Annual Progress Report on Malting Barley Research March, 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

60 have already been made in efforts to surpass the yield of Baronesse and the malting quality of Harrington while maintaining environmental stability. Table 1. Malting quality performance of high yielding experimental lines and recommended malting varieties for Montana. Data from 2001 Irrigated Intrastate Trials in Bozeman, MT. Kernel on Barley Malt Barley Wort Alpha- Beta- Variety or Weight 6/64" Color Extract Wort Wort Protein Protein S/T DP amylase glucan Quality Selection (mg) (%) (Agtron) (%) Color Clarity (%) (%) (%) (°ASBC) (20°DU) (ppm) Score Harrington 37.4 77.1 84 81.0 1.4 1 11.3 4.25 37.8 97 58.6 423 26 Morex 33.4 72.2 89 78.5 1.7 2 13.2 4.40 34.3 137 47.1 369 29 Legacy 33.3 75.7 84 78.3 1.5 2 13.0 4.88 37.9 145 62.3 318 32 Merit 41.8 89.3 76 79.8 1.4 1 12.5 4.46 35.6 105 61.4 212 35 Conlon 36.2 79.7 73 79.0 1.5 1 12.2 3.16 27.5 46 35.1 439 20 Garnet 39.9 84.6 82 81.9 1.6 1 12.6 4.77 38.0 135 70.4 279 33 MT970116 42.3 87.5 78 80.2 1.2 1 12.1 3.75 32.7 98 45.3 208 41 MT981039 38.1 85.5 88 81.8 1.5 1 11.4 4.25 39.7 99 57.6 109 38 MT981091 42.3 88.8 79 79.5 1.1 1 11.9 3.65 30.9 100 40.5 422 38 MT981238 46.5 93.5 83 79.7 1.5 1 13.3 4.74 35.7 117 67.4 428 38 MT981210 39.5 85.3 87 81.1 1.4 1 12.6 4.67 39.8 133 58.1 226 36 MT970155 41.4 88.0 78 79.7 1.4 1 13.2 4.47 36.4 101 63.6 286 35 MT960101 36.2 62.2 84 80.7 1.5 2 13.2 4.67 36.1 117 68.9 97 34 MT990023 36.7 69.6 84 79.3 1.3 1 12.7 3.95 31.3 116 48.5 131 32 MT990041 36.1 74.2 81 81.7 1.5 1 12.6 5.13 40.9 151 73.3 106 32 MT960099 37.7 60.7 75 80.0 1.6 1 12.5 4.52 38.0 116 59.7 179 31 MT970110 38.9 77.8 83 78.9 2.1 2 12.4 3.67 31.3 97 34.5 527 21 Harrington (Check) Harrington (Check) 39.3 93.9 81 82.2 1.9 1 11.7 5.49 49.8 111 78.6 44 42 38.8 94.0 81 81.9 2.0 1 11.4 5.54 51.0 109 80.0 44 39
61 Table 2. 1992 thru 2001 Overall Summary for Montana experimental lines with high malting quality scores, recommended malting varieties for Montana, and feed barley checks. Data is averaged over dryland and irrigated locations. ID Pedigree # Yrs Yield (bu/ac) # Yrs Test Wt (lb/bu) # Yrs Plump (%) # Yrs Heading Date # Yrs Plant Ht. (in) PI568246 Baronesse 101 103.0 100 51.1 97 78.4 96 178.0 99 28.6 81 12.1 MT960099 Manley/Baronesse 41 102.4 40 50.5 41 65.4 39 179.2 41 27.7 41 12.1 MT981091 MT851195/MT140523 21 100.2 20 51.7 21 83.2 19 175.9 21 28.6 21 12.0 MT960101 Manley/Baronesse 41 97.5 40 50.5 41 69.2 39 179.8 41 29.1 41 12.1 MT970116 Klages/Baronesse 32 97.2 31 52.4 32 84.3 30 175.7 32 33.5 32 12.2 MT970110 Klages/Baronesse 32 97.1 31 51.4 32 80.7 30 178.9 32 30.8 32 12.4 PI610264 Valier 51 96.9 50 51.5 51 76.1 47 178.5 50 30.9 51 12.7 MT981210 MT910150/Stark 21 96.9 20 51.7 21 88.8 19 177.1 21 30.8 21 12.4 MT970155 MT886610/MT140523 26 96.3 25 51.4 26 81.4 24 179.1 26 29.3 26 12.4 MT981238 ND112311/Lewis 21 96.0 20 52.6 21 87.0 19 174.2 21 32.2 21 12.6 MT910189 ND 7293/Bearpaw 83 93.6 82 51.5 81 83.4 78 174.3 81 29.7 76 11.9 SiteMean 101 93.5 100 50.8 97 77.5 96 176.0 99 30.2 81 12.5 PI491534 Gallatin (Check) 101 93.2 100 51.7 97 74.9 96 175.4 99 31.5 81 12.3 CI 15856 Lewis 101 92.8 100 51.8 97 77.2 96 176.5 99 31.4 81 12.9 2B914947 Merit 60 91.7 59 48.6 60 75.7 55 178.9 58 30.4 58 12.4 BA 1202 Busch Agr 1202 72 91.4 72 49.0 69 75.1 69 177.8 70 30.4 60 12.6 SK 76333 Harrington 101 90.8 100 49.6 97 75.2 96 177.7 99 30.6 81 12.3 MT981039 H5860219/Baronesse 21 90.3 20 51.4 21 81.2 19 179.3 21 29.2 21 12.5 6B932978 Legacy 21 87.8 20 48.0 21 71.9 19 175.2 21 32.7 21 12.7 CI 15773 Morex 65 80.0 64 48.9 65 72.5 62 172.7 64 35.4 59 12.7 # Yrs Protein (%)
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: 59 Huntley-dryland) with two replic
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?