4.5 Review

Agronomic characteristics, grain quality and flour rheology of 372 bread wheats in a worldwide core collection

期刊

JOURNAL OF CEREAL SCIENCE
卷 48, 期 3, 页码 569-579

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcs.2008.05.005

关键词

Bread wheat; Genetic resources; Diversity; Core collection

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A core collection of 372 accessions representative of worldwide hexaploid bread wheat diversity [Balfourier, F.. Roussel, V., Strelchenko, P., Exbrayat-Vinson, F., Sourdille. P., Boutet, G., Koenig, J., Ravel, C.. Mitrofanova, O., Beckert, M., Charmer, G., 2007. A worldwide bread wheat core collection arrayed in a 384-well plate. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 114, 1265-1275] was used to evaluate the available genetic diversity of agronomic and quality characteristics. The traits assessed during the vegetative period were date of ear-emergence, date of flowering, lodging, disease susceptibility and pre-harvest sprouting. Thousand kernel weight, test weight, grain hardness, grain protein content, pentosan viscosity and grain colour were also measured. The rheological properties of the derived white flours were estimated using mixograph and alveograph tests. For most of the traits, a wide phenotypic variation was observed across all the accessions. Several parameters (mixograph width parameters before and after peak time, alveograph dough tenacity and extensibility, near infrared measurements, like those for protein content, and absorbance measurements of palmitic acid and linoleic acid content) made it easier to discriminate between the cultivars. The largest ranges of variation were found in landraces and old cultivars rather than in more recent varieties. This is evidence that there is sufficient variability available for rare alleles, which have been eliminated in breeding modern varieties to be detected. Such a core collection will therefore be a useful resource for future genetic studies on wheat quality. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据