbosum recombinants. Dr. Richard Pickering of Crop and Food Research in New Zealand has established a world-renown gene introgression program to develop H. vulgare × H. bulbosum recombinants. We routinely screen recombinants developed by Dr. Pickering for disease resistance. FHB data were obtained on 26 introgression lines planted in China. Only two lines (38P18/22/3 and 219W3) exhibited less than 10% FHB incidence and severity under light disease pressure. It is not known whether the lower disease severity in these lines was due to the H. bulbosum introgression because the H. vulgare parent also exhibited relatively low disease levels. Further evaluation tests are planned to assess the FHB resistance and DON accumulation of these recombinants. Barley disease survey. A survey was made in the northwestern part of Minnesota (the primary barley production area in the state) to ascertain the prevalence and importance of barley diseases in 2001. Eleven fields were visited during the survey conducted on July 24-26. FHB and net blotch were detected in every field; the observed severities ranged from trace to 4% and trace to 80%, respectively (Table 1). Stem rust, SSLB, and loose smut were the next most common diseases observed in commercial fields. Other diseases identified in the survey (listed in decreasing order of prevalence) were crown rust, barley yellow dwarf, and bacterial blight. Net blotch has been and continues to be a major disease problem on six-rowed barley in the region. FHB and SSLB have historically been minor diseases of barley in the Upper Midwest. However, since 1993, these diseases have increased significantly in importance, and epidemics have occurred in some regions of the state. It is not uncommon to find loose smut in Minnesota barley fields, but the incidence is usually very low. Producers who save seed from the previous year’s crop often have higher levels of loose smut in their fields. Crown rust, barley yellow dwarf, and bacterial blight are common diseases in Upper Midwest barley fields—the severity of each disease in any one year can vary dramatically. For example, barley yellow dwarf is usually found in trace amounts in just a few fields each year. However, in 1999, a severe epidemic occurred, and the disease was found in over 80% of fields and in severities of up to 50%. Collecting and maintaining a library of pathogen isolates. It is essential to keep a library of characterized pathogen isolates to conduct disease evaluation tests of breeding material and other germplasm. Additional isolates of F. graminearum, P. t. f. teres, C. sativus, and P. g. f. sp. tritici were collected during the 2001 barley disease survey. These isolates were purified and then stored for future virulence evaluations. Additionally, eleven isolates of P. hordei were received from cooperators around the United States in 2001. Due to severe insect infestations in the greenhouse, none of the isolates was successfully increased. Evaluation of barley breeding germplasm for resistance to foliar disease. One hundred and forty-four barley lines from the University of Minnesota Barley Improvement Program were inoculated with the spot blotch pathogen in the field at St. Paul. This evaluation was done to ensure that the durable spot blotch resistance in sixrowed germplasm was maintained in populations derived from non-elite parents.
49 Unfortunately, disease levels in the nursery were too low to assess due to the extremely dry weather after inoculation. Instead, seedling plants will be inoculated and evaluated for spot blotch resistance in the greenhouse. Personnel: Brian J. Steffenson, Associate Professor/Project Leader Chris Kavanaugh, Junior Scientist Hilda Salas, Junior Scientist Gacheri Kimanthi, Postdoctoral Research Associate Shaobin Zhong, Postdoctoral Research Associate Cooperators: Michael C. Edwards, USDA-ARS, Fargo, ND Paul B. Schwarz, NDSU, Fargo, ND Jerome D. Franckowiak, NDSU, Fargo, ND Richard D. Horsley, NDSU, Fargo, ND Kevin Smith, UM, St. Paul, MN Gary Muehlbauer, UM, St. Paul, MN Ruth Dill-Macky, UM, St. Paul, MN Darrell Wesenberg, USDA-ARS, Aberdeen, ID Harold Bockelman, USDA-ARS, Aberdeen, ID Andy Kleinhofs, WSU, Pullman, WA Richard Pickering, Crop & Food Research, Christchurch, New Zealand Patrick M. Hayes, OSU, Corvallis, OR Recent Publications: Zhong, S., and Steffenson, B. J. 2001. Genetic and molecular characterization of mating type genes in Cochliobolus sativus. Mycologia 93:852-863. Zhong, S., and Steffenson, B. J. 2001. Virulence and molecular diversity in Cochliobolus sativus. Phytopathology 91:469-476. Schwarz, P. B., Schwarz, J. G., Zhou, A., Prom, L. K., and Steffenson, B. J. 2001. Effect of Fusarium graminearum and F. poae infection on barley and malt quality. Monatsschr. Brauwissenschaft 54:55-63. Edwards, M. C., Fetch, T. G. Jr., Schwarz, P. B., and Steffenson, B. J. 2001. Effect of Barley yellow dwarf virus infection on yield and malting quality in barley. Plant Dis. 85: 202-207. Steffenson, B. J. 2001. Exploiting wild Hordeum species for barley improvement. Pages 28-33 in: Proc. 33 rd Barley Improvement Conference. San Antonio, TX.
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: 47 IDENTIFICATION OF NOVEL DISEASE
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?