Crop Science Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in Crop Science
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berdahl, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Ray, I. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Berdahl, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Ray, I. M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Berdahl, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Ray, I. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Germplasm Enhancement
Right arrow Crop Genetics
Right arrow Other Forage Crops
Published in Crop Sci. 44:768-771 (2004).
© 2004 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA

CROP BREEDING, GENETICS & CYTOLOGY

Comparison of S1 with Open-Pollination Progenies in Selection for Yield in Crested Wheatgrass

John D. Berdahl*,a and Ian M. Rayb

a USDA-ARS, Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, P.O. Box 459, Mandan, ND 58554
b Dep. of Agronomy and Horticulture, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003-0003

* Corresponding author (berdahlj{at}mandan.ars.usda.gov).

Genetic gain from selection for high dry matter yield in most cross-pollinated forage grasses has been an elusive goal, in spite of sustained breeding efforts. This study was conducted to determine the value of one generation of self-pollinating (S1) before selection for yield in crested wheatgrass (Agropyron spp.). Dry matter yields were compared at two locations near Mandan, ND, for synthetic populations derived from selection among and within S1 or among and within open-pollination (OP) progenies from three source populations. Within each source population, the 20 parents used to produce S1 progenies were in common with the 20 maternal parents of the OP progenies. Soil was a Parshall fine sandy loam (coarse-loamy, mixed, superactive, frigid Pachic Haplustolls) at Location 1 and a Wilton silt loam (fine-silty, mixed, superactive, frigid Pachic Haplustolls) at Location 2. In space-plant tests, S1 family means for dry matter yield averaged 52% of OP family means, indicating high levels of inbreeding depression. In solid-seeded tests, yield differences between S1– and OP-derived synthetic populations were significant (P ≤ 0.05) for only one comparison. On the basis of three distinct source populations, we found that S1 and OP families were both effective when used as the selection unit to choose high yielding parents for synthetic populations. Additional resources required to produce and evaluate S1 families over OP families could not be justified in the crested wheatgrass source populations evaluated in this study.


Related articles in Crop Science:

THIS ISSUE IN CROP SCIENCE

Crop Science 2004 44: 707-710. [Full Text]  






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Journal of
Environmental Quality
Copyright © 2004 by the Crop Science Society of America.