Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-495rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T19:18:27.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developmental consequences of two-row and six-row ear type in spring barley: 1. Genetical analysis and comparison of mature plant characters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

T. J. Riggs  and
E. J. M. Kirby
T. J. Riggs
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Trumpington, Cambridge CB2 2LQ
E. J. M. Kirby
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Trumpington, Cambridge CB2 2LQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Mature plant characters and yield components were measured on a two-row (Proctor) and a six-row (Clermont) spring barley variety, the F1 of the cross between them, and the first back-cross to each parent.

Whereas shoot dry weight in the F1 significantly exceeded the mid-parental value, and chaff dry weight, stem length and weight per grain showed positive heterosis, grain yield did not exceed the mid-parental value and number of grains per plant showed negative heterosis.

A scaling test showed that an additive-dominance model fitted the data in all cases except possibly for dry weight per grain, where the χ2 test approached significance.

The partial dominance of the two-row allele (V) for grains set per rachis node exhibited in the mature ears of the F1 was not apparent at anthesis when all the lateral florets were found to have large, apparently normal stamens. However, the ratio of median to lateral grains set over all main shoot ears of the F1 was 1:0·21 with an average of six lateral grains per ear.

The results presented indicate that the factors determining total dry-matter production and grain yield are inherited in such a way that the restriction upon grain yield in the F1 is due not to a deficiency of dry matter but to a limited capacity of the plant to store dry matter in the form of grain. This may indicate some developmental interdependence in the expression of yield component characters.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 91 , Issue 1 , August 1978 , pp. 199 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Carleton, A. E. & Foote, W. H. (1968). Heterosis for grain yield and leaf area and their components in two- x six-rowed barley crosses. Crop Science 8, 554–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavalli, L. L. (1952). An analysis of linkage in quantitative inheritance. Quantitative Inheritance (ed. Rieve, E. C. R. and Waddington, C. H.), pp. 135–144. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
Elliot, W. A. & Poehlman, J. M. (1976). Inheritance of kernel weight in six-rowed x two-rowed barley crosses (Hordeum vulgare L. x H. distichum L.). Barley Genetics III, Proceedings of the Third International Barley Genetics Symposium, Garching, 1975, pp. 678–685.Google Scholar
Grafius, J. E., Thomas, R. L. & Barnard, J. (1976). Effect of parental component complementation on yield and components of yield in barley. Crop Science 16, 673–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gymer, P. T. (1976). Heterosis for grain size in six-row x two-row F1 hybrids. Barley Qenetics Newsletter 6, 30–33.Google Scholar
Habgood, R. M. & Jones, D. L. (1976). Breeding Programmes – spring barley. Report of the Welsh Plant Breeding Station for 1975, pp. 36–37.Google Scholar
Hayter, A. M. & Allison, M. J. (1976). Breeding for high diastatic power. Barley Genetics III, Proceedings of the Third International Barley Genetics Symposium, Garching, 1975, pp. 612–619.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Faris, D. G. (1972). The effect of plant density on tiller growth and morphology in barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 78, 281–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, J. W. & Liang, T. J. (1952). Studies of various characters of six-rowed segregates from crosses between two-rowed and six-rowed barleys. Agronomy Journal 44, 364–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mather, K. (1949). Biometrical Genetics (1st edition), London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Mather, K. & Jinks, J. L. (1971). Biometrical Genetics (2nd edition), pp. 71–76. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nilan, R. A. (1964). The cytology and genetics of barley 1951–1962. Monographic Supplement No. 3, Research Studies. Washington State University.Google Scholar
Riggs, T. J. & Hayter, A. M. (1975). A study of the inheritance and interrelationships of some agronomically important characters in spring barley. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 46, 257–264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Takahashi, R., Hayashi, J. & Moriya, I. (1976). Basic studies on breeding barley by the use of two-rowed and six-rowed varietal crosses. Barley Genetics III, Proceedings of the Third International Barley Genetics Symposium, Garching, 1975, pp. 662–677.Google Scholar
Tandon, J. P., Joshi, A. B. & Jain, K. B. L. (1968). Genetic analysis of yield in a six-row and two-row varietal cross in barley. I. Genetics of yield and its primary components. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding 28, 239–251.Google Scholar
Tseng, S. T. & Poehlman, J. M. (1974). Hybrid performance among six-rowed x two-rowed winter barleys (Hordeum vulgare L. and Hordeum distichum L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 44, 294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zali, A. A. & Allard, R. W. (1976). The effect of level of heterozygosity on the performance of hybrids between isogenic lines of barley. Genetics 84, 765–775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed