Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T01:16:52.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A critical survey of breeding wheat for baking quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

O. H. Frankel
O. H. Frankel
Affiliation:
Wheat Research Institute, Christchurch, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. For both genetical and methodological reasons, tests for quality, in the majority of breeding schemes, are not required at the early stages of the breeding process.

2. Reliability and definition of any one empirical test is not sufficient to safeguard against losses of valuable material.

3. It is suggested, therefore, that as a rule agronomically promising lines should be carried on to a stage where comprehensive tests, using a number of selected methods, can be carried out, preferably over a number of seasons. It may be questioned whether a combination of such tests as the wholemeal fermentation and the gluten swelling tests (Pelshenke, 1938a) would suffice. In the light of the available evidence a testing system might be suggested comprising baking tests together with such “indirect” and, better still, “analytical” methods as will afford accurate information of an analytical nature.

4. This review of the testing problem suggests the conclusion that empirical tests are limited in their significance and reliability, and that only an increased knowledge of the fundamentals can afford a truly scientific approach. It should be admitted that the plant breeder, with his insistence on empirical tests where fundamental knowledge was lacking, has side-tracked the cereal chemist from the narrow path of scientific approach all too often. It is questionable whether this has been to the ultimate advantage of wheat breeding.

5. Inheritance studies on quality should greatly facilitate the task of the breeder. They will become feasible and valuable only when the nature of the desirable characters and the true significance of the testing methods are clearly understood.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , January 1940 , pp. 98 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1940

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

REFERENCES

Aamodt, O. S. & Torrie, J. H. (1935). Canad. J. Res. 13, 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akerman, A. (1933). Mühlenlab. Spec. Suppl. 1933.Google Scholar
Bayfield, E. G. (1935). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 27, 241–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biffen, R. H. (1908). J. agric. Sci. 3, 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blish, M. J. (1934). Cereal Chem. 11, 70–3.Google Scholar
Boerger, A. (1937). Arch. Fitotiécn. Uruguay, 2, 1–84.Google Scholar
Breakwell, E. J. (1934). J. Dep. Agric. S. Aust. 37, 1532–9.Google Scholar
Cutler, G. H. & Worzella, W. W. (1933). Cereal Chem. 10, 250–62.Google Scholar
Edel, P. (1934). Mühle, 71 (Suppl.).Google Scholar
Engelke, H. (1935). J. Landw. 83, 89–106.Google Scholar
Engelke, H. (1937). Landw. Jb. 84, 779–98.Google Scholar
Frankel, O. H. & Donald, H. P. (1933). Proc. World’s Grain Exhib. and Conf. Canada, 2, 133.Google Scholar
Geddes, W. F. & Aitken, T. R. (1935). Cereal Chem. 12, 696–707.Google Scholar
Geddes, W. F. & McCalla, A. G. (1934). Cereal Chem. 11, 384–95.Google Scholar
Griffiths, E. L. & Cayzer, L. S. (1934). Agric. Qaz. N.S.W. 45, 14–17.Google Scholar
Harris, P. H. & Sanderson, T. (1938). Cereal Chem. 15, 251–6.Google Scholar
Larmour, R. K.Geddes, W. F. & Whiteside, A. G. O. (1933). Cereal Chem. 10, 601–4.Google Scholar
Mader, W. (1931). Züchter, 3, 286–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Méneret, G. (1937). C.R. Acad. Agric. Fr. 23, 742–7.Google Scholar
Pelshenke, P. (1932). Z. Zücht. A 18, 1–18.Google Scholar
Pelshenke, P. (1933). Cereal Chem. 10, 90–6.Google Scholar
Pelshenke, P. (1934). Züchter, 6, 169–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelshenke, P. (1938 a). Züchter, 10, 6–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelshenke, P. (1938 b). Mühlenlab. 8, 194–8.Google Scholar
Rosenstiehl, K. V. (1934). Züchter, 6, 261–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, H. A. & Humphries, S. (1928). J. nat. Inst. agric. Bot. 2, 34.Google Scholar
Schick, R. (1930). Züchter, 2, 72–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanson, C. O. (1937). Cereal Chem. 14, 419–33.Google Scholar
Swanson, C. O. (1939). Cereal Chem. 16, 365–76.Google Scholar
Swanson, C. O. & Dines, F. T. (1939). Cereal Chem. 16, 168–77.Google Scholar
Vettel, F. & Pelshenke, P. (1934). Züchter, 6, 193–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worzella, W. W. (1934). J. agric. Res. 49, 705–14.Google Scholar