Variability of Spring Barley Traits Essential for Organic Farming in Association Mapping Population

  • Linda Legzdina
  • Ieva Mezaka
  • Indra Beinarovica
  • Aina Kokare
  • Guna Usele
  • Dace Piliksere
  • Nils Rostoks
Conference paper

Abstract

Association mapping population consisting of 154 Latvian and foreign spring barley genotypes contrasting for traits that are important for organic agriculture was established with the aim to develop molecular markers useful in breeding for organic farming. The mapping population was genotyped at 3072 single-nucleotide polymorphism loci using Illumina GoldenGate platform to provide marker data for association mapping. Field trials in two organically and two conventionally managed locations are being carried out during three seasons. The following traits essential for organic farming were phenotyped: plant morphological traits ensuring competitive ability against weeds, grain yield in organic farming, yield stability/adaptability to organic conditions, nutrient use efficiency (measured as ability to form acceptable grain yield and accumulate protein in grain under conditions of organic farming) and prevalence of diseases. This chapter gives an overview on preliminary phenotyping results. ANOVA showed that genotype and location significantly influenced most of analysed traits (p < 0.01). The average yield reduction in organic trials, when compared to conventional, was 1.2 t ha−1, and it ranged from 4.2 t ha−1 reduction to 1.2 t ha−1 increase. In respect to morphological traits related to competitive ability against weeds (canopy height in beginning of plant elongation, plant ground cover in tillering, length and width of flag leaves, tillering capacity, plant height before harvest), there was a tendency that average trait values were higher in conventional farming locations, but the coefficients of variation were higher in organic locations in most of the cases. The differences in protein content between conventional and organic trials correlated significantly (r = 0.732), and its variation was significantly effected by genotype. The average reduction of protein content in organic fields, if compared to conventional, was 2%, and it ranged 0–6.5%.

Keywords

Phenotyping Competitive ability against weeds Nutrient use efficiency 

References

  1. Backes, G., & Østergård, H. (2008). Molecular markers to exploit genotype–environment interactions of relevance in organic growing systems. Euphytica, 163, 523–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bänziger, M., Edmeades, G. O., Beck, D., & Bellon, M. (2000). Breeding for Drought and Nitrogen Stress Tolerance in Maize: From Theory to Practice. Mexico: CIMMYT. 68.Google Scholar
  3. Baresel, J., Reents, H. J., & Zimmermann, G. (2005, January 17–19). Field evaluation criteria for nitrogen uptake and nitrogen use efficiency. In Proceedings of the COST SUSVAR/ECO-PB workshop on organic plant breeding strategies and the use of molecular markers, Driebergen, The Netherlands, pp. 49–51.Google Scholar
  4. Beattie, A. D., Edney, M. J., Scoles, G. J., & Rossnagel, B. G. (2010). Association mapping of malting quality data from western Canadian two-row barley cooperative trials. Crop Science, 50, 1649–1663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Challaiah, Burnside O. C., Wicks, G. A., & Johnson, V. A. (1986). Competition between winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars and Downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Weed Science, 34, 689–693.Google Scholar
  6. Christensen, S. (1995). Weed suppression ability of spring barley varieties. Weed Research, 35, 241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cockram, J., White, J., Leight, F. J., Lea, V. J., Chiapparino, E., Laurie, D. A., Mackay, I. J., Powell, W., & O’Sullivan, D. M. (2008). Association mapping of partitioning loci in barley (Hordeum vulgare ssp. vulgare L.). BMC Genetics, 9, 16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dreccer, M. F. (2006). Nitrogen use at the leaf and canopy level: A framework to improve crop N use efficiency. In S. Sham et al. (Eds.), Enhancing the efficiency of nitrogen utilization in plants (pp. 97–101). Binghamton: Food Products Press.Google Scholar
  9. Feng, Y., Cao, L. Y., Wu, W. M., Shen, X. H., Zhan, X. D., Zhai, R. R., Wang, R. C., Chen, D. B., & Cheng, S. H. (2010). Mapping QTLs for nitrogen-deficiency tolerance at seedling stage in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Breeding, 129, 652–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoad, S., Topp, C., & Davies, K. (2008). Selection of cereals for weed suppression in organic agriculture: A method based on cultivar sensitivity to weed growth. Euphytica, 163, 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kraakman, A. T. W., Niks, R. E., Van den Berg, P. M. M. M., Stam, P., & Van Eeuwijk, F. A. (2004). Linkage disequilibrium mapping of yield and yield stability in modern spring barley cultivars. Genetics, 168, 435–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kraakman, A. T. W., Martinez, F., Mussiraliev, B., van Eeuwijk, F. A., & Niks, R. E. (2006). Linkage disequilibrium mapping of morphological, resistance and other agronomically relevant traits in modern spring barley cultivars. Molecular Breeding, 17, 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lammerts van Bueren, E. T., Backes, G., de Vriend, H., & Ostergaard, H. (2010). The role of molecular markers and marker assisted selection in breeding for organic agriculture. Euphytica, 175, 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Löschenberger, F., Fleck, A., Grausgruber, H., 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, 469–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maasman, J., Cooper, B., Horsley, R., Neate, S., Dill-Macky, R., Chao, S., Dong, Y., Schwarz, P., Muehlbauer, J., & Smith, K. P. (2011). Genome-wide association mapping of Fusarium head blight resistance in contemporary barley breeding germplasm. Molecular Breeding, 27(4), 439–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Østergård, H., Kristensen, K., Pinnschmidt, H. O., Klarskov Hansen, P., & Hovmøller, M. S. (2008). Predicting spring barley yield from variety-specific yield potential, disease resistance and straw length, and from environment-specific disease loads and weed pressure. Euphytica, 163, 391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Przystalski, M., Osman, A., Thiemt, E. M., Rolland, B., Ericson, L., Østergård, H., Levy, L., Wolfe, M. A., Buchse, A., Piepho, H. P., & Krajewski, P. (2008). Comparing the performance of cereal varieties in organic and non-organic cropping systems in different European countries. Euphytica, 163, 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Reid, T. A., Yang, R. C., Salmon, D. F., & Spaner, D. (2009). Should spring wheat breeding for organically managed systems be conducted on organically managed land? Euphytica, 169, 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Roy, J. K., Smith, K. P., Muehlbauer, G. J., Chao, S., Close, T. J., & Steffenson, B. J. (2010). Association mapping of spot blotch resistance in wild barley. Molecular Breeding, 26, 243–256.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sinclair, T. R., & Vadez, V. (2002). Physiological traits for crop yield improvement in low N and P environments. Plant and Soil, 245, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lammerts van Bueren, E. T. (2002). Organic plant breeding and propagation: concepts and strategies. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, The Netherlands, p. 207.Google Scholar
  22. Vlachostergios, D. N., & Roupakias, D. G. (2008). Response to conventional and organic environment of thirty-six lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) varieties. Euphytica, 163, 449–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wicks, G. A., Ramsel, R. E., Nordquist, P. T., & Schmidt, J. W. (1986). Impact of wheat cultivars on establishment and suppression of summer annual weeds. Agronomy Journal, 78, 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wolfe, M. S., Baresel, J. P., Desclaux, D., Goldringer, I., Hoad, S., Kovacs, G., Löschenberger, F., Miedaner, T., Østergård, H., & Lammerts van Bueren, E. T. (2008). Developments in breeding cereals for organic agriculture. Euphytica, 163, 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhu, C., Gore, M., Buckler, E. S., & Yu, J. (2008). Status and prospects of association mapping in plants. The Plant Genome, 1, 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Zhejiang University Press and Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda Legzdina
    • 1
  • Ieva Mezaka
    • 1
  • Indra Beinarovica
    • 1
  • Aina Kokare
    • 1
  • Guna Usele
    • 1
  • Dace Piliksere
    • 1
  • Nils Rostoks
    • 2
  1. 1.State Priekuli Plant Breeding InstitutePriekuliLatvia
  2. 2.Faculty of BiologyUniversity of LatviaRigaLatvia

Personalised recommendations