Euphytica

, Volume 201, Issue 3, pp 389–400 | Cite as

Evaluation of cauliflower genebank accessions under organic and conventional cultivation in Southern Germany

  • Eltohamy A. A. Yousef
  • Christian Lampei
  • Karl J. Schmid
Article

Abstract

In recent years, public attention increased towards products from organic farming due to their presumed higher quality and health benefits. Frequently, organic farming is characterized by lower yields than conventional farming. One reason may be the use of varieties that were bred for conventional cultivation and are not adapted to organic farming. This raises the question if high yielding varieties differ in their performance under different cultivation methods allowing the selection of varieties with superior performance in organic cultivation. To answer this question and to identify suitable genotypes we evaluated a collection of 178 cauliflower genebank accessions under organic and conventional farming conditions. Two traits (curd width and time to budding) were evaluated for mean and stability. We observed a significant genotype × cultivation method interaction because genotypes differed in their performance between cultivation methods. Of the two traits investigated, curd width showed a lower heritability (\(H_{\text{org}}^{2}\) = 0.26, \(H_{\text{conv}}^{2}\) = 0.37) and low genotypic correlation between organic and conventional systems, compared to days to budding that show high heritability (\(H_{\text{org}}^{2}\) = 0.86, \(H_{\text{conv}}^{2}\) = 0.87) and a high correlation between the two farming systems. Our results demonstrate that the selection for curd width should be preferably conducted under organic conditions, whereas selection for number of days can be carried out under organic or conventional conditions. The evaluation of genotypes at both environments identified genotypes that may be used as parental lines for breeding under organic conditions.

Keywords

Cauliflower Organic farming Genotype-by-environment interaction Heritability Stability 

Supplementary material

10681_2014_1225_MOESM1_ESM.doc (270 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 269 kb)
10681_2014_1225_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (57 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLSX 57 kb)

References

  1. Almekinders CJM, Elings A (2001) Collaboration of farmers and breeders: participatory crop improvement in perspective. Euphytica 122:425–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atlin G, Baker R, McRae K, Lu X (2000) Selection response in subdivided target regions. Crop Sci 40:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Backes G, Ostergard H (2008) Molecular markers to exploit genotype–environment interactions of relevance in organic growing systems. Euphytica 169:523–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baenziger PS, Ibrahim S, Little RS, Santra DK, Regassa T, Wang MY (2011) Structuring an efficient organic wheat breeding program. Sustainability 3:1190–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banziger M, Cooper M (2001) Breeding for low input conditions and consequences for participatory plant breeding: examples from tropical maize and wheat. Euphytica 122:503–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2013) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.0-5Google Scholar
  7. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B 57:289–300Google Scholar
  8. Ceccarelli S (1996) Adaptation to low high input cultivation. Euphytica 92:203–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crisp P (1977) Genotype × environment interactions in early winter cauliflowers in south-west Britian. J Hortic Sci 52:357–366Google Scholar
  10. Crisp P, Kesavan V (1978) Genotypic and environmental effects on the weight of the curds of autumn-maturing cauliflowers. J Agric Sci 90:11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawson JC, Murphy KM, Huggins DR, Jones S (2011) Evaluation of winter wheat breeding lines for traits related to nitrogen use under organic management. Org Agric 1:65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dawson JC, Serpolay E, Giuliano S, Schermann N, Galic N, Berthellot J-F, Chesneau V (2013) Phenotypic diversity and evolution of farmer varieties of bread wheat on organic farms in Europe. Genet Resour Crop Evol 60:145–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Ponti T, Rijk B, van Ittersum MK (2012) The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture. Agric Syst 108:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elwan MWM, Abd El-Hamed KE (2011) Influence of nitrogen form, growing season and sulfur fertilization on yield and the content of nitrate and vitamin C of broccoli. Sci Hortic 127:181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. FAO (2010) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation. The Statistics Division. http://www.fao.org
  16. FiBL, SOEL (2010) European Organic Farming Statistics. http://www.organic-europe.net/europe_eu/statistics
  17. Finckh MR (2008) Integration of breeding and technology into diversification strategies for disease control in modern agriculture. Eur J Plant Pathol 121:399–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gauch HG (2006) Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci 46:1488-1500Google Scholar
  19. Goldstein WA, Schmidt W, Burger H, Messmer M, Pollak LM, Smith ME, Goodman MM, Kutka FJ, Pratt RC (2012) Maize: breeding and field testing for organic farmers. In: Myers JR, Lammerts van Bueren ET (eds) Organic crop breeding. Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, pp 175–188Google Scholar
  20. Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical J 50:346–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jindal SK, Thakur JC (2003) Interrelationship of curd weight and other characters in November cauliflower. J Res 40:358–362Google Scholar
  22. Kang MS (2002) Genotype–environment interaction: progress and prospects. In: Kang MS (ed) Quantitative genetics, genomics and plant breeding. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 221–243Google Scholar
  23. Kesavan V, Crisp P, Gray AR, Dowker BD (1976) Genotypic and environmental effects on the maturity time of autumn cauliflowers. Theor Appl Genet 47:133–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kirk AP, Fox SL, Entz MH (2012) Comparison of organic and conventional selection environments for spring wheat. Plant Breed 131:687–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kirsh VA, Peters U, Mayne ST (2007) Prospective study of fruit and vegetable intake and risk of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 99:1200–1209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Koesling M, Løes A, Flaten O, Kristensen NH, Hansen MW (2012) Farmers’ reasons for deregistering from organic farming. Org Agric 2:103–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kokare A, Legzdine L, Beinarovica I, Malliepaard C, Niks RE, Lammerts van Bueren ET (2014) Performance of spring barely (Hordeum vulgare) varieties under organic and conventional conditions. Euphytica 197(2):279–293. doi:10.1007/s10681-014-1066-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lammerts van Bueren ET, Jones SS, Tamm L, Murphy KM, Myers JR, Leifert C, Messmer MM (2011) The need to breed crop varieties suitable for organic farming, using wheat, tomato, and broccoli as examples: a review. NJAS-Wageningen J Life Sci 58:193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lan TH, Paterson AH (2000) Comparative mapping of quantitative trait loci sculpting. Genetics 155:1927–1954PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee SA, Fowke JH, Lu W, Ye C, Zheng Y, Gu K, Gu YT, Gao XO, Shu X, Zheng W (2008) Cruciferous vegetables, the GSTP1 Ile105Val genetic polymorphism, and breast cancer risk. Am J Clin Nutr 87:753–760PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lin C, Binns M (1991) Genetic properties of four types of stability parameters. Theor Appl Genet 82:505–509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lo Scalzo R, Iannoccari T, Genna A, Di Cesare LF, Viscardi D, Ferrari V, Campanelli G (2008) Organic vs. conventional field trials: the effect on cauliflower quality. In: Proceedings of the 16th IFOAM organic world congress, cultivate the future based on science, 2nd conference of the international society of organic agriculture research ISOFAR, Modena, Italy, ID code 11758Google Scholar
  33. Löschenberger F, Fleck A, Grausgruber G, Hetzendorfer H, Hof G, Lafferty J, Marn M, Neumayer A, Pfaffinger G, Birschitzky J (2008) Breeding for organic agriculture the example of winter wheat in Austria. Euphytica 163:469–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Maggio A, De Pascale S, Paradiso R, Babieri G (2013) Quality and nutritional value of vegetables from organic and conventional farming. Sci Hortic 164:532–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Messmer MM, Burger H, Schmidt W, Geiger HH (2009) Importance of appropriate selection environments for breeding maize adapted to organic farming systems. Tagung der Vereinigung der Pflanzenzücher und Saatgutkaufleute Österreichs, pp. 49–51Google Scholar
  36. Messmer M, Hildermann I, Thorup-Kristensen K, Rengel Z (2012) Nutrient management in organic farming and consequences for direct and indirect selection strategies. In: Lammerts van Bueren ET, Myers JR (eds) Organic crop breeding. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 15–32Google Scholar
  37. Mohammadi R, Amri A (2009) Analysis of genotype × environment interactions for grain yield in durum wheat. Crop Sci 49:1177–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Murphy KM, Campbell KG, Lyon SR, Jones SS (2007) Evidence of varietal adaptation to organic farming systems. Field Crop Res 102:172–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Myers JR, McKenzei L, Voorrips RE (2012) Brassica: breeding cole crops fir organic agriculture. In: Lammerts van Bueren ET, Myers JR (eds) Organic crop breeding. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 251–262Google Scholar
  40. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, the R Core team (2013) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-113Google Scholar
  41. Przystalski M, Osman A, Thiemt EM et al (2008) Comparing the performance of cereal varieties in organic and non organic cropping systems in different European countries. Euphytica 163:417–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. R Development Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  43. Reid T, Yang R-C, Salmon DF, Spaner D (2009) Should spring wheat breeding for organically managed systems be conducted on organically managed land? Euphytica 169:239–252Google Scholar
  44. Renaud ENC, Lammerts van Bueren ET, Jiggins J, Maliepaard C, Paulo J, Juvik JA, Myers JR (2010) Breeding for specific bioregions. A genotype by environment study of horticultural and nutritional traits integrating breeder and farmer priorities for organic broccoli cultivar improvement. In: Goldringer I, Dawson J, Rey F, Vettoretti, A (eds) Breeding for resilience. A strategy for organic and low-input farming systems? EUCARPIA 2nd Conference of the Organic and Low-Input Agriculture Section. Paris, pp. 124–127Google Scholar
  45. Serpolay E, Dawson JC, Chable V, Lammerts Van Bueren E, Osman A, Pino S, Silveri D, Goldringer I (2011) Diversity of different farmer and modern wheat varieties cultivated in contrasting organic farming conditions in Western Europe and implications for European seed and variety legislation. Org Agric 1:127–145Google Scholar
  46. Singh G, Singh DK, Bhardwaj SB (2010) Variability studies on November maturity group of cauliflower (Brassica olearacea var. botrytis L.). Pantnagar J Res 8:202–205Google Scholar
  47. Seufert V, Ramankutty N, Foley JA (2012) Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 485:229–234Google Scholar
  48. Tang L, Zirpoli GR, Guru K, Moysich KB, Zhang Y, Ambrosone CB, McCann SE (2008) Consumption of raw cruciferous vegetables is inversely associated with bladder cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark prev 17:938–944Google Scholar
  49. Tharuk BS (2006) Adaptability for yield in some mid-late and late group cauliflower (Brassica olearaceaevar botrytis) genotypes under the mid-hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh. Indian J Agric Sci 76:37–40Google Scholar
  50. Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S (2002) Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418:671–677PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Trewavas A (2004) A critical assessment of organic farming and food assertions with particular respect to the UK and the potential environmental benefits of no-till agriculture. Crop Prot 23:757–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wiebe HJ (1975) The morphological development of cauliflower and broccoli cultivars depending on temperature. Sci Hortic 3:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Willer H, Kilcher L (eds.) (2010) The world of organic agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2010. IFOAM, Bonn and FiBL, FrickGoogle Scholar
  54. Wolfe MS, Baresel JP, Desclaux D, Goldringer I, Hoad S, Kovacs G, Loschenberger F, Miedaner T, Østergard H, Lammerts van Bueren ET (2008) Developments in breeding cereals for organic agriculture. Euphytica 163:323–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eltohamy A. A. Yousef
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christian Lampei
    • 1
  • Karl J. Schmid
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Crop Biodiversity and Breeding Informatics (350b)University of HohenheimStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Department of Horticulture, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of Suez CanalIsmailiaEgypt

Personalised recommendations