17th
North American Barley Researchers Workshop (NABRW)
September
22-25, 2002
Ramada
Plaza Suites and Conference Center
Fargo,
North Dakota, USA
Richard Horsley, Co-Chair
Michael Edwards, Co-Chair
Paul Schwarz
Lynn Dahleen
Marcia McMullen
Stephen Neate
Jerome Franckowiak
North Dakota Barley Council
Bayer Crop Science
Miller Brewing Co
NDSU Department of Plant
Sciences
North Dakota Crop
Improvement & Seed Association
Busch Agricultural
Resources, Inc.
NDSU College of Agriculture
American Malting Barley
Association
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.,
Inc.
NDSU Agricultural Experiment
Station
Rahr Malting Co.
Cargill Incorporated
Blackwell Publishing
Summit Brewing Co.
NDSU Department of Cereal
and Food Sciences
BASF
Briess Malting Co
NDSU Department of Plant
Pathology
Syngenta Crop Protection
USDA-Agricultural Research
Service
Special
thanks to Kenneth Lamb, NDSU Plant Sciences, for preparing and updating the
NABRW web site; and to all of the NDSU
and ARS staff for their assistance, especially Melissa Welter, Eileen
Buringrud, Polly McMichael, and Lyle Lindberg.
17th
North American Barley Researchers Workshop
September
22-25, 2002
Fargo,
North Dakota, USA
8:00 am – Welcome
Feed, Food
and Malt Quality, Paul Schwarz, Moderator
8:10 Gary Hanning, Anheuser Busch – Malting barley quality needs.
8:50 Willie Rahr, Rahr Malting – Globalization of malting and
brewing.
9:20 Vern Anderson and Greg Lardy, North Dakota State University –
Feed barley research and market
development. p. 7.
9:40-10:00 Break
10:00 Walt Newman, Montana State University – Barley dietary fiber and
beta-glucans: pigs and people. p. 7.
10:20 Christine Fastnaught, National. Barley Foods Council – Barley
reduces cholesterol – an update on
clinical trials and FDA petition process. p. 8.
10:40 Dennis Gordon, North Dakota State University – Barley as a human
food and functional food. p. 8.
11:10 Jorge Correa, Semillas Correa Mexicana – Barley and its potential
as a forage crop in dairy production
in Mexico. p. 9.
11:30 Discussion
12:00-1:15 Lunch
1:15-3:30 Joint AMBA liaison meeting/poster
session
3:30-4:00 Break
4:00-5:30 Guided beer tasting
7:00-10:00 Canadian
Researchers/Barley Development Council Meeting
8:30 Stephen Neate, North Dakota State University –Root disease
suppression in small grains in a
low rainfall and low soil fertility environment. p. 9.
9:00 Brian Steffenson, University of
Minnesota – Host-Parasite Genetics in the Hordeum vulgare:Cochliobolus sativus
pathosystem. p. 10.
9:30 Henriette Horvath, Washington State University - Genetically engineered stem rust resistance in barley using the Rpg1
gene. p. 10
9:50-10:15 Break
10:15 Kelly Turkington, Agri-Food Canada, Lacombe, AB – Barley production
and the impact of seedbed
utilization, row spacing, and fungicide. p. 11.
10:35 Rich Horsley, North Dakota State University – Efficacy of
fungicides for controlling FHB in
barley genotypes with partial resistance. p. 11.
11:00-12:00 Business meeting/poster
session
12-1:15 Lunch
1:30 Darrell Wesenberg, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Aberdeen,
ID – History of barley research at the
Aberdeen Station. p. 12.
2:10 Steve Ullrich, Washington State University –Principles learned
about quantitative traits in barley from
QTL analysis. p. 12.
2:30 Mario Therrien, Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada, Brandon, MB
– Digital plant breeding. p. 17.
2:50-3:10 Break
3:10 Blake Cooper, Busch Agricultural Resources, Inc. - Breeding for
lower DON response in six-row
malting barley using conventional methods and existing germplasm. p. 17.
3:30 Victoria Carollo, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Albany, CA
- GrainGenes and other public databases
for barley genomics. p. 18.
4:00-5:00 Poster session
6:30-7:30 Social
7:30-10:00 Banquet – Dinner Speaker, Mark Peihl, Archivist,
Clay Co. Historical Society Presentation
“Fargo-Beerhead”
8:00-9:00 Poster session
9:00 Andy Kleinhofs, Washington State University – Genetic and
physical mapping towards map-based
cloning in barley. p. 18.
9:40 Tim Close, University of California, Riverside – HarvEST
Triticeae: a portable EST database
viewer for barley researchers and others. p. 19.
10:20-10:40 Break
10:40 Warren Kruger, University of Minnesota – Using EST databases for
functional and comparative
bioinformatics. p. 19.
11:20 Roger Wise, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Ames, IA –
Parallel expression analysis using
barley microarrays. p. 20.
Farewell
Wednesday pm – Campus and lab
tours
Poster
Presentations
1. Effectiveness
of in Vitro Selection in Barley for Fusarium Head Blight
Resistance. M. Banik, W.G. Legge, B.
Bizimungu, J. Tucker, M.C. Therrien, A. Tekauz, F. Edes and M. Savard. p. 20.
2. Characterization of the Barley Stem
Rust Resistance Gene Rpg1 Family.
R. Brueggeman, N. Rostoks, D. Kudrna, A. Druka, and
A. Kleinhofs. p. 21.
3. Multivariate Analysis of Malting
Quality. Allen D. Budde, Lauri
Herrin and Berne L. Jones. p. 21
4. Breeding BYDV Resistant Barley with
an Agronomically Improved Background. Flavio
Capettini, Monique Henry and Hugo Vivar. p. 22.
5. GrainGenes:
The Triticeae Genome Database. Victoria Carollo, David
Matthews, Gerard Lazo, and Olin Anderson. p. 22.
6.
A Proposal for the Use of Pedigree and Historical Data for Marker Trait
Association in Barley. Federico
Condon, Kevin P. Smith
and Brian Steffenson. p. 23.
7. Evaluation of Bowman
Backcross-derived Barley Genetic Stocks. Jerome D. Franckowiak and An Hang.
p. 23.
8.
Evaluation of Hulless Barley Germplasm at Aberdeen, ID. A. Hang, K. Satterfield,
and C. S. Burton. p. 24.
9. A New
Look at Location Yield Data. James H. Helm, Patricia
Juskiw and Tim Duggan. p. 24.
10. The Stability of Diastatic Power QTL Expression in
Western Six-rowed Barley Backgrounds and Environments: The Initial Phases. David Hoffman and An Hang. p. 25.
11. Non-Starch Polysaccharides in Barley. M. S. Izydorczyk and S. Bazin. p. 25.
12. Proteinases and Proteinase Inhibitors of Barley and
Malt. Berne L. Jones. p. 26.
13. Fast Neutron Induced Barley Mutants. Kleinhofs, A., And Kudrna,
D. P. 26.
14. Spike Morphology and FHB Reaction In Barley. Nadejda
Krasheninnik and Jerome D. Franckowiak. p. 27.
15. Mapping Genes Conferring
Fusarium Head Blight Resistance in C93-3230-24. K.E. Lamb,
M.J. Green, R.D. Horsley, and Zhang Bingxing. p. 27.
16. Transformation of Barley cv. Conlon with Genes for
Resistance to Fusarium Head Blight. M. Manoharan, L.S. Dahleen, T.
Hohn, S.P. McCormick, N.A. Alexander, P. Schwarz, S. Neate and R.D.
Horsley. p. 28.
17. Using the Re-steep
Function for Hydrating Grain in the Joe White Micromalter. Christopher H. Martens, Allen D. Budde and Berne L.
Jones. p. 28.
18. Fungicide Application Timings of Folicur and AMS 21619
for Fusarium Head Blight Control in Six-Row and Two-Row Malting Barley. Kent McKay and Kristie
Clark. p. 29.
19. Fungicide Studies for Control of Fusarium Head Blight of Barley in
North Dakota, 1998-2002. McMullen, M., Meyer, S., Jordahl, J., Pederson, J., and Halley, S. p. 29.
20. Mapping Of
QTL Associated With Nitrogen Storage And Remobilization In Barley (Hordeum
vulgare L.) Leaves. Suzanne Mickelson, Deven See,
Fletcher D. Meyer,
John P. Garner, Curt R. Foster, Tom K. Blake and
Andreas M. Fischer. p. 30.
21. Status Of RWA-Resistant Barley Germplasm. D.W.
Mornhinweg, P.P. Bregitzer, Darrell Wesenberg, Bob Hammon, and Frank Peairs. p.
30.
22. Evaluation Of Near-Isogenic Lines For Fusarium
Head Blight Resistance QTL In Barley. L. M. Nduulu, A. Mesfin, G. J. Muehlbauer, and K. P. Smith.
p. 31.
23. Predicting Relative Maturity in Barley Using Spikes.
Joseph Nyachiro, James Helm, Patricia Juskiw, Donald
Salmon, Kequan Xi and Jennifer Zantinge. p. 31.
24. Potential NIRS Application for Plant Breeding & Production
Research. Lori Oatway and Jim Helm. p. 32.
25. Analysis of the Barley Stem Rust Resistance Gene Rpg1 Messenger RNA. Nils Rostoks, Brian Steffenson, David Kudrna, and Andris Kleinhofs. p. 32.
26. Genetic
Linkage Map of cv. Foster x Fusarium Resistant Line CI4196.
Deric Schmierer, David
Kudrna, Thomas Drade, and Andris Kleinhofs. p. 33.
27. Can Molecular Breeding Overcome Yield Ceilings in Western Two-Row
Malting Barley? D.A. Schmierer, A. Kleinhofs,
S.E. Ullrich, D.A. Kudrna, V.A. Jitkov, and B.L. Jones. p. 34.
28. Effects
Of Deoxynivalenol On Detached Barley Leaf Segments. Seeland, T.M., Bushnell,
W.R., and D.E. Krueger. p. 33.
29.
Evaluation Of The National Small Grains Collection Of Barley For Resistance To
Fusarium Head Blight And Deoxynivalenol Accumulation. L.G. Skoglund and J.L. Menert.
p. 37.
30. Reactions of
Barley Cultivars to Fusarium Head Blight (Fusarium graminearum) in
Western Canada. J. R. Tucker, W. G.
Legge, M. Savard, M. C. Therrien, A. Tekauz, B. G. Rossnagel, B. L. Harvey, E.
Lefol, D. Voth and T. Zatorski. p. 37.
31. An Alberta Perspective On Fusarium Head Blight. T.K.
Turkington, R.M. Clear, J. Calpas, and J.P. Tewari. p. 38.
32. Summary of QTL Analyses of the Seed Dormancy Trait
in Barley. S.E. Ullrich, F. Han, W. Gao, D. Prada, J. Clancy, A. Kleinhofs, I.
Romagosa, and J.L. Molina-Cano. p. 39.
33. Mapping Quantitative Stripe Rust Resistance in a Large Doubled
Haploid Population of Barley. Vales, M. Isabel; Hayes, Patrick M; Castro, Ariel;
Corey, Ann; Mundt, Chris; Capettini, Flavio; Vivar, Hugo; Sandoval-Islas,
Sergio; and Schoen, Chris. p. 38.
34. Phenotypic
Associative Microsatellite (SSR) Marker Assisted Selection. L. J. Wright, D. B. Cooper, and P.
Hayes. p. 42.
35. Cultivar Resistance To Scald Of Barley In Alberta From 1997 To
2001. K. Xi, T.K. Turkington, M. Cortez, J. Helm, P. Juskiw and
J. Nyachiro. p. 42.
36. Genetic
Structure of Rhynchosporium secalis in Alberta. J.
Zantinge, J. Hillson and K. Xi. p. 43.
Feed
Barley Research and Market Development.
Greg Lardy and Vern Anderson, North Dakota State
University, Fargo and Carrington.
Feed barley is economically and nutritionally
competitive with other grains and co-products available in the Northern Plains
states and provinces. Feed barley is
commonly used in diets for ruminant and non-ruminant species, with beef cattle
feeding providing the largest market. Developing specific feed barley cultivars
could enhance the value and improve animal performance from feeding
barley. Selection priorities include
reduced starch fermentation rate, increased fiber digestibility, hulless
varieties, higher protein levels, and yield.
A Western Coordinating Committee (WCC-201) is composed of university
faculty in all barley growing states and functions to increase communications among researchers, educate feed barley
users, and identify research needs.
NDSU feed barley research efforts focus on beef and bison feeding
trials. Sprouting did not adversely
affect feed value of barley and coarse rolling of sprouted barley improved
feedlot performance. Tempering barley
increased feed efficiency and adding a yeast/enzyme cocktail reduced effects of
weather stress on feedlot performance.
Particle size of processed barley did not affect animal performance in
corn gluten diets. Barley
supplementation up to .8% of body weight in forage fed beef cows increased diet
digestibility but higher levels reduced intake and digestibility. Bison fed high starch (67% barley) diets
gained faster than high digestible fiber levels (soy hulls). North Dakota State University is expanding
beef feedlot research with several trials planned that include barley. The North Dakota Barley Council has hired a
“Barley Utilization Development Specialist” to promote and educate potential
barley users worldwide. Substantial
barley feeding information is available in the region from university and other
resources.
Vern Anderson, vanderso@ndsuext.nodak.edu,
701.652.2951
Barley
dietary fiber and β-glucans: Pigs
and people. C. Walt
Newman and Rosemary K. Newman, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717.
Although
vastly different in physical appearance, the digestive and metabolic systems of
the two species are remarkably similar.
Recent studies have shown the health benefits of barley dietary fiber
(DF) and β-glucans (βG) for humans.
Most reports concern the positive modification of serum lipids, serum
glucose, and/or insulin levels. Blood
lipids and glycemic effects are not generally considered as important as the
available energy of a foodstuff for pigs.
Because of the higher DF in barley, which contributes only a negligible
amount of energy, barley is generally thought to be inferior to grains such as
maize for growing pigs. However, an
extensive cooperative study showed that barley was comparable to maize as a
foodstuff for young pigs. More recently
a study was conducted to evaluate barley DF and βG levels in diets of baby
pigs. Diets were fed containing two
levels of βG (5 and 7%) and three levels of DF (19, 22, and 26%). Growth of the pigs tended to increase with
increasing levels of DF, especially those fed the 5% βG diets. Historical anecdotal reports indicate the
benefits of barley products for human infants such as barley water. Thus it is likely that the results from the
baby pig study support such claims, and suggest a beneficial and therapeutic
value of barley, dietary fiber and βG.
C. Walt
Newman, cwn@montana.com, 406.686.4606
Barley Reduces Cholesterol – An Update on Clinical Trials and FDA Petition Process. Christine Fastnaught, National Barley Foods Council (Consultant),
Judith Hallfrisch and Kay Behall, USDA-ARS, Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center.
The Barley Foods Research Steering Committee was established in 1999 at the request of the National Barley Foods Council. The Committee,
comprised of barley producers, industry, and scientists, was asked to review existing health research and identify new research priorities on behalf of the US
food barley industry. A proposal ‘BARLEY FOODS HEALTH BENEFITS RESEARCH PROJECT’ was submitted to the National Barley Improvement Committee.
As a result, congress approved significant new funding for health research involving barley. Two clinical trials have been completed to date. For both trials, a
Midwestern barley containing at least 4% beta-glucan was processed by pearling and subsequent flaking and grinding/sieving. Pearled barley, flakes and flour
were incorporated into recipes so that subjects consumed 0, 3g, or 6g beta-glucan soluble fiber/day in a double-blind, five week crossover study. The control (0)
consisted of brown rice/whole wheat. In study 1 (2001), participants were 18 non-hypertensive men with moderately elevated cholesterol levels and in study 2
(2002), both men and women participated. All participants consumed a NCEP step 1 diet for 2 weeks prior to the first intervention period. In study 1,
blood pressure was reduced by all of the whole grain diets compared to baseline or the step 1 diet. Total cholesterol was significantly lower (14%, 17% and 20%,
respectively) while HDL cholesterol was higher (9%, 7% and 18%) after the low, mid and high soluble fiber diets compared to pre-study values. While results from
study 2 have not been compiled, consumption of barley appears to be as effective as oats in improving risk factors for cardiovascular disease.
Christine Fastnaught, cefastnaught@msn.com, 701-293-5146
Barley as
a Human Food and Functional Food. Dennis T. Gordon, Dept of Cereal Science, North Dakota State
University, Fargo, ND, 58105
Barley is one of eight common
cereals. Common varieties include six-row and two-row, with or without hull,
and all can be pearled. Pearled barley has the highest potential for use as a
human food or food ingredient. The hull and/or bran of barley are not as
acceptable, compared to wheat bran, for use in “bran” or “dietary fiber” foods.
The common remark that barley has an unacceptable taste or flavor is without
merit; Gerber’s Barley Cereal is well accepted by mothers and babies. Barley
has a nutritional profile that compares favorably to oats, but it suffers that
oats were popularized first. There is little demand for barley as a human food,
which is unfortunate. This can be partially attributed to the high marketing
costs to develop and sustain a “brand” product. One unique functional food
ingredient in barley and associated with human health is β-glucan.
β-glucan has been shown to lower blood cholesterol in humans and is
extensively investigated for its potential to attenuate blood glucose levels.
SustagrainTM is a new variety of barley (Prowashonupana) and has
approximately twice the amount of β-glucan compared to conventional barley
varieties and oats. The CSIRO laboratories in Australia are investing a barley
variety (CSIRO-Barley) with high resistant starch content. Resistant starch has
the physiological properties of dietary fiber and a prebiotic. Prebiotics
stimulate the growth of lactic acid producing bacteria in the large intestine,
which helps promote intestinal health. Barley also contains arabinoxylans which
stimulate intestinal peristalsis because of their water hold capacity. The
combined physiological effects and biochemical reactions resulting from the
intestinal fermentation of β-glucan, arabinoxylans and resistant starch in
barley can make it an attractive functional food for health. All cereals,
including barley, can provide significant amounts of phenolic compounds,
another important class of functional food ingredients.
Dennis T.
Gordon; dennis.gordon@ndsu.nodak.edu; 701-231-9438
The
development of the Mexican dairy industry created a great increase in demand of
high quality forage, during the summer-spring as well as in fall-winter
seasons. The 10-year drought in Mexico has generated the need to produce forage
for the short-term demand and in highly technified areas such as in Laguna,
Northern Mexico. It is important to mention that this demand has also brought
the need to grow forage in two cycles during fall and winter, including oat,
wheat, triticale and more recently, barley. Semillas Correa Mexicana, a
national seed producing company, has been working intensively in the last two
years (two cycles per season) in order to obtain new varieties of oat,
triticale and awnless barley. It is important to underline that during
fall-winter, barley results were superior to all other crops, exceeding the
expected. Therefore, we will focus our presentation in the results obtained in
three different states in México, and will also see the future importance that
barley will play in our country.
Jorge A.
Correa, semillas@scorrea.com, (01461)
61 15135
Traditionally, ecological research into
mechanisms which lead to disease suppressive soils has involved study of
interactions between the pathogen and only one or a few microorganisms or
physical or chemical factors in the soil.
As the temporal and spatial growth of a pathogenic organism is
influenced by ongoing interactions with different trophic groups of soil biota
we propose that an ecological approach may be better suited to understand the
mechanisms behind the development of a disease suppressive soil. We systematically tested the effect on
disease of the potential factors that influence the survival of disease
inoculum, both within and between seasons.
The often transient nature of the interactions we detected confirmed the
need for a sequential sampling approach.
Spatial variations also required that that factor be taken into account
when taking measurements. The complex biotic interactions measured confirmed
the need for an integrated ecological approach i.e. combination of functional
and trophic groups, and utilizing the food-web model. We compare the results we obtained in a low rainfall low soil
fertility environment with other mechanistic studies of suppression in higher
rainfall and higher fertility environments.
Stephen M. Neate, stephen.neate@ndsu.nodak.edu;
701 231-7078
Host-Parasite Genetics in the Hordeum
vulgare:Cochliobolus sativus pathosystem. Brian Steffenson and Shaobin Zhong, Department of
Plant Pathology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Spot
blotch, caused by Cochliobolus sativus,
is an important disease of barley in the United States. Six-rowed malting cultivars in the upper
Midwest possess durable resistance to spot blotch, which was derived from the
breeding line ND B112. Genetic analysis
of six-rowed barley cultivars revealed that spot blotch resistance at the
seedling stage is conferred by a single major gene (Rcs5) on chromosome 1(7H).
Durable adult plant resistance in the field is controlled by two
quantitative trait loci: one on
chromosome 5(1H) explaining 63% of the phenotypic variance and a second one on
chromosome 1(7H) explaining 9% of the variance. Three pathotypes (0, 1, and 2) of C. sativus were
identified on three differential barley genotypes. A cross was made between the pathotype 2 isolate ND90Pr and the
pathotype 0 isolate ND93-1. Virulence
on cultivar Bowman was controlled by a single locus (VHv1) in isolate ND90Pr. A
genetic map of the ND90Pr/ND93-1 cross was constructed using molecular markers,
and six co-segregating AFLP markers were identified for VHv1 on one of the major linkage groups. Fifteen chromosomes were resolved from CHEF gel electrophoresis
of C. sativus isolates ND90Pr and ND93-1. Hybridization of CHEF-separated DNA with a cloned AFLP marker
co-segregating with VHv1 localized
the barley virulence locus to a well-separated chromosome of 2.8 Mbp. Research is underway to clone both Rcs5 in barley and VHv1 in C. sativus. The successful cloning of these genes will allow us to develop a
model system for studying host-parasite interactions at the molecular level.
Brian
Steffenson, bsteffen@umn.edu, (612)
625-4735
Genetically
engineered stem rust resistance in barley using the Rpg1 gene. Horvath,
H., Rostoks, N., Brueggeman, R., Steffenson, B., von Wettstein, D. and
Kleinhofs, A. Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, School of Molecular
Biosciences, Washington State University.
Stem rust,
caused by Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici, was among the most
devastating diseases of barley in the northern Great Plains of the U.S.
and Canada before the deployment of the stem rust-resistance gene Rpg1
in the 1940s. Since then, Rpg1 has provided durable
protection against severe stem rust losses, except for a few minor outbreaks.
Recently, the Rpg1 gene was cloned by a map-based approach. Sequencing
of Rpg1 alleles revealed a functional gene structure only in resistant
cultivars and a defective gene structure or lack of Rpg1 in susceptible
cultivars. Here we present the first case of stable transformation of a
susceptible cultivar with a cloned barley disease resistance gene. Using
Agrobacterium-mediated transformation, the Rpg1 gene isolated
from cv. Morex (including 864 bp upstream of the start codon and 651 bp
downstream of the stop codon) was transferred into the susceptible cultivar
Golden Promise. Forty-two transgenic T0 plants containing the stem
rust resistance gene were obtained. The T1 generation of 12
transformants was analyzed for resistance to stem rust pathotype MCC. Resistance
was observed in 10 transgenic barley lines, while two lines gave rise to
susceptible progeny. Interestingly, the majority of transgenic stem rust
resistant plants exhibited a level of resistance that was higher than Morex,
the original source of the cloned resistance gene. The reason for this apparent
anomaly as well as stability of transgenic plants is being investigated.
Henriette
Horvath, PhD, henny@mail.wsu.edu,
509-335-5933
Barley production and the impact of seedbed
utilization, row spacing, and fungicide. T.K. Turkington1
, H.R. Kutcher2, G.W. Clayton1, J.D. O'Donovan3,
A.M. Johnston4, K.N. Harker1, J.H. Helm5, and
F.C. Stevenson6. 1Lacombe Res. Centre, Agric. and Agri-Food Canada
(AAFC), Lacombe, AB, Canada; 2Melfort
Research Farm, AAFC, Melfort, SK, Canada;
3Beaverlodge Res. Farm, AAFC, Beaverlodge, AB, Canada; 3Potash and Phosphate Institute
of Canada, Saskatoon, SK, Canada; 5Field
Crop Dev. Centre, Alberta Agric., Food and Rural Dev., Lacombe, AB,
Canada; 6142 Rogers Rd.,
Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Seeding
systems that have openers spreading seed rather than placing it in distinct
rows may enhance foliar cereal disease pressure by restricting canopy air
movement, thus producing favourable microenvironmental conditions. In addition, narrow row spacing may also
enhance disease development and negatively impact productivity. A field experiment was conducted at Lacombe
and Beaverlodge, AB, and Melfort, SK, from 1999 to 2000 to evaluate the effect
of seedbed utilization (SBU) using three seed placements (distinct row: 23 cm
and 30 cm with a hoe opener; and spread band: a 20 cm spread using a 28 cm
sweep on 23 cm row spacing) and fungicide (propiconazole) applications
(untreated check, and applications at the 2–3 leaf stage, flag leaf stage,
heading stage, 2–3 leaf plus flag leaf stage, and flag leaf plus heading
stage). Net blotch severity and yield
varied with location and year, with disease highest and yields lowest for those
treatments that did not include a fungicide application at either the flag leaf
stage or heading. Foliar disease
severity and yield were influenced by the SBU treatments, but varied with
location and year, with a trend of higher disease and lower yields for the two
hoe opener treatments, which were similar. The increase in disease and
reduction in grain yield, when no fungicide was applied, tended to be smaller
for the spread band versus hoe treatments.
Planting in distinct rows may have resulted in higher disease and lower
yields by helping to facilitate spore dispersal and subsequent disease
development compared with the spread band treatment.
T.K.
Turkington, turkingtonk@agr.gc.ca, (403) 782-8138.
Efficacy of Fungicides in Controlling Barley Fusarim
Head Blight in Lines With Partial Resistance.
J.D. Pederson1, R.D.
Horsley1, M. McMullen2,3, and K. McKay3. 1Dep.
of Plant Sciences, North Dakota State Univ., 2Dep of Plant
Pathology, North Dakota State Univ.; and 3North Dakota Extension
Service.
Research to
test the efficacy of fungicides in controlling Fusarium head blight (FHB) and
deoxynivalenol (DON) levels in barley was previously conducted using cultivars
(i.e. Robust, Foster, and Stander) that are susceptible to FHB. Results indicate that fungicides had little
to no effect in reducing DON concentration to levels acceptable to the malting
and brewing industry. Minimal
information is available on the efficacy of fungicides in controlling FHB and
DON levels on genotypes with partial FHB resistance. The objective of this study is to determine if the integrated use
of fungicides and barley cultivars with partial resistance to FHB will control
FHB severity and accumulation of DON.
Experiments were conducted in the field in North Dakota since 2000 and
included genotypes resistant, partially resistant, and susceptible to FHB. Fungicides used were Folicur in 2000, 2001,
and 2002; and AMS21619 in 2001 and 2002.
Folicur did not significantly reduce FHB severity or DON accumulation in
resistant, moderately resistant, or susceptible genotypes. However, genotypes sprayed with Folicur
generally had greater yield due to control of septoria speckled leaf blotch
(SSLB), incited by Septoria passerinii.
Yield gains due to control of SSLB tended to be sufficient to cover the
cost of Folicur and its application on cultivars developed and released by
upper Midwest barley breeding programs.
Preliminary data indicates that efficacy of AMS21619 was slightly better
than Folicur in reducing FHB and DON.
R. Horsley, Richard.Horsley@ndsu.nodak.edu,
701-231-8142
A Historical Perspective on Barley Breeding and
Related Research at Aberdeen, Idaho. Darrell M. Wesenberg*, J. Michael
Bonman, and Donald E. Obert
USDA-ARS ret.* and USDA-ARS, Aberdeen, Idaho 83210
The
Aberdeen Research and Extension Center was established in 1911. Initially the Idaho Agricultural Experiment
Station and the USDA Office of Cereal Investigations jointly operated the
Center. Early objectives included the
improvement of cereals in the intermountain region by introducing better
varieties. Spring barley variety
testing began in 1912. Winter barley,
hulless barley, hooded, and beardless barley were studied. Composite cross populations were reported as
early as 1923. The first reference to
malting barley was the inclusion of ‘Canadian Malting No. 2’ in trials in
1925. Over time varieties resulted from
reselections from introduced varieties, variety introductions, selection from
composite crosses, and traditional pedigree breeding. G.A Wiebe played a key role in barley research at Aberdeen from
the early 1920s. With his appointment
as Junior Plant Breeder by the USDA in May 1922, he began a long career with
the USDA, culminating in the national role of USDA-ARS Barley Investigations
Leader. Other individuals who provided
the basis for barley breeding and research accomplishments at Aberdeen include
H.V. Harlan, M.L. Martini, Harland Stevens, Ralph Hayes, and Allen
Dickson. Varieties introduced or developed
and released at Aberdeen have been important commercial varieties as well as
being widely used parents that have contributed to other significant
varieties. Today basic project
objectives are similar, but goals are more diverse and although traditional
pedigree breeding remains an important approach, new breeding targets and new
technologies involving tissue culture, transgenic germplasm, and molecular
markers are creating greater opportunities for barley improvement.
D.M.
Wesenberg, dwesen4285@aol.com,
208-226-2638
Principles
Learned about Quantitative Traits in Barley from QTL Analysis.
Steven E.
Ullrich, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-6420
Quantitative
traits (QTs) have always been difficult to study and understand and have
greatly baffled geneticists. Conventional quantitative genetic analyses have
been unsatisfactory and unsatisfying in terms of actual usable knowledge
gained, and the assumptions underlying such analyses are generally unrealistic
and unacceptable. The following is a quote about QTs from a well known plant
breeding textbook published within the last decade: “Each multiple gene
expresses a small effect on the phenotype relative to the total variation;
normally it is not possible to identify individual gene effects.” Quantitative
trait locus (QTL) analysis using advanced molecular genetic and computer tools
has opened a floodgate of knowledge about quantitative traits not available
through conventional genetic analyses. The term QTL was invented to describe a
genetic determinant for a QT, which is not quite at the level of gene or locus
in the conventional sense. This paper is intended to be a reflection of
perspectives based on experience and observation.
Considerable
new and usable information has been gained over the past 10 years about
economically important QTs in barley starting with but not limited to QTL
analysis. Much of this information has been made possible through the North
American Barley Genome (Mapping) Project and based on key comprehensive
molecular maps. First of all, QTL analyses have identified the number and
approximate chromosome location of QTLs for many traits (7, 11, 12, 13, 16).
These results in themselves are very exciting and satisfying. QTL analyses have
given us the first real genetic glimpses of important QTs. In addition QTL
analysis has allowed for the calculation of QTL effects (r2 values
or % variation explained), heritability, and environmental (E) and QTL x E, and
QTL x QTL interaction effects.
QTLs that
map coincidently with other QTLs of other traits have confirmed relationships
among traits and have raised questions about the occurrence and role of
pleiotropy and gene clusters. For example, malt extract content QTLs usually
map coincidently with other QTLs, such as for a-amylase activity, diastatic power, malt b-glucanase
activity, and/or malt b-glucan
content, which are all sub-traits or contributing traits of malt extract (5, 18).
Grain yield QTLs often overlap with sub-trait QTLs, such as heading date, plant
height, lodging resistance, and/or shatter resistance (7, 12, 16). Fusarium
head blight resistance QTLs may overlap with QTLs for plant height and
inflorescence morphology (20). Chromosome regions that are rich in major
related QTLs are logical candidates for marker-assisted selection (MAS) for
trait maintenance or improvement in applied breeding.
QTL
analysis has opened the door for fine mapping, further genetic study, map-based
cloning, and MAS. Identified QTLs have been “isolated” by selection within
doubled haploid line (DHL) mapping populations or by marker-assisted backcross
isoline development. Such lines have been used for QTL verification and study
of gene action and epistasis, e.g., for seed dormancy (3, 4). Marker-assisted
selection has been used for QTL verification and for breeding applications.
Barley stripe rust (BSR) resistance QTLs were mapped (1) and the information
used for breeding BSR resistance cultivars (6,17). This involved a two
gene-plus model. Verification of QTLs via tests of MAS has met with mixed
results. Using DHLs form ‘Steptoe’/’Morex’ crosses not used in the mapping
efforts, a major malting quality QTL region on chromosome 1 (7H) was verified and
MAS improved malting quality compared with conventional phenotypic selection
(2). However, another QTL region on chromosome 4 seemed to disappear! A similar
study, using ‘Harrington’/TR306 DHLs not used in the mapping effort, produced
similar results. Two major malting quality QTL regions on chromosome 7 (5H)
were verified with MAS improving malting quality, but QTL regions on
chromosomes 3 and 6 could not be definitively confirmed (8). Moving a grain
yield QTL on chromosome 3 from Steptoe into Morex via MAS seemed not to
adversely affect malting quality of progeny, but did lower test weight and
apparently did not increase grain yield (10). Again, using a Steptoe/Morex DHL
population not used in mapping, confirmed with consistent positive MAS results
grain yield QTL regions on chromosome 3 and 6. MAS for chromosome 2 and 7 (5H)
yield QTLs gave inconsistent results due apparently to QTL x E interactions
(15). Introgressing three yield QTL regions from Steptoe into the Morex
background via MAS resulted in little effect on malting quality, improvements
in yield related traits (reduced plant height, lodging, shattering), but no
improvement on grain yield itself (9). On the other hand a MAS study involving
backcrossing ‘Baronesse’ grain yield QTLs into the Harrington background has
been preliminarily successful in the development of lines with Harrington-like
malting quality and Baronesse-like grain yield (Schmierer et al., 2002, this
proceedings). However, there is one backcross line that has improved yield and
reduced malting quality, and it does not contain any of the targeted Baronesse
yield QTLs!
Experience
in fine mapping studies using isolines developed by MAS backcrossing and in
various MAS breeding schemes for improving or maintaining complex “mega traits”,
such as malt extract and grain yield, indicates that the background genotype is
of great importance. It appears isogenic lines are not usually isogenic even
with the aid of molecular marker checks. Furthermore, behavior of QTLs is not
always as expected in different backgrounds. Ramage’s (14 ) concepts of the
role of background genotype and “happy homes” appear to be as important for
QTLs as they are for qualitative genes. Lack of ‘purity” of genetic background
also allows for epistatic effects not expected because of previously undetected
“genes”. The effects of E and QTL x E interactions also complicate
understanding. Crossover interactions in which a QTL expresses alternative
favorable alleles (19) are also perplexing and complicate MAS. However, refinement
of techniques and the ability to observe the genome more comprehensively, with
for example micro-arrays, will continue to advance our understanding of QTs.
But at present, even with QTL analysis and subsequent molecular genetic study,
QTs can still be baffling.
1. Chen, F.Q.
D. Prehn, P.M. Hayes, D. Mulrooney, A. Corey, and H. Vivar. 1994 Mapping genes
for resistance to barley stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis f.sp. hordei).
Theor. Appl. Genet. 88:215-219.
2. Han, F.,
I. Romagosa, S.E. Ullrich, B. Jones, P.M. Hayes, and D.M. Wesenberg. 1997.
Molecular marker assisted selection for malting quality traits in barley.
Molec. Breed. 3:427-437.
3. Han, F.,
S.E. Ullrich, J.A.. Clancy, V. Jitkov, A. Kilian, and I. Romagosa. 1996.
Verification of barley seed dormancy loci via linked molecular markers. Theor. Appl. Genet. 92:87-91.
4. Han, F.,
S.E. Ullrich, J.A. Clancy, and I. Romagosa.1999. Inheritance and fine mapping
of a major barley seed dormancy QTL. Plant Sci. 143:113-118.
5. Han, F.,
S.E. Ullrich, A. Kleinhofs, B.L. Jones, P.M. Hayes, and D.M. Wesenberg. 1997.
Fine structure mapping of the barley chromosome 1 centromere region containing
malting quality QTL. Theor. Appl. Genet. 95:903-910.
6. Hayes,
P.M., A.E. Corey, R. Dovell, R. Karow, C. Undi, K. Rhinart, and H. Vivar. 2000.
Registration of Orca barley. Crop Sci. 40:849.
7. Hayes, P.
M., B. H. Liu, S. J. Knapp, F. Chen, B. Jones, T. Blake, J. Franckowiak, D
Rasmusson, M. Sorrells, S. E. Ullrich, D. Wesenberg and A. Kleinhofs. 1993. Quantitative trait locus effects and
environmental interaction in a sample of
North American barley germplasm.
Theor. Appl. Genet. 87: 392-401.
8. Igartua
E., M. Edney, B.G. Rossnagel, D. Spaner, W.G. Legge, G.J. Scoles, P.E.
Eckstein, G.A. Penner, N.A. Tinker, K.G. Briggs, and D.E. Falk. 2000.
Marker-based selection of QTL affecting grain and malt quality in two-row
barley. Crop Sci. 40:1426-1433.
9. Kandemir,
N., B.L. Jones, D.M. Wesenberg, S.E. Ullrich, and A. Kleinhofs. 2000. Marker
assisted analysis of three grain yield QTL in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) using near isogenic lines. Molec. Breed.
6:157-167.
10. Larson,
S.R., D.K. Habernicht, T.K. Blake, and M. Adamson. 1997. Backcross gains for
six-rowed grain and malt qualities with introgression of a feed barley yield
QTL. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 55:52-57.
11. Marquez-Cedillo,
L.A., P.M. Hayes, B.L. Jones, A. Kleinhofs, W.G. Legge, B.G. Rossnagel, K.
Sato, S.E. Ullrich, D.M. Wesenberg, and the NABGMP. 2000. QTL analysis of malting quality in barley
based on the doubled haploid progeny of two elite North American varieties
representing different germplasm groups.
Theor. Appl. Genet. 101:173-184.
12. Marquez-Cedillo,
L.A., P.M. Hayes, A. Kleinhofs, W.G. Legge, B.G. Rossnagel, K. Sato, S.E.
Ullrich, D.M. Wesenberg, and the NABGMP. 2001.
QTL analysis of agronomic traits in barley based on the doubled-haploid
progeny of two elite North American varieties representing different germplasm
groups. Theor. Appl. Genet.
103:625-637.
13. Mather,
D.E., N.A. Tinker, D.E. LaBerge, M. Edney, B.L. Jones, B.G. Rossnagel, W.G.
Legge, K.G. Briggs, R.B. Irvine, D.E. Falk, and K.J. Kasha. 1997. Regions of
the genome that affect grain and malt quality in a North American two-row
barley cross. Crop Sci. 37:544-554.
14. Ramage, R.T.
1977. Male sterile facilitated recurrent selection and happy homes. p. 92-98.
in S. Barghout et al., (ed.). Proc. 4th reg. winter cereals
workshop, vol. 2. barley. Amman, Jordan.
15. Romagosa,
I., F. Han, S.E. Ullrich, P.M. Hayes, and D.M. Wesenberg. 1999. Verification of
yield QTL through realized molecular marker assisted selection responses in a
barley cross. Molec. Breed. 5:143-152.
16. Tinker,
N.A., D.E. Mather, B.G. Rossnagel, K.J. Kasha, A. Kleinhofs, P.M. Hayes, D.E.
Falk, Ferguson, L.P. Shugar, W.G. Legg, R.B. Irvine, T.M. Choo, K.G. Briggs,
S.E. Ullrich, J.D. Franckowiak, T. Blake, R.J. Graf, S.M. Dofing, M.A. Saghai
Maroof G.J. Scoles, D. Hoffman, L.S. Dahleen, A. Kilian, F. Chen, R.M.
Biyashev, D.A. Kudrna, and B.J. Steffenson.
1996. Regions of the genome that affect agronomic performance in two-row
barley. Crop Sci. 36:1053-1062.
17. Toojinda,
T., E. Baird, A. Booth, L. Broers, P. Hayes, W. Powell, W. Thomas, H. Vivar,
and G. Young. 1998. Introgression of qualitative trait loci (QTLs) determining
stripe rust resistance in barley: an example of marker-assisted line
development. Theor. Appl. Genet. 96:123-131.
18. Ullrich
S.E., F. Han, and B.L. Jones. 1997. Genetic complexiy of the malt extract trait
in six-row spring barley suggested by QTL analysis. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 55:1-4.
19. Zhu, H.,
G. Briceno, R. Dovel, P.M. Hayes, B.H. Liu, C.T. Liu, and S.E. Ullrich. 1999.
Molecular breeding for grain yield in barley: An evaluation of QTL effects in a
spring barley cross. Theor. Appl. Genet. 98:772-779.
20. Zhu, H.,
L. Golchrist, P. Hayes, A. Kleinhofs, D. Kudrna, Z. Liu, L. Prom, B.
Steffenson, T. Toojinda, and H. Vivar. 1999. Does function follow form?
Principle QTLs for Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance are coincident with
QTLs for inflorescence traits and plant height in a doubled-haploid population
of barley. Theor. Appl. Genet. 99:1221-1232.
S.E.
Ullrich, Ullrich@wsu,edu, 509-335-4936
Digital Plant Breeding. Mario C.
Therrien AAFC Brandon Research Centre,
Brandon, MB. Canada
In recent
years, electronic devices for measuring plant parameters, such as crop density,
and gathering digital information, such as digital cameras, have become robust
and relatively inexpensive. Their ability to rapidly measure physical and optical
properties has made these devices a potentially useful set of tools in a
breeding program by measuring or predicting useful agronomic traits. Five
different digital devices were assessed for their practicality and utility in
identifying high (grain and forage) yielding genotypes of barley for potential
use in a breeding program. These included 1) a digital camera, 2) a crop canopy
analyzer, 3) a chlorophyll fluorometer, 4) a SPAD meter, and 5) a
multi-spectral radiometer. Nine barley cultivars were chosen, widely differing
in genetic background and agronomic performance, and were planted at two
locations over two years. Each device was used throughout the growing season at
emergence, tillering, shot blade, boot, anthesis, and grainfill stages (except the
block harvested as silage). Values obtained were correlated with grain and
biomass yield. The digital camera and SPAD meter were also used to examine
disease load and incidence at anthesis and grainfill. As well, the digital
camera also measured harvested grain parameters. Each device was also assessed
for ease of use and cost/benefit. Results show that all the devices were able
to predict grain or biomass yield, or both, except for the fluorometer. The
digital camera and SPAD meter were also useful for measuring other traits. The
SPAD meter gave the best overall results.
Mario C.
Therrien, Mtherrien@em.agr.ca,
204-726-7650
Breeding
for lower DON response in six-row malting barley using conventional methods and
existing germplasm. Dr. D.B. Cooper Busch Agricultural Resources Inc. 3515 E. Co. Rd.
52, Ft. Collins, CO 81024
Fusarium head blight (FHB) on malting barley has become an important limitation on the stable supply of acceptable malt barley in the upper mid-western United States. Considerable effort has been made to screen germplasm for sources of resistance to both the pathogen itself and for sources of reduce