Barley Breeding for Montana: Ensuring a stable malt supply
Principal Investigator:
Dr. Jamie Sherman
210 Plant Biosciences Building
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
jsherman@montana.edu
Liz Elmore
Research Associate
Barley Breeding
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
Hannah Turner
Barley Quality Lab Director
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
Cooperators:
Pat Carr, Central Ag Research Center
52583 US Highway 87
Moccasin, MT 59462-9512
Ken Kephart, Southern Ag Research Center
748 Railroad Highway
Huntley, MT 59037
Chengci Chen, Eastern Ag Research Center
1501 North Central Avenue
Sidney, MT 59270
Zach Miller, Western Ag Research Center
580 Quast Lane
Corvallis, MT 59828
Maryse Bourgault and Peggy Lamb,
Northern Ag Research Center
3710 Assinniboine Road
Havre, MT 59501-8412
John Miller, Western Triangle Ag Research
Center
9546 Old Shelby Rd
Conrad, MT 59425
Executive Summary:
In recent years, Montanan growers have planted more barley acres than any other state.
Successful barley crops in Montana are critical to the security of malting barley for end-users
throughout the country. Although current malt supplies are high, longer-term threats to the malt
supply include: 1) Movement of corn and soybeans into Montana because they provide a safer
higher economic return to growers. 2) Abiotic stresses, which are becoming more frequent and less
predictable with climate change, reduce yield or cause barley to be rejected due to poor malting
quality. Rejection reduces growers’ income and makes growers leery of growing barley. 3) Biotic
stress patterns are changing with the climate and in some cases are invading Montana. It is of
critical importance that barley is bred not only with high quality and yield, but also with stability for
these traits.
Vision: The MSU Barley Breeding Program will bring to bear innovative methods and utilize the full
range of stakeholder input to collaboratively create improved varieties for quality, stability, and
sustainability to catalyze a strong Montana economy. Mission: The MSU Barley Breeding Program
will research, educate, and serve to improve barley, providing an economic benefit to Montana
stakeholders.
During 2017-18 funding cycle the following objectives were met to ensure an adequate high-quality
malt supply 1) The barley breeding pipeline is complete with new lines at all stages of development.
2) With the formation of the MSU malt quality lab, quality analysis is being performed earlier, and on
more environments to ensure the selection of high-quality malt lines. 3) To develop new cropping
choices for growers and to avoid heat and drought during heading, a winter barley breeding program
is being initiated, with screening and crossing of winter lines. 4) Genetic dissection of high quality
and abiotic stress resistance have been initiated. Ultimately, this work will help create better lines
and empower growers to produce high quality malt.
Detailed Report on Objectives, Methodology and Results – AMBA Funded Project
1) The plant breeding pipeline to improve malt barley in Montana
The Barley Breeding Pipeline is fully flowing with new crosses each year, inbreeding to F4 for first
field testing, F5 full plots, PYT, EYT, and intrastate trials. All totaled this is about 14,000 plots. We
are breeding for all end-uses of spring and winter barley including malt, feed, forage and food.
Several of the trials reported below were grown at the Montana Ag Research Centers and we
recognize those cooperators, including Pat Carr and Jed Eberly (CARC), Chengci Chen and Frankie
Crutcher (EARC), Peggy Lamb (NARC), Ken Kephardt and Kent McVay (SARC), and John Miller
(WTARC). Below we detail each stage in the breeding pipeline for 2018.
Crosses:
Crosses were made in both spring and fall of 2018 as detailed below. The 75 and 90 Heirloom
crosses made in 2017 and 2018 are to satisfy the USDA-NIFA Rocky Mountain Barley Cooperative
Grant. However, lines with unique malt quality characteristics will be incorporated into the breeding
program.
Crosses made in 2017 consisting of 100 families were grown in 10.000 F4s as head rows in 2018
and about 2,000 will be advanced to F5s in 2019 based on height, heading date, maturity, and
protein. The F5s in 2018 originated from crosses made in 2016. About 500 of these lines will be
advanced into the PYT in 2019.
Test advanced lines
209 Lines in F5s in 2017 were advanced into PYT in 2018. We grew the PYT in two locations,
SARC (Ken Kephardt) and Post farm (Liz Elmore). Reported below are the lines that yielded better
than Hockett. Many had low protein and good plumps. MSU completed Malt quality analysis on
these lines to determine advancement into the EYT.
PYT agronomic data:
Early Yield Trial
The Early Yield trial was grown in seven locations in 2018. The experimental lines were advanced
from the F5 single row plots in 2017. The best yielding named variety in dryland was Opera; while
the best yielding named variety under irrigation was Sienna, both Limagrain lines. The best yielding
of the experimental lines was a cross between a female plant carrying the low protein gene and a
stay green plant from North Dakota.
Early Yield Trial 2018 Agronomic Data
The E Y T from Bozeman and Havre has been malted. Six of the Experimental lines are the top
performing for malt extract. High Beta glucans have been a problem for MT lines in the past. Here
there are several lines with Beta glucans lower than the 100ppm cutoff. Another problem corrected
by some of these lines is lower FAN for the craft malt industry (below 200ppm).
Early Yield Trial 2018 Quality Data
Intrastate
The Intrastate also originated from the 2017 PYT and several out yield Hockett across all
environments and have lower protein. This may in part be due to the low protein gene plus a stay
green genotype that increase grain-fill time.
Several of the lines have lower beta glucan and high extract. Interestingly, material in Huntley even
under irrigation tends to have higher beta glucans than material grown in Bozeman. We have
initiated experiments to determine the cause. In a few cases we see lower beta glucan in Huntley
data. From our steep studied (submitted to ASBC), evidence suggests these genotypes are more
sensitive to flush steep used by USDA.
Variety Release of MT124112 spring malt barley
Pedigree: MT124112 = (ND7293/Bearpaw, Hockett)*4//(LK644, Lewis/Karl)
Selection history:
MT124112 is a spring, 2-row, hulled barley developed for malt barley production in Montana. MT124112
has a lax head type, rough awns, white aleurone and long rachilla hairs. MT124112 is an F4 derived selection
from backcrossing GPC6H into Hockett (ND7293/Bearpaw) four times. The original donor for GPC6H was
Karl through an RIL from a Karl by Lewis cross (line number LK644). MT124112 was advanced by single
seed descent from the F1 thru F4 generations. It was increased from a F4 plant to produce seed for
preliminary yield testing in 2011. MT124112 was tested for agronomic and malt traits beginning in 2012.
MT124112 was confirmed to carry the low protein allele for GPC6H via marker assisted selection (See et
al., 2002).
Agronomic performance and characteristics:
Across all environments, MT124112 has substantially lower protein than the top performing malt varieties
grown in Montana (Fig. 1). When MT124112 is compared to commonly grown lines, plump percentage and
test weights are higher; heading dates are earlier while maturity dates are later; plant heights are shorter and
less prone to lodging under irrigation (Tables 1A & B). Earlier heading dates and later maturity date
increases time of grain fill by about five days (data not shown). The average yields of all lines reported are
essentially equal when grown under the conservative nitrogen applications of malt barley production.
However, MT124112 features a gene that consistently maintains malt-appropriate levels of grain protein
under high fertilizer, thus displaying a substantially higher yield potential (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Data from all 2015-2018 Montana trials shows the consistency of MT124112’s low protein
levels across a broad range of conditions (38 location years).
Figure 2. Data from a 6 location/year fertilizer management experiment with variable rates of nitrogen.
The protein level of MT124112 increases more slowly with concurrent yield increases along the X axis.
Note that the grain protein level for MT124112 grown at the highest yield potential was still acceptable,
as were other malt quality parameters (not shown).
DRYLAND
AGRONOMIC
TRAITS Variety Variety Mean
MT124112
Mean
Percent of
Variety P- value ¹ No. Locations
YIELD
bu/ac
Growler
82.5
80.3
97%
0.0459
18
Harrington
75.1
75.3
100%
0.8059
14
Hockett
79.3
79.9
101%
0.3029
23
Metcalfe
75.8
79.9
105%
0.0000
23
Odyssey
83.9
81.0
97%
0.0065
14
Synergy
81.9
80.3
98%
0.0185
18
PROTEIN
AM ≤ 12%
Adj ≤ 13%
Growler
13.0
11.4
88%
0.0000
18
Harrington
13.3
11.6
87%
0.0000
14
Hockett
12.4
11.3
91%
0.0000
23
Metcalfe
13.2
11.3
86%
0.0000
23
Odyssey
12.5
11.2
89%
0.0000
14
Synergy
12.5
11.4
92%
0.0000
18
PLUMP
AM & Adj >90%
Growler
83.6
90.8
109%
0.0000
18
Harrington
81.5
88.8
109%
0.0000
14
Hockett
88.1
91.0
103%
0.0000
23
Metcalfe
83.3
91.0
109%
0.0000
23
Odyssey
83.3
89.3
107%
0.0000
14
Synergy
86.3
90.8
105%
0.0000
18
TEST WEIGHT
lb/bu
Growler
50.8
53.0
104%
0.0000
18
Harrington
51.9
52.7
102%
0.0000
14
Hockett
53.1
52.9
100%
0.0108
23
Metcalfe
52.5
52.9
101%
0.0000
23
Odyssey
50.8
52.9
104%
0.0000
14
Synergy
52.0
53.0
102%
0.0000
18
HEADING
julian
Growler
176.4
173.2
98%
0.0000
12
Harrington
174.0
171.0
98%
0.0000
14
Hockett
173.6
171.9
99%
0.0000
18
Metcalfe
173.5
171.9
99%
0.0000
18
Odyssey
183.2
175.0
96%
0.0000
7
Synergy
175.5
173.2
99%
0.0000
12
MATURITY
julian
Growler
210.4
212.7
101%
0.0004
4
Harrington
209.8
211.7
101%
0.0000
4
Hockett
210.7
213.2
101%
0.0000
5
Metcalfe
209.8
213.2
102%
0.0000
5
Odyssey
220.5
218.3
99%
0.0025
2
Synergy
210.5
212.7
101%
0.0000
4
HEIGHT
cm
Growler
67.5
69.0
102%
0.0000
18
Harrington
68.3
68.8
101%
0.0595
14
Hockett
70.0
69.2
99%
0.0002
23
Metcalfe
71.7
69.2
97%
0.0000
23
Odyssey
61.7
68.6
111%
0.0000
14
Synergy
70.5
69.0
98%
0.0000
18
Table 1A. 2015-18 Dryland agronomic measurements of the top performing varieties in Montana. As location
years do not match for each comparison, MT124112 appears against each measured variety trait.
AMBA criteria for malting varieties: AM = All-Malt Brewing (barley only) Adj. = Adjunct Brewing
¹ Based on Fisher's LSD at the 0.05 probability level
IRRIGATED
AGRONOMIC
TRAITS Variety Variety Mean
MT124112
Mean
Percent of
Variety P- value ¹ No. Locations
YIELD
bu/ac
Growler
114.56
109.01
95%
0.0021
10
Harrington
101.41
102.59
101%
0.3080
11
Hockett
106.44
104.29
98%
0.0083
14
Metcalfe
105.68
104.29
99%
0.0710
14
Odyssey
116.66
109.72
94%
0.0000
7
Synergy
111.91
109.01
97%
0.0179
10
PROTEIN
AM ≤ 12%
Adj ≤ 13%
Growler
11.27
11.08
98%
0.0074
10
Harrington
11.7
10.82
92%
0.0000
11
Hockett
11.87
11.11
94%
0.0000
14
Metcalfe
11.87
11.11
94%
0.0000
14
Odyssey
11.03
11.43
104%
0.0000
7
Synergy
11.77
11.08
94%
0.0000
10
PLUMP
AM & Adj >90%
Growler
94.55
96.12
102%
0.0000
10
Harrington
92.11
95.88
104%
0.0000
10
Hockett
93.93
96.09
102%
0.0000
13
Metcalfe
93.1
96.09
103%
0.0000
13
Odyssey
96.1
96.13
100%
0.8021
7
Synergy
94.91
96.12
101%
0.0025
10
TEST WEIGHT
lb/bu
Growler
51.5
52.55
102%
0.0000
10
Harrington
52.77
52.49
99%
0.0037
10
Hockett
52.95
52.17
99%
0.0000
13
Metcalfe
52.71
52.17
99%
0.0000
13
Odyssey
51.17
52.34
102%
0.0000
7
Synergy
51.87
52.55
101%
0.0000
10
HEADING
julian
Growler
180.76
175.19
97%
0.0000
7
Harrington
176.2
171.47
97%
0.0000
10
Hockett
175.88
173.21
98%
0.0000
11
Metcalfe
176.58
173.21
98%
0.0000
11
Odyssey
188.47
179.53
95%
0.0000
5
Synergy
179.14
175.19
98%
0.0000
7
MATURITY
julian
Growler
216
216.83
100%
0.2532
2
Harrington
213.56
214.11
100%
0.0574
3
Hockett
213
214.11
101%
0.0113
3
Metcalfe
212.67
214.11
101%
0.0000
3
Odyssey
226.33
225
99%
n/a
1
Synergy
215.17
216.83
101%
0.0013
2
HEIGHT
cm
Growler
76.78
77.06
100%
0.5181
10
Harrington
80.19
78.32
98%
0.0001
11
Hockett
80.27
78.51
98%
0.0000
14
Metcalfe
81.88
78.51
96%
0.0000
14
Odyssey
68.59
76.68
112%
0.0000
7
Synergy
82.22
77.06
94%
0.0000
10
LODGING
%
Growler
28.89
18.89
65%
0.0004
4
Harrington
74.17
22.5
30%
0.0000
2
Hockett
52.78
18.89
36%
0.0000
4
Metcalfe
31.11
18.89
61%
0.0000
4
Odyssey
24.17
22.5
93%
0.2645
3
Synergy
31.67
18.89
60%
0.0000
4
Table 1B. 2015-18 Irrigated agronomic measurements of the top performing varieties in Montana. As location
years do not match for each comparison, MT124112 appears against each measured variety trait.
AMBA criteria for malting varieties: AM = All-Malt Brewing (barley only) Adj. = Adjunct Brewing
¹ Based on Fisher's LSD at the 0.05 probability level
Malt quality characteristics:
The malt quality of MT124112 is suitable for both all-malt brewing (using only barley) as well
as adjunct brewing. Generally, malting traits are either statistically equal or superior in
performance according to the criteria determined by the American Malting Barley Association
(AMBA). These traits stay within the acceptable ranges when grown under dryland or irrigated
conditions.
Tables 2A & B show the malting traits compared with the other top performing malt varieties.
MT124112 has higher malt extract and lower Beta glucan levels in dryland environments, and
performs equally under irrigation. Diastatic power is consistently lower, making this line less
enzymatically active than most commercially available lines, and thus ideal for all-malt brewing.
Alpha amylase, free amino nitrogen, as well as various protein measurements (total malt, soluble,
and soluble/total) are all statistically equal to other malting varieties.
When comparing MT124112’s malt quality performance under rainfed or irrigated conditions, it
appears that MT124112 performs better under rainfed, particularly in malt extract and beta glucan
(Tables 2A & B). However, this difference is primarily due to the lab malting the line. The MSU
malt quality lab follows a malt recipe more similar to that used by maltsters; while USDA-ARS
has a different steeping regime. Steep regime highly impacts malt quality performance (Turner et
al., submitted to ASBC). It happens that most of the dryland data was provided by MSU; while
irrigated data was provided by USDA-ARS. Importantly, direct comparisons made here are under
the same malting conditions.
MT124112’s improved quality is in part due to faster hydration of the endosperm during malting.
The Chapon Test, which steeps seeds for 48 hours, boils seed for 1 minute, and observes seed
after splitting longitudinally, reveals the difficulty in hydrating Hockett’s endosperm (Fig 3).
Non-hydrated endosperm is white and chalky, while hydrated endosperm is gray and more
translucent. In Figure 3, seeds from each line were grouped by visual scoring for their percent of
hydrated endosperm. MT124112 has higher endosperm hydration than Hockett or Metcalfe after
48 hour steep under MSU malting conditions. Maltsters who use Hockett have requested a faster
hydrating line, because slow hydration requires the addition of hormones for germination to
proceed at an acceptable rate, costing time and money.
Figure 3: Percent hydration after 48 hours steep
DRYLAND
MALT QUALITY
TRAITS
Variety Variety Mean
MT124112
Mean
Percent of
Variety P- value ¹ No. Locations
Growler
78.6
82.2
105%
0.0263
3
MALT
Harrington
79.0
82.2
104%
0.0199
3
Hockett
80.1
82.2
103%
0.0049
3
EXTRACT
Metcalfe
80.4
82.2
102%
0.0129
3
>81% for
Odyssey
79.1
82.5
104%
0.0560
2
AM & Adj
Synergy
80.7
82.2
102%
0.0533
3
BETA GLUCAN
<100 ppm for
AM & Adj
Growler
120.2
85.5
71%
0.4388
3
Harrington
256.3
85.5
33%
0.0155
3
Hockett
216.0
85.5
40%
0.0638
3
Metcalfe
52.8
85.5
162%
0.2961
3
Odyssey
123.4
66.0
54%
0.3858
2
Synergy
32.0
85.5
267%
0.0961
3
Growler
106.8
119.0
111%
0.2036
3
ALPHA
Harrington
84.8
119.0
140%
0.0905
3
Hockett
89.0
119.0
134%
0.0585
3
AMYLASE
Metcalfe
105.3
119.0
113%
0.2435
3
AM 40-70 DU
Odyssey
54.5
127.3
234%
0.0723
2
Adj >50 DU
Synergy
97.6
119.0
122%
0.0798
3
DIASTATIC
Growler
195.3
133.0
68%
0.0123
3
POWER
Harrington
163.7
133.0
81%
0.0091
3
Hockett
168.0
133.0
79%
0.0115
3
ᵒASBC
Metcalfe
171.0
133.0
78%
0.0156
3
AM 110-150 ᵒ
Odyssey
124.3
129.7
104%
0.3837
2
Adj >120ᵒ
Synergy
145.8
133.0
91%
0.2135
3
Growler
206.3
212.7
103%
0.5760
3
FREE AMINO
Harrington
193.8
212.7
110%
0.2041
3
Hockett
166.2
212.7
128%
0.0841
3
NITROGEN
Metcalfe
219.5
212.7
97%
0.6259
3
AM 140-190
Odyssey
124.1
210.6
170%
0.0736
2
Adj > 210
Synergy
196.5
212.7
108%
0.3370
3
Growler
14.7
12.0
82%
0.0684
3
TOTAL MALT
Harrington
14.2
12.0
85%
0.0089
3
Hockett
13.2
12.0
91%
0.0377
3
PROTEIN
Metcalfe
13.9
12.0
87%
0.0116
3
AM ≤ 11.8 %
Odyssey
13.7
11.8
86%
0.2338
2
Adj ≤ 12.8 %
Synergy
12.9
12.0
93%
0.0291
3
Growler
4.6
4.7
101%
0.7418
3
SOLUBLE
Harrington
4.4
4.7
106%
0.0572
3
Hockett
4.2
4.7
112%
0.0131
3
PROTEIN
Metcalfe
4.8
4.7
98%
0.0000
3
AM < 5.3 %
Odyssey
3.7
4.6
126%
0.0997
2
Adj 4.8 - 5.6%
Synergy
4.6
4.7
102%
0.1835
3
S/T PROTEIN
AM 38-45%
Adj 40-47 %
Growler
32.6
40.3
124%
0.0204
3
Harrington
32.1
40.3
126%
0.0065
3
Hockett
32.7
40.3
123%
0.0021
3
Metcalfe
35.8
40.3
113%
0.0175
3
Odyssey
27.7
41.0
148%
0.0430
2
Synergy
37.6
40.3
107%
0.0104
3
Table 2A. 2015-18 Dryland malt quality measurements of the top performing varieties in Montana. As
location years do not match for each comparison, MT124112 appears against each measured variety trait. AMBA
criteria for malting varieties: AM = All-Malt Brewing (barley only) Adj. = Adjunct Brewing
¹ Based on Fisher's LSD at the 0.05 probability level
IRRIGATED
MALT QUALITY
TRAITS Variety Variety Mean
MT124112
Mean
Percent of
Variety P- value ¹ No. Locations
Growler
81.3
81.3
100%
0.9493
3
MALT
Harrington
80.9
81.5
101%
0.5273
5
Hockett
81.2
81.5
100%
0.6493
5
EXTRACT
Metcalfe
81.6
81.5
100%
0.7931
5
>81% for
Odyssey
81.0
80.4
99%
0.5844
2
AM & Adj
Synergy
81.6
81.3
100%
0.7178
3
BETA GLUCAN
<100 ppm for
AM & Adj
Growler
133.1
183.3
138%
0.2530
3
Harrington
260.9
162.2
62%
0.1999
5
Hockett
218.5
162.2
74%
0.4502
5
Metcalfe
100.4
162.2
162%
0.1365
5
Odyssey
108.2
215.2
199%
0.4065
2
Synergy
115.0
183.3
159%
0.0282
3
Growler
95.8
115.4
120%
0.1266
3
ALPHA
Harrington
81.2
112.5
139%
0.0123
5
Hockett
93.7
112.5
120%
0.1892
5
AMYLASE
Metcalfe
103.0
112.5
109%
0.3391
5
AM 40-70 DU
Odyssey
57.7
106.2
184%
0.1643
2
Adj >50 DU
Synergy
103.7
115.4
111%
0.3891
3
DIASTATIC
Growler
150.8
129.9
86%
0.2295
3
POWER
Harrington
144.6
135.5
94%
0.4940
5
Hockett
163.9
135.5
83%
0.0042
5
ᵒASBC
Metcalfe
152.9
135.5
89%
0.3192
5
AM 110-150 ᵒ
Odyssey
130.0
135.7
104%
0.4123
2
Adj >120ᵒ
Synergy
154.7
129.9
84%
0.2060
3
Growler
215.9
230.6
107%
0.2947
3
FREE AMINO
Harrington
201.1
240.0
119%
0.0054
5
Hockett
228.4
240.0
105%
0.5439
5
NITROGEN
Metcalfe
250.4
240.0
96%
0.6463
5
AM 140-190
Odyssey
145.8
233.5
160%
0.0380
2
Adj > 210
Synergy
217.2
230.6
106%
0.1570
3
Growler
12.8
12.3
96%
0.2167
3
TOTAL MALT
Harrington
12.0
12.2
102%
0.7668
5
Hockett
12.8
12.2
95%
0.0744
5
PROTEIN
Metcalfe
12.2
12.2
100%
0.9652
5
AM ≤ 11.8 %
Odyssey
12.8
13.0
102%
0.2952
2
Adj ≤ 12.8 %
Synergy
12.6
12.3
98%
0.7280
3
Growler
4.8
5.0
104%
0.0117
6
SOLUBLE
Harrington
4.9
5.3
108%
0.0001
8
Hockett
5.1
5.3
103%
0.0570
8
PROTEIN
Metcalfe
5.1
5.3
102%
0.0896
8
AM <5.3 %
Odyssey
4.1
5.0
122%
0.0000
5
Adj 4.8 - 5.6%
Synergy
5.1
5.0
99%
0.3144
6
S/T PROTEIN
AM 38-45%
Adj 40-47 %
Growler
39.6
42.9
108%
0.2090
3
Harrington
42.0
45.4
108%
0.1194
5
Hockett
41.9
45.4
108%
0.0444
5
Metcalfe
44.1
45.4
103%
0.4564
5
Odyssey
34.3
40.6
118%
0.0604
2
Synergy
42.5
42.9
101%
0.6761
3
Table 2B. 2015-18 Irrigated malt quality measurements of the top performing varieties in Montana. As location years do
not match for each comparison, MT124112 appears against each measured variety trait. AMBA criteria for malting
varieties: AM = All-Malt Brewing (barley only) Adj. = Adjunct Brewing
¹ Based on Fisher's LSD at the 0.05 probability level
Disease resistance:
Since 2015, trials have not had consistent disease pressure for disease scoring,
although occasional observations of rust and leaf spots occur in Sidney under
irrigation. We have ongoing trials in Sidney and North Dakota evaluating fusarium
infections with subsequent DON (deoxynivalenol) testing by North Dakota State
University. Not surprisingly, MT124112 responds to head blight similarly to
Hockett.
Table 3. Rates of DON accumulation over three years of testing. Analysis fails to
show statistically significant differences over time. For brewing, the tolerance is
<1ppm DON.
Purification/seed stocks: We purified MT124112 in 2017 by planting 100 F
9
-derived
F
10 headrows at Bozeman Post farm. We evaluated for phenotypic uniformity before
bulking all headrows. The 2018 breeder strips appeared uniform and were regularly
rogued by barley breeding employees and Foundation staff.
Summary:
MT124112 is well-suited for production across all malt barley growing regions of Montana.
Agronomic Strengths
• Low grain protein in dry land and with higher nitrogen applications
• Can be grown at higher yield potential without damaging quality
• Shorter plant height and low percentage of lodging under irrigation
• Longer grain fill period
• Higher test weights and percentage of plump seed
Quality Strengths
• High Malt Extract
• Low DP value
• Low Beta glucan
• Faster hydration
• More stable quality across variable growing conditions
2) Early generation selection for malt quality
In 2018, the malt quality lab produced data for the breeding program, malt quality
research and for third parties as reported in the table below. Six hundred and sixty-five
data points were provided to the breeding program and used to make decisions on lines
to advance. 471 of these data points were on early generation material using 5 gram
samples (T-balls). We will continue early generation selection at least over the next
several years, until the utility is confirmed. The data from the AMBA Trial was used to
confirm the line we have released in 2019. The lab created 620 data points used for
research resulting in publications and presentations. Much of the research is ongoing
and several of the projects are graduate student projects. The lab provided 223 data
points to growers, seed companies, other researchers and malt companies generating
$27,870 for the lab.
2018 Malt Quality Work Summary
3) Selecting for quality stability by testing more environments for malt quality
Through joint work of USDA-ARS and the MSU Malt Quality lab we were able to make
malt quality selections in time for planting on at least two environments for advanced
generations. We are still trying to determine the best balance between early generation
and multiple environments.
Malt Quality Under Different Nitrogen Management
We tested malt quality under 4 nitrogen treatments at 3 locations in Montana. We found
the nitrogen impacts yield, protein, and plumps. We also found nitrogen impacts malt
quality. However, we found that malt quality was more stable in lines with the low
protein gene. For example, note in the graph below that malt extract and diastatic
power is less impacted by increasing nitrogen in the low protein lines when compared to
Hockett.
Two low protein lines have better malt extract than Hockett even at high nitrogen
treatments.
Diastatic power increases as N increases, but two low protein lines have lower
diastatic power than Hockett.
Outreach:
The lab gave 12 tours for various stakeholders, including brewers from around the state,
peer programs from local and regional groups, local maltsters and potential start up
maltsters, the Farmers Union and MSU Alumni, as well as international groups
interested in Montana malt barley.
Service:
We currently have 16 active clients. Including maltsters, brewers, and peer research
programs such as Cornell. Clients are both local, regional, and international including
Canada and 10 states. We have presented talks to the National Brewers Association,
and American Malting Barley Association. Successful delivery of data as well as our
outreach efforts are steadily building our clientele and the income generated from 3
rd
party testing. Service efforts ensure the long-term sustainability of the lab.
4) The development of new cropping choices with winter lines
The table to the right reports data from the 2018
Post Farm winter trial of the Vavilov collection. Here
we record soft dough date, height, and dry weight
in grams. The highest biomass lines are being used
as parents for winter forage.
The table to the right reports the data
for the same material grown at CARC.
Winter survival was better at CARC.
We speculate this was due to planting
in no‐till. Some of the Vavilov lines
had better winter survival than the
winter check Dicktoo. Some of the
Vavilov lines have better yield and
plumps and lower protein than the
malt check Charles. However, most of
these lines are 6 row.
The table below provides malt quality
data for the winter nursery. Although
the Vavilov lines have low protein, they
require malt improvement for a number
of traits, including water sensitivity,
extract, turbidity, beta glucan, and
alpha amylase (see quality data below).
We have made crosses using the most winter tolerant of the Vavilov material and
other European winter families, resulting in one family for food, 8 families for forage,
21 families for feed, 1 family for food and 45 families for malt. We have planted these
crosses at the Bozeman Post Farm to test for winter survival in 2019.
5) Genetic dissection of the relationship between seed morphology and speed of
hydration during malting
We have initiated a graduate student project to genetically dissect speed of hydration in
a biparental mapping population and association mapping panel. Both populations
were grown in summer of 2018. Malting is complete in the association panel. Malting
for biparental will occur this spring. Tracking of hydration index will occur in both during
the next several months. Both populations will be replanted this summer. Due to our
studies of environmental impact on malt, we believe there is an environmental
component to speed of hydration. We plan to plant the biparental population in
Bozeman and Sydney in 2019 to gain an understand of the environmental effect on
hydration.
We have obtained money from MWBC and BA for a graduate student to genetically
dissect root development in barley in collaboration with Maryse Bourgault. Population
development is complete. Greenhouse experiments and field trials are planned for
2019.
Publication activity in 2018:
Neyhart, J. L., Sweeney, D., Sorrells, M., Kapp, C., McFarland, A., Kephart, K., Sherman, J.,
Stockinger, E. J., Fisk, S., Hayes, P., Daba, S., Mohammadi, M., Hughes, N., Lukens, L.,
Barrios, P. G., Gutierrez, L., Smith, K. P. (2019). Registration of the S2MET Barley Mapping
Population for Multi-Environment Genomewide Selection. Journal of Plant Registrations/Crop
Science Society of America.
Burkhardt, A., Briar, S., Martin, J., Carr, P., Lachowiec, J. A., Zabinski, C., Roberts, D., Miller, P.,
Sherman, J. (in press). Perennial crop legacy effects on nematode community structure in
semi-arid wheat systems. Applied Soil Ecology/Elsevier.
Sherman, J., Varella, A., Lanning, S., Martin, J., Heo, H.-Y., Nash, D., Blake, N., Cook, J.,
Talbert, L. (2018). Effect of a gene for high dough strength on whole wheat baking
parameters of hard white spring wheat. Cereal Chemistry, 95, 411-417.
Jordan, K., Wang, S., He, F., Chao, S., Lun, Y., Paux, E., Sourdille, P., Sherman, J., Akhuovna,
A., Blake, N., Pumpheries, M., Glover, K., Dubkovsky, J., Talbert, L., Akhunov, E. The
genetic architecture of genome-wide recombination rate variation in allopolyploid wheat
revealed by nested association mapping. The Plant Journal, 95, 1039–1054.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/tpj.14009
Varella, A. C., Talbert, L., Achhami, B. B., Blake, N. K., Hofland, M. L., Sherman, J., Lamb, P.,
Reddy, G., Weaver, D. (2018). Characterization of resistance to Cephus cinctus Norton
(Hymenoptera: Cephidae) in barley germplasm. Journal of Economic Entomology, 111(2),
923-930. https://academic.oup.com/jee/article/111/2/923/4890308
Cook, J. P., Heo, H.-Y., Varella, A. C., Lanning, S. P., Blake, N. K., Sherman, J., Martin, J., See,
D., Chao, S., Talbert, L. (2018). Evaluation of a QTL Mapping Population Composed of Hard
Red Spring and Winter Wheat Alleles Using Various Marker Platforms. Crop Science, 58(2),
701-712.
Burkhardt, Andy, Shabeg S. Briar, John M. Martin, Patrick M. Carr, Jamie Sherman. 2019.
Characterization of soil nematode community structure in semi-arid dryland barley systems.
Applied Soil Ecology (submitted).
Turner, Hannah M., Liz Elmore, Jason Walling, Jennifer Lachowiec, Dylan Mangel, Andreas
Fischer and Jamie Sherman. 2019, The Effect of Steeping Regime on Barley Malt Quality
and its Impacts on Breeding Program Selection. ASBC (submitted).
