Tải bản đầy đủ - 0 (trang)
IX. Barley and Malt Intercharacter Correlations

IX. Barley and Malt Intercharacter Correlations

Tải bản đầy đủ - 0trang

TABLE V

Simple Correlation Coefficients among Barley Grain or Malt Characteristics Important to Malting Barley as Compiled

from Fifteen Different Studies



W



P,



Determinations (r value or range) made on

Characters correlated

Grain yield vs plump kernels

Grain yield vs protein or nitrogen

Grain yield vs diastatic power

Grain yield vs extract

% Plump kernels vs protein or nitrogen

% Plump kernels vs diastatic power

% Plump kernels vs extract

% Plump kernels vs fine-coarse extract difference

% Thin kernels vs kernel weight

% Thin kernels vs test weight

% Thin kernels vs protein or nitrogen

% Thin kernels vs diastatic power

% Thin kernels vs extract

% Thin kernels vs fine-coarse extract difference

Kernel weight vs test weight

Kernel weight vs protein or nitrogen

Kernel weight vs diastatic power

Kernel weight vs extract

Test weight vs extract

Test weight vs soluble/total nitrogen

Test weight vs protein or nitrogen

Protein or nitrogen vs diastatic power

Protein or nitrogen vs extract

Protein or nitrogen vs a-amylase



Barley

0.29

-0.20 to

-0.25 to

0.4% to

0.25 to

-0.75

0.54 to



-0.48

-0.28

0.65

0.40

0.55



-0.71 to -0.86

-0.49 to -0.70

-0.41

0.70 to -0.53

-0.58

0.29

-0.47

-0.47

0.51

0.45



to

to

to

to

to



0.71

0.27

-0.55

0.71

0.58



0.28 to 0.97

-0.28 to -0.90



Barley and malt



Malt



0

?



-0.55

-0.28



cd



m

4

m



-0.55 to -0.49

-0.58

0.52 to 0.54

-0.56



F!



0



z

a-



s

?

P



0.42 to 0.44

0.65

-0.50 to 0.55

0.45



;3

a

0.60

0.69

0.25

0.50

0.41

-0.50

0.41



to 0.99

to 0.96

to -0.96

to 0.65



0.44 to 0.74

-0.30 to -0.90

0.50 to 0.60



Protein or nitrogen vs soluble protein or nitrogen

Protein or nitrogen vs soluble/total protein or nitrogen

Protein or nitrogen vs proteolytic activity

Protein or nitrogen vs malting loss

Protein or nitrogen vs malt recovery

Diastatic power vs diastatic power

Diastatic power vs extract

Diastatic power vs a-amylase

Diastatic power vs soluble protein or nitrogen

Diastatic power vs fine/coarse extract difference

Extract vs extract

Extract vs a-amylase

Extract vs soluble protein or nitrogen

Extract vs soluble/total protein or nitrogen

a-Amylase vs soluble protein or nitrogen

a-Amylase vs soluble/total protein or nitrogen

Soluble protein or nitrogen vs soluble/total protein or nitrogen

Soluble protein or nitrogen vs fine-coarse extract difference

Soluble/total protein or nitrogen vs fine-coarse extract difference



0.65 t o 0.76

-0.64

0.85

0.69



0.53 to 0.66

-0.55 to - 0 . 6 2



-0.95

0 . 7 9 t o Oi91

-0.27 to -0.86



-0.87



-0.54 t o - 0 . 7 9

0.34 to 0 . 5 5

0 . 5 0 to'O .64

-0.54



0 . 8 9 to 0.97



0.68



Fr



=!

z



0



0.41 t o -0.53

-0.43 to -0.48

0.46to0.57

0 . 5 3 to 0 . 5 5

0.65

0.80



-0.36

-0.59



m

r



.e



z



4



E



m

m



w

P

W



350



0. A. PETERSON AND A. E. FOSTER



X.



Genetics and Breeding of Malting Barley



Wiebe (Reid et al., 1968) has indicated that cultivated barley ranks

among the top half-dozen plant species in the amount of genetic information available. Genetic analyses have established the number of genes and

linkage relationships for many of the morphological and disease characteristics of barley. Although the physiological and biochemical characters that

relate to malting quality are heritable, the exact mode of inheritance is

unknown. The inheritance of many of these malting quality characteristics

is complex, and their expression is influenced by the environment in which

the barley plant is grown.

Although the plant breeder does not have a complete understanding of

the inheritance of the malting quality characteristics, improvement of the

characteristics through breeding has been possible. However, this lack of

knowledge has slowed improvement of the malting quality characteristics

compared with several of the qualitatively inherited agronomic and disease

characteristics. Breeding for malting quality has been aided by correlation

studies which contribute to the knowledge of what can be expected in hybrid progeny, and by heritability studies which aid in the understanding

of the reliability of selection.

Acceptable malting varieties have been developed by bringing favorable

levels of malting quality characteristics into a single variety. Once these

favorable associations are established within a variety, they assist the barley breeder by serving as genotypes which can be used as parents in effecting further improvements. Genetic linkages can be a deterent to breeding

improvements when the breeder attempts to introduce a desirable gene or

genes which are associated with unfavorable agronomic, disease, or malting

quality characteristics. Undesirable genetic linkages often occur when

exotic germplasm is used as parents in a breeding program. Bell and

Lupton (1962) have aptly described the breeding of malting barley varieties and the associated problems. One factor emphasized is that quality

standards are not universal. The barley breeder’s efforts must be to develop

varieties which contain suitable levels of agronomic and disease characteristics for given environments and the proper combination of malting quality

traits. These quality traits may vary with the type of barley, area of production, and maltster and brewer requirements.

A.



GENETICSAND HERITABILITY

STUDIES



The literature on the inheritance of many of the agronomic and disease

characteristics desired in a malting barley variety is extensive. Smith



MALTING BARLEY IN THE UNITED STATES



35 1



(1951) and Nilan (1964) have made excellent reviews of these studies.

The complexity of inheritance of agronomic characteristics ranges widely

from traits such as maturity and plant height, where individual F, plant

selection is effective, to grain yield, which requires extensive progeny testing in replicated trials. Most of the disease characteristics are relatively

simply inherited and can be manipulated in a breeding program if either

natural or artificial epiphytotics are available to obtain a selection differeential. A common experience encountered, however, is that the desired

disease resistance often is available only in exotic, unadapted material containing undesired genes. Several crosses with adapted malting barley varieties or the growing of extremely large populations of single crosses often

are required to break the linkages between the disease resistance gene or

genes and the undesired genes.

The genetics of malting quality characteristics are less understood than

most of the agronomic and disease characteristics handled by the barley

breeder. The unavailability of adequate testing procedures to most breeders

and the complexity of inheritance of quality characteristics have been contributing factors to the lack of understanding. The recognition of the relationship of kernel protein levels to malting quality caused the initation of

some of the first genetic studies of quality to be made on kernel protein.

Recent genetic studies have been concerned with enzymatic activity and

other quality characteristics. Reviews of these inheritance studies along

with application of the results to development of improvement of malting

quality have been made by Smith (1951 ), Nilan (1964), Bell and Lupton

(1962), and Meredith et al. (1962).

The development of “prediction tests” which involve chemical analyses

of the barley grain for percent protein, potential diastatic power, and percent extract has provided the barley breeder with a means for predicting

malting quality of lines in early generations. The prediction test frequently

is supplemented by kernel plumpness evaluations. Sisler and Banasik

(195 1 ) found that selection in the F, generation of a barley cross for kernel weight, percent nitrogen, diastatic power, and percent extract increased

the proportion of lines with acceptable quality. The effectiveness of selection for the individual characters was not presented. Bendelow and Meredith (1955) showed the prediction test was 79 % effective in selecting lines

which were favorable for quality, based on later malting quality tests. They

indicated that in some instances desirable lines would be discarded, but

knowledge of the parentage would be helpful in the selection of lines.

Some of the most useful information that can be used by the plant

breeder in selecting for malting quality characteristics is provided by recent

studies on estimates of heritabilities and genetic variances (Day et al.,

1955; Rasmusson and Glass, 1965, 1967; Rutger et al., 1966; Foster et al.,



Tài liệu bạn tìm kiếm đã sẵn sàng tải về

IX. Barley and Malt Intercharacter Correlations

Tải bản đầy đủ ngay(0 tr)

×