Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 33, Issue 2–3, pp 509–516 | Cite as

Contribution of the breeding methods used by Rudolf Fleischmann to the development of the Ruma maize heterosis source

A review
Article

Abstract

The gene pool of Rumai 122, probably derived from Korai Arany (Early Golden, a name suggesting origin from Livingstone’s Early Golden or Early Golden Mastodon), appears to have arisen from genetic mixing between one or more Southern Dent varieties, probably of the Gourdseed type, imported from the Corn Belt in the 1890s, and the local (improved) Korai Bânâti Flint (Early Bánáti Flint) variety (Caribbean type, Old Hungarian Yellow, 8–12-row flint) grown on the Ruma estate. Ruma varieties were grown on around half the maize-growing area in Hungary for 30 years (1925–1955), and enjoyed much the same popularity in Yugoslavia. The varieties bred from the mother plant Rumai 122 in Yugoslavia were Rumai Yellow Dent, Vukovar Yellow Dent and Béllyei Yellow Dent, while those bred in Hungary were “F” Early Yellow Dent and “F” Mezőhegyes Yellow Dent. (The latter was also popular in Yugoslavia under the name Novisadski Flajsman.) As the result of Fleischmann’s breeding methods, not only were varieties with high yield potential and genetic stability developed from Ruma 122, but this strain also served as a source for the successful breeding of parental lines each used in the development of a number of commercial hybrids. A total of at least 22 first-cycle and 8 second-cycle lines of high value are known. These exhibited good combining ability with a wide range of lines, not only from the Corn Belt, but also from Europe (dent and flint alike). Due to their different origin and excellent combining ability, genetic sources that can be traced back to mother line Rumai 122 are regarded as an independent European source of heterosis.

Key words

maize breeding source of heterosis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anonymus, (1914): Az első országos kukorica kiállítás ismertetése. (Report on the first national maize exhibition.) Magyar Földműves, 5:179–182.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymus, 1905): Korai Mastodon kukorica. A Livingstone féle korai arany kukorica. (Early Mastodon maize. Livingston’s Early Golden maize.) Gazdasági Lapok, 57:147–148.Google Scholar
  3. Balogh, J. (1988): A kukorica fajtaszerkezete Magyarorszagon 1938–1987 között. (Variety structure of maize in Hungary between 1938 and 1987.) Manuscript. Gabonamag Alapanyagszaporító Gazdasági Társaság, Budapest 77.Google Scholar
  4. Berzsenyi-Janosits, L. (1958): A hibridkukorica. (Hybrid maize.) Mezőgazdasági Kiadó, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  5. Butujás, Gy. (1912): Hazánkban termő fontosabb tengeri félék magjainak alak és alkattana. Gazdasági értékükre való tekintettel. (Doktori értekezés) (Seed morphology of the major maize varieties grown in Hungary, with special regard to their economic value. Thesis.) Stief Jenő és társa Kőnyvkiadója. Kolozsvár, 52.Google Scholar
  6. Fabricius, E. (1921): A magyar nővénynemesítés. (Hungarian plant breeding.) O.M.G.E. Kiadása, Budapest, 316.Google Scholar
  7. Fleischmann, R. (1913a): A rumai uradalom tengeri nemesítő eljárasa. (Maize breeding method followed on the Ruma estate.) Kőztelek, 23:1694–1697.Google Scholar
  8. Fleischmann, R. (1913b): A tengericső alakulàsának jelentősége a tengeri nemesítésénél. (Importance of ear formation in maize breeding.) Köztelek, 23: 3012–3013.Google Scholar
  9. Fleischmann, R. (1914): A rumai uradalom kukoricája. (The maize developed on the Ruma estate.) Gazdasági Lapok, 66: 345–346.Google Scholar
  10. Fleischmann, R. (1916): A nemesített tengeri fajták kipróbálasa és a tengeri nemesítése. (Testing of improved maize varieties and the breeding of maize.) Köztelek, 26: 585–586.Google Scholar
  11. Fleischmann, R. (1920): A kukorica terméseink fokozása fajtanemesités útján. (Improvements in maize yields by variety breeding.) Köztelek, 30:753–754.Google Scholar
  12. Fleischmann, R. (1934): Az “F” kukorica termöképességének kialakulása nemesités útján. (Trends in the yield potential of “F” maize as the result of breeding.) Köztelek, 44: 400–401.Google Scholar
  13. Fleischmann, R. (1939a): Az “F” kukorica üjabb fejlödése. (Recent improvements in “F” maize.) Köztelek, 49: 264–265.Google Scholar
  14. Fleischmann, R. (1939b): Erhöhung der Maisertrage durch Ausnutzung der Heterosiswirkung. Der Züchter, 11:37–40.Google Scholar
  15. Fleischmann, R (1942): 33 Jahre Maiszüchtung. Zeitschr. f. Pflanzenzüchtung, 24:363–373.Google Scholar
  16. Fleischmann, R. (1947): Kukorica. (Maize breeding H.) In: Villax, Ö. (ed.) Növénynemesítés H. kötet. Különleges növénynemesités. Magyaróvar Pátria Irodalrni Vállalat es Nyomdai Rt., BudapestGoogle Scholar
  17. Gyulavári, O. (2003): Fajtahibrid kukoricák átmeneti szerepe Magyarországon, valamint a kukoricanemesítő kollektíva munkája. (Transitional role of maize variety hybrids in Hungary, and the work of the maize breeding team.) pp. 127–132. In: Marton, L. Cs., Ârendás, T. (ed.) 50 éves a magyar hibridkukorica, MartonvásárGoogle Scholar
  18. Hadi, G., Marton L. Cs., Szundy, T., Kovács, L, Pintér, J., Dolinka, B. (2003a): A Mindszentpusztai sárga lófogú kukorica fajta és a belőle származó vonalak szerepe az európai és magyar hibridkukorica nemesítésben. (Role of the maize variety Mindszentpusztai Yellow Dent and the lines derived from it in European and Hungarian hybrid maize breeding.) pp. 141–145. In: Marton, L. Cs., Árendás, T. (ed.) 50 éves a magyar hibridkukorica, MartonvásárGoogle Scholar
  19. Hadi, G., Illés, O., SzŐke, Cs. (2003b): A rumai gén-pool kialakulása és szerepe a középeurópai hibridkukorica nemesitésben. (Development and role of the Ruma gene pool in hybrid maize breeding in Central Europe.) pp. 133–139. In: Marton, L. Cs., Ârendás, T. (ed.) 50 éves a magyar hibridkukorica, MartonvásárGoogle Scholar
  20. Hadi, G., Marton, L. Cs., Szundy, T., Kovács, L, Pintér, J., Dolinka, B. (2004): Contribution made by the maize variety Mindszentpusztai Yellow Dent (MYD) to the birth of hybrid maize in Hungary and in Europe as a whole. Review. Cer. Res. Comm., 32:159–166.Google Scholar
  21. Jánossy, A, Komlóssy, Gy., Mórász, S., Taróczi, H. (1957): Magyar kukoricafajták és termesztésük. (Hungarian maize varieties and its productions.) Mezögazdasági Kiadó, Budapest, 143.Google Scholar
  22. Kiss, K. (1995): Szóbeli közlés. Personal communication.Google Scholar
  23. Kovács, I. (2003): 50 éves a Martonvásári 5 hibridkukorica. (The maize hybrid Martonvásári 5 is 50 years old.) pp. 11–18. In: Marton, L. Cs., Árendás, T. (ed.) 50 éves a magyar hibridkukorica, MartonvásárGoogle Scholar
  24. Marton, L. Cs. (2003): A Martonvásári 5 hatása a martonvásári kukoricanemesitési kutatásokra. (Effect of Martonvásári 5 on maize breeding research in Martonvásár.) pp. 19–26. In: Marton, L. Cs., Árendás, T. (ed.) 50 éves a magyar hibridkukorica, MartonvásárGoogle Scholar
  25. Misevic, D. (1989a): Heterotic patterns among U.S. Corn Belt, Yugoslavian and exotic maize populations. Maydica, 34: 353–363.Google Scholar
  26. Misevic, D. (1989b): Evaluation of three test statistics used to identify maize inbred lines with new favourable alleles not present in elite single crossess. Theor. Appl. Genet., 77: 402–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Misevic, D. (1989c): Identification of inbred lines as a source of new alleles for improvement of elite maize single crosses. Crop Sci., 29: 1120–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Misevic, D. (1990): Evaluation of commercial maize hybrids as sources of new favourable alleles. Maydica, 35: 287–295.Google Scholar
  29. Németh, J. (1985): As I see it... Acta Agron. Hung., 34: 842–851.Google Scholar
  30. Palaversic, P., Rojc, P., Parlov, D., Corovic, M. (1979): Performance of early medium early maize BC lines obtained from local varieties in hybrid combinations with foreign lines. In: Tomov, N. (ed.) Proc. of the Tenth Meeting of the Maize and Sorghum Section of Eucarpia, 77–81.Google Scholar
  31. Péterfy, T. (1923): Magyar kukorica fajták. (Hungarian maize varieties.) Gazdasági lapok, 23: 704–705.Google Scholar
  32. Radovic, G., Jelovac, D. (1995): Identification of the heterotic pattern of Yugoslav maize germplasm. Maydica, 40: 223–227.Google Scholar
  33. Savic, R. (1979): Szóbeli közlés. Personal communication.Google Scholar
  34. Surányi, J. (1938): Háromévi kisérletek kukorica fajtákkal 1934–1936. (Three years of experiments on maize varieties, 1934–1936.) Országos M. Kir. Növénytermelési Kisérleti Állomás Jelentései, Mosonmagyaróvár, Pátria Kiadó, Budapest 4(1): 1–199.Google Scholar
  35. Szundy, T. (2003): A beltenyésztéses kukorica hibridek elterjedése Magyarországon 1953–1964. (Spread of inbred maize hybrids in Hungary between 1953 and 1964.) pp. 39–47. In: Marton, L. Cs., Árendás, T. (ed.) 50 éves a magyar hibridkukorica, MartonvásárGoogle Scholar
  36. Taróczi, H. (1954): Kukorica. (Maize.) pp. 239–257. In: Jánossy, A. (ed.) Nemesitett fajtákkal végzett országos fajtakísérletek eredményei 1953. (Results of national variety trials on improved varieties, 1953.) Mezőgazdasági Kiadó, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  37. Trifunovic, V. (1978): Maize production and maize breeding in Europe. pp 41–58. In: Walden D. B. (ed.) Maize Breeding and Genetics. John Wiley and Sons, New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto.Google Scholar
  38. Villax, Ö., Surányi, J. (1932): Varieties of corn in Hungary. Magyaróvár, 64.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2005

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agricultural Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of SciencesMartonvásárHungary

Personalised recommendations