CULTIVAR DESCRIPTION AAC Synergy barley W. G. Legge 1, J. R. Tucker 1, T. G. Fetch Jr. 2, S. Haber 2, J. G. Menzies 2, A. Tekauz 2, T. K. Turkington 3, and M. E. Savard 4 Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 37.44.200.128 on 11/25/17 1 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Brandon Research Centre, P.O. Box 1000A, R.R. #3, 2701 Grand Valley Road, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada R7A 5Y3; 2 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Cereal Research Centre, 195 Dafoe Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2M9; 3 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C&E Trail, Lacombe, Alberta, Canada T4L 1W1; and 4 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6. Received 26 September 2013, accepted 17 December 2013. Published on the web 23 December 2013. Legge, W. G., Tucker, J. R., Fetch, T. G. Jr., Haber, S., Menzies, J. G., Tekauz, A., Turkington, T. K. and Savard, M. E. 2014. AAC Synergy barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 94: 797803. AAC Synergy is a hulled two-row spring malting barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivar with high yield and is widely adapted to western Canada. Developed from the cross TR02267/Newdale made in 2002, AAC Synergy was evaluated in the Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test (20092010) and the Collaborative Malting Barley Trials (20102011) conducted by the malting and brewing industry before being registered in 2012. AAC Synergy s excellent combination of agronomic traits, disease resistance and desirable malting quality traits should make it a useful cultivar for producers and the malting and brewing industry. Key words: Malting barley, Hordeum vulgare L., cultivar description, high yield, disease resistance, malting quality Legge, W. G., Tucker, J. R., Fetch, T. G. Jr., Haber, S., Menzies, J. G., Tekauz, A., Turkington, T. K. et Savard, M. E. 2014. L orge AAC Synergy. Can. J. Plant Sci. 94: 797803. AAC Synergy est un cultivar d orge (Hordeum vulgare L.) de printemps nue à deux rangs. Cette varie té brassicole se caracte rise par un rendement e leve et est largement adapte e a` l ouest du Canada. Issu du croisement TR02267/Newdale réalise en 2002, AAC Synergy a e té e value dans le cadre des essais coope ratifs de l Ouest sur l orge à deux rangs de 2009 et 2010, et lors des essais coope ratifs sur l orge brassicole de 2010 et 2011, pilote s par l industrie brassicole avant son homologation en 2012. AAC Synergy pre sente une excellente combinaison de caractères agronomiques, et sa résistance à la maladie de meˆme qu une qualite brassicole de sirable devraient en faire un cultivar apprécié des agriculteurs comme des brasseurs. Mots clés: Orge brassicole, Hordeum vulgare L., description de cultivar, rendement e leve, résistance a` la maladie, qualité brassicole AAC Synergy is a hulled two-row spring malting barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivar developed at the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Brandon Research Centre, Brandon, MB. It received registration No. 7211 from the Variety Registration Office, Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) on 2012 May 31. Plant Breeders Rights for AAC Synergy (certificate No. 4649) were granted by the Plant Breeders Rights Office, CFIA on 2013 Nov. 14. Pedigree and Breeding Methods AAC Synergy was developed from the cross TR02267/ Newdale (Legge et al. 2008) made in 2002 in the greenhouse at the AAFC Brandon Research Centre, Brandon, MB. TR02267 is an advanced breeding line from the Brandon Research Centre with the pedigree TR253/AC Metcalfe (Legge et al. 2003), where TR253 was selected from the cross TR238//TR236/TR234. TR238 was developed from the cross Wpg843-234/ Manley//AC Oxbow/Manley, where Wpg843-234 was a breeding line developed by the AAFC Cereal Research Centre (CRC), Winnipeg, MB, from the cross Ellice (Metcalfe 1987)/SM80489 with SM80489 being a breeding line from the University of Saskatchewan (University of Sask.), Saskatoon, SK. TR236 was selected for net blotch resistance (Pyrenophora teres Drechs.) from the cross Wpg8419-24-2-1//AC Oxbow/ Manley, where Wpg8419-24-2-1 is another breeding line from the CRC with the pedigree SM80489/CI9214. TR234 was developed from the cross Ellice/S7729// ND7556, where S7729 is a breeding line from the Univ. of Sask., and ND7556 was a breeding line with spot blotch resistance [Cochliobolus sativus (Ito & Kurib.) Drechs. ex Dast.] from North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND. Newdale is a two-row malting barley cultivar that showed a significant advance in grain yield when it was in the registration tests (Legge et al. 2008). Early generations were handled by a modified bulk method. The F 1 generation was grown as a bulk in the field at Brandon in 2002, and the F 2 generation as a bulk increase in the 20022003 winter nursery at Southern Seeds Technology, Leeston, New Zealand. Can. J. Plant Sci. (2014) 94: 797803 doi:10.4141/cjps2013-307 797
798 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE Table 1. Grain yield (kg ha 1 ) for AAC Synergy and check cultivars, Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test, 2009 and 2010 Soil zone Class Black (east) z Brown y Black and Grey (west) x Overall CDC Copeland Malting 6019 5856 5844 5905 Xena Feed 6612 6400 6479 6489 AC Metcalfe Malting 5768 5550 5559 5622 AAC Synergy Malting 6533 6305 6159 6341 w 461 409 363 232 No. of tests 10 13 8 31 Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 37.44.200.128 on 11/25/17 z Black Soil Zone (east): Brandon, Glenlea (2009), and Rosebank, MB; Indian Head (2009), Melfort, and Regina, SK. y Brown Soil Zone: Lethbridge, Trochu, and Vulcan (2010), AB; Harris (2009), Saskatoon (2009), Scott, Swift Current and Watrous, SK. x Black and Grey Soil Zone (west): Beaverlodge, Calmar, Fort Vermilion, and Lacombe, AB. w Least significant difference among cultivar means at the 5% probability level, where each test was treated as one replication. The F 3 generation was grown in two bulk plots in a randomized test in the field at Brandon in 2003. Based on agronomic appearance and foliar disease resistance, the population was selected for further evaluation with 525 spikes harvested and threshed individually. The harvested seeds from each spike were planted as a single F 4 hill plot in the irrigated field leaf disease nursery at Brandon in 2004 where spot blotch was the predominant disease. Based on spot blotch resistance and agronomic appearance, 52 lines were selected and grown as F 5 progeny rows in the field at Brandon in 2005. Of these, 13 lines were selected on the basis of height, maturity, lodging resistance, general appearance, and field disease reaction with spot blotch being the predominant disease. The selected F 6 lines, one of which was BM0215-189-1, were grown as single plots in a preliminary yield test with repeated checks at Brandon in 2006. In addition to the earlier selection criteria, lines were selected based on yield, heading date, kernel plumpness, test weight, kernel weight, kernel brightness (rated visually on 15 scale), hull peeling, and preliminary malting quality analyses (i.e., grain protein concentration, alpha amylase activity, diastatic power, fine grind extract, soluble protein concentration, and ratio of soluble to total protein concentration) conducted at the CRC, Winnipeg, MB. They were also evaluated in field disease nurseries for reactions to spot blotch at Brandon and the Crop Development Centre (CDC), University of Saskatchewan, SK; stem rust (Puccinia graminis Pers.) at Brandon and the CRC, Winnipeg; and to fusarium head blight (FHB) incited by Fusarium graminearum Schwabe on a 05 scale based on visual symptoms in the irrigated FHB nursery at Brandon (Legge et al. 2004). BM0215-189-1 was advanced to a replicated preliminary yield test at Brandon in 2007 where it was evaluated for the same traits as the previous year plus hull peeling of the malt, Table 2. Agronomic trait data for AAC Synergy and check cultivars, Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test, 2009 and 2010 Days to heading Days to maturity Height (cm) Lodging (19) z Test weight (kg hl 1 ) 1000-kernel weight (g) Plump y CDC Copeland 61.0 97.8 80.4 5.0 63.7 46.0 89.5 Xena 59.4 98.2 75.2 3.5 65.3 46.7 88.0 AC Metcalfe 59.4 97.9 76.0 3.5 64.9 44.5 89.4 AAC Synergy 59.8 98.3 74.6 3.0 64.5 47.2 91.7 x 0.6 0.8 1.8 2.7 0.6 1.1 2.3 No. of tests 26 w 25 v 33 u 3 t 30 s 30 s 23 r z 1no lodging; 9completely lodged. y Kernel plumpness as determined over a 6/64-inch (238 mm) slotted screen. x Least significant difference among cultivar means at the 5% probability level, where each test was treated as one replication. w Locations: Brandon (2009), and Rosebank (2009), MB; Indian Head, Melfort, Regina, Saskatoon (2009), Swift Current (2010), and Watrous, SK; Beaverlodge, Calmar, Fort Vermilion, Lacombe, Lethbridge (2009), Three Hills (2009), Trochu, and Vulcan (2010), AB; Dawson Creek (2010), BC. v Locations: Brandon (2009), Glenlea (2009), and Rosebank (2009), MB; Indian Head (2009), Melfort, Regina, Scott, Swift Current (2009), and Watrous, SK; Beaverlodge, Fort Vermilion, Lacombe (2009), Lethbridge, Three Hills (2009), Trochu (2009), and Vulcan (2010), AB; Dawson Creek, BC. u Locations: Brandon, Glenlea (2009), and Rosebank, MB; Indian Head, Melfort, Regina, Saskatoon (2009), Scott, Swift Current and Watrous, SK; Beaverlodge, Calmar, Fort Vermilion, Lacombe (2010), Lethbridge, Three Hills (2009), Trochu, and Vulcan (2010), AB; Dawson Creek, BC. t Locations: Calmar (2010), and Lethbridge, AB. s Locations: Brandon (2010), and Rosebank (2009), MB; Harris (2009), Indian Head (2010), Melfort, Regina, Saskatoon (2009), Scott (2009), Swift Current, and Watrous, SK; Beaverlodge, Calmar, Fort Vermilion, Lacombe, Lethbridge, Three Hills (2009), Trochu, and Vulcan (2010), AB; Dawson Creek, BC. r Locations: Brandon (2010), and Rosebank (2009), MB; Harris (2009), Indian Head, Regina, Saskatoon (2009), Swift Current, and Watrous, SK; Calmar, Lacombe, Lethbridge, Three Hills (2009), Trochu, and Vulcan (2010), AB; Dawson Creek (2010), BC.
Table 3. Malting quality trait data z for AAC Synergy and check cultivars, Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test, 2009 and 2010 y Kernel plumpness Germination energy 1000-kernel Grain Steep-out 7/64ƒ x 6/64ƒ w weight (g) protein (g hg 1 ) vu 4 ml 8 ml moisture (g hg 1 ) v CDC Copeland 50.7 93.2 44.0 10.9 97 91 46.0 AC Metcalfe 56.7 93.0 43.2 11.4 97 88 45.8 AAC Synergy 72.2 95.1 46.2 10.8 96 86 46.4 n 6.9 1.9 1.2 0.7 2 5 0.7 No. of tests 4 m 6 6 6 6 6 6 Fine grind extract (g hg 1 ) vt Soluble protein (g hg 1 ) vt Soluble to total protein s Diastatic power (8L) ur Alpha amylase (DU) uq Beta-glucan (mg L 1 ) p Wort viscosity (cps) uo Friability CDC Copeland 80.6 4.58 42.1 111 55.5 106 1.45 86.4 AC Metcalfe 81.1 4.78 42.8 132 74.1 131 1.45 78.3 AAC Synergy 81.3 4.78 45.4 121 66.5 67 1.42 85.5 n 0.7 0.27 3.4 7 3.7 58 0.02 12.8 No. of tests 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 m Free amino nitrogen (mg L 1 ) Partially unmodified grains Wholly unmodified grains Malt hull peeling CDC Copeland 168 0.8 0.5 3.7 AC Metcalfe 183 2.8 0.4 4.9 AAC Synergy 177 2.0 0.6 3.7 n 16 3.5 0.6 2.5 No. of tests 5 l 4 m 4 m 4 m z Malting quality characteristics determined by industry at the micro-malting level using procedures similar to the Grain Research Laboratory (GRL), Canadian Grain Commission, Winnipeg, MB (Mather et al. 1997). y Locations (company lab): 2009 Beaverlodge, AB (GRL), Trochu, AB (GRL), and Regina, SK (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC); 2010 Brandon, MB (GRL), Swift Current, SK (GRL), and Vulcan, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC). x Kernel plumpness as determined over a 7/64-inch (278-mm) slotted screen. w Kernel plumpness as determined over a 6/64-inch (238-mm) slotted screen. v Expressed as % by the malting and brewing industries. u On a grain dry matter basis. t On a malt dry matter basis. s Ratio of soluble protein to total protein concentration. r Degrees Lintner. q Dextrinizing unit measure of alpha amylase activity. p On a malt extract basis, expressed as ppm by the malting and brewing industries. o Centipoise, international viscosity units used by the malting and brewing industries. n Least significant difference among cultivar means at the 5% probability level, where each test was treated as one replication. m Data not collected in 2009 for Regina, SK (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC) and in 2010 for Vulcan, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC); mean of four tests. l Data not collected in 2009 for Regina, SK (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC); mean of five tests. LEGGE ET AL. * AAC SYNERGY BARLEY 799
Table 4. Pilot-scale malting quality trait data z for AAC Synergy and check cultivars, Collaborative Malting Barley Trials, 2010 and 2011 y Kernel plumpness Germination energy 1000-kernel Grain Steep-out Friability 7/64ƒ x 6/64ƒ w weight (g) protein (g hg 1 ) vu 4 ml 8 ml moisture (g hg 1 ) v AC Metcalfe 69.2 95.1 46.0 11.7 98 90 45.0 78.9 CDC Copeland 64.7 94.4 47.5 11.1 98 87 45.1 87.0 AAC Synergy 76.8 96.6 47.9 11.2 98 86 45.5 82.7 m 7.6 2.1 1.7 0.5 1 8 0.7 4.0 No. of tests 8 l 10 k 9 j 11 11 11 9 i 7 h Malt protein Fine grind extract 708C coarse grind Fine-coarse Soluble protein Soluble to total (g hg 1 ) vt (g hg 1 ) vt extract (g hg 1 ) vt difference (g hg 1 ) vt (g hg 1 ) vt protein s AC Metcalfe 11.3 81.2 79.8 1.1 5.31 47.7 CDC Copeland 11.0 80.9 79.5 1.3 5.03 46.4 AAC Synergy 10.9 81.9 81.0 0.9 5.19 48.5 m 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.31 3.1 No. of tests 11 11 10 g 10 g 11 11 Diastatic Alpha Beta Wort Free amino Peeled and broken power (8L) ur amylase (DU) uq glucan (mg L 1 ) p viscosity (cps) uo nitrogen (mg L 1 ) Barley n Malt n AC Metcalfe 154 74.6 147 1.46 232 2.7 3.8 CDC Copeland 138 61.9 137 1.47 211 2.2 2.6 AAC Synergy 145 71.5 108 1.43 223 3.0 2.8 m 12 5.4 30 0.01 19 0.9 2.3 No. of tests 11 11 11 11 11 10 f 7 e z Malting quality characteristics determined by industry using procedures similar to the Grain Research Laboratory (GRL), Canadian Grain Commission, Winnipeg, MB (Mather et al. 1997). y Locations (company lab): 2010 Neapolis, AB (Rahr Malting Co.), Watrous, SK (Prairie Malt Ltd.), Vulcan, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC), Hamiota, MB (GRL), Lethbridge, AB (Malteurop Canada Ltd.); 2011 Neapolis, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC), Vulcan, AB (Prairie Malt Ltd.), Hamiota, MB (GRL), Lethbridge, AB (Canada Malting Co. Ltd.), Kamsack, SK (Malteurop Canada Ltd.), Vegreville, AB (Rahr Malting Co.). x Kernel plumpness as determined over a 7/64-inch (278-mm) slotted screen. w Kernel plumpness as determined over a 6/64-inch (238-mm) slotted screen. v Expressed as % by the malting and brewing industries. u On a grain dry matter basis. t On a malt dry matter basis. s Ratio of soluble protein to total protein concentration. r Degrees Lintner. q Dextrinizing unit measure of alpha amylase activity. p On a malt extract basis, expressed as ppm by the malting and brewing industries. o Centipoise, international viscosity units used by the malting and brewing industries. n Percentage of peeled and broken barley and malt, respectively, as measured by industry. m Least significant difference among cultivar means at the 5% probability level, where each test was treated as one replication. l Data not collected in 2010 for Watrous, SK (Prairie Malt Ltd.), Vulcan, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC), and Lethbridge, AB (Malteurop Canada Ltd.). k Data not collected in 2010 for Watrous, SK (Prairie Malt Ltd.). j Data not collected in 2010 for Lethbridge, AB (Malteurop Canada Ltd.), and in 2011 for Kamsack, SK (Malteurop Canada Ltd.). i Data not collected in 2010 for Neapolis, AB (Rahr Malting Co.), and in 2011 for Vulcan, AB (Prairie Malt Ltd.). h Data not collected in 2010 for Neapolis, AB (Rahr Malting Co.), and Vulcan, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC), and in 2011 for Neapolis, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC), and Lethbridge, AB (Canada Malting Co. Ltd.). g Data not collected in 2010 for Neapolis, AB (Rahr Malting Co.). f Data not collected in 2011 for Lethbridge, AB (Canada Malting Co. Ltd.). e Data not collected in 2010 for Neapolis, AB (Rahr Malting Co.), Watrous, SK (Prairie Malt Ltd.), and Vulcan, AB (Busch Agricultural Resources, LLC), and in 2011 for Vegreville, AB (Rahr Malting Co.). 800 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE
Table 5. Disease reactions for AAC Synergy and check cultivars, Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test, 2009 and 2010 Ustilago smuts Net blotch Spot blotch (% infected) z Sask y Inoculated x Melf w Bran v Melf w Sask u Inoc. t nuda hordei nigra U. hordei 102 858 857 (19) (19) (19) (19) 1903 2009 CDC Copeland 25 42.5 22.5 S 2 10 3 1.0 7.5 6.0 7.0 5 Xena 76 12.5 30.0 S 9 10 7 2.0 5.5 3.5 5.0 6 AC Metcalfe 0 25.0 32.5 MS 9 10 5 4.5 5.5 3.0 4.5 4 AAC Synergy 83 27.5 10.0 S 2 8 1 1.0 3.5 2.0 2.0 4 2010 CDC Copeland 100 40.0 13.0 8.0 3 9 3 1.0 8.5 7.5 7.5 7, 6 Xena 100 25.0 10.0 16.0 9 10 7 1.5 8.0 6.0 5.5 8 AC Metcalfe 20.0 3.0 5.0 9 9 3 3.5 7.0 4.5 4.0 7, 6 AAC Synergy 100 41.5 30.0 17.0 1 3 2 1.5 3.5 3.0 2.5 3, 4 Stem Rust r p Common root rot s Field rating Wpg MCCF Rpg1 Inocul. q Field Reaction Severity IR IT Marker 1493 Edmon Laco 2009 CDC Copeland 53 MS 5.0 MR ;1 S 7.0 5.0 Xena 44 MRMS 5.0 MR ;1 S 6.5 3.0 AC Metcalfe 51 MS 5.0 MR ;1 MS 6.0 3.0 AAC Synergy 51 MS 1.0 R 0; S 7.0 4.5 2010 CDC Copeland 64 S 2.0 R 0; 7.5 7.5 Xena 35 R 5.0 R 0; 8.0 7.5 AC Metcalfe 41 MR 2.0 R 0; 6.0 6.0 AAC Synergy 49 MRMS 2.0 R 0; 7.0 7.0 Brandon Fusarium head blight Portage la Prairie Septoria o DON DON 1998 FHB (05) n (mg kg 1 ) m FHB (05) n (mg kg 1 ) m 2009 CDC Copeland 2.5 20.4 2.3 7.0 Xena 2.2 13.9 2.3 12.4 AC Metcalfe 2.2 13.0 2.5 8.5 AAC Synergy 3.2 23.6 2.3 13.1 2010 CDC Copeland S 3.5 33.7 2.5 26.2 Xena S 3.0 22.2 2.5 14.7 AC Metcalfe S 2.3 28.0 2.5 31.9 AAC Synergy S 3.5 39.6 2.0 36.3 Scald LEGGE ET AL. * AAC SYNERGY BARLEY 801
802 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE z Infected plants as determined in smut tests conducted at the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Cereal Research Centre (CRC), Winnipeg, MB. y Covered smut (U. hordei) rating determined at the Crop Development Centre (CDC), University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK; in 2009 reaction types were determined with Ssusceptible and MSmoderately susceptible, while in 2010 % infected plants were determined. x Seedlings inoculated with Pyrenophora teres f. teres isolates WRS102 and WRS858 (net-form net blotch), and P. teres f. maculata isolate WRS857 (spot-form net blotch) from the CRC, Winnipeg, MB; 1resistant, 10susceptible. w Rated for net-form net blotch (P. teres f. teres) and spot blotch (Cochliobolus sativus) reactions in the leaf disease nursery at AAFC, Melfort, SK, on a 19 scale (1resistant, 9 susceptible). v Rated for spot blotch (C. sativus) reactions in the irrigated leaf disease nursery at AAFC, Brandon, MB, on a 19 scale (1resistant, 9susceptible). u Rated for reaction to spot blotch (C. sativus) in the CDC irrigated nursery, Saskatoon, SK, on a 19 scale (1resistant, 9susceptible). t Seedlings inoculated with C. sativus isolate WRS1903 from the CRC, Winnipeg, MB; 1resistant, 9susceptible. s Percentage of plants infected in the common root rot (C. sativus) nursery at AAFC, Lacombe, AB, and disease reaction types, where Ssusceptible, MSmoderately susceptible, MRMSmoderately resistant to moderately susceptible, MRmoderately resistant, Rresistant. r Reaction to stem rust (Puccinia graminis) was determined in inoculated field nurseries at Winnipeg, MB, with severity % infected and IRinfection reaction, where MRmoderately resistant and Rresistant; in seedling tests inoculated with race MCCF at the CRC, Winnipeg, MB, where ITinfection type; and in molecular marker tests at the CDC, Saskatoon, SK, to detect the Rpg1 stem rust resistance gene where indicates the presence of the gene and resistance. q Seedlings inoculated with Rhynchosporium secalis isolate WRS1493 from the CRC, Winnipeg, MB; Ssusceptible. p Field ratings for scald (R. secalis) reactions on a 09 scale where 0no disease, 9susceptible; EdmonUniversity of Alberta scald nursery, Edmonton, AB; LacoAAFC, Lacombe, AB, scald nursery. o Seedlings inoculated with Septoria passerinii isolate WRS1998 from the CRC, Winnipeg, MB; Ssusceptible. n Mean fusarium head blight (Fusarium graminearum) reaction rated visually on a 05 scale (0no symptoms, 5susceptible) in irrigated FHB nurseries at AAFC, Brandon, and Portage la Prairie, MB; mean for each year calculated from three replications at each site. m Deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration determined by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) at the Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre (ECORC), Ottawa, ON, using a composite sample of three replications for each year at each site. advanced malting quality analyses (i.e., same traits as for preliminary analyses plus friability and wort viscosity), and reaction to loose smut [Ustilago nuda (Jens.) Rostr.], covered smut [U. hordei (Pers.) Lagerh.], false loose smut (U. nigra Tapke.), net-form net blotch isolate WRS 858 in seedling tests at the CRC, and deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration by harvesting the row from the FHB nursery at Brandon, grinding a 20-g sample and sending a 1-g subsample to the Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre (ECORC), Ottawa, ON, for analysis using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). BM0215-189-1 was grown in an advanced yield test at five locations in western Canada in 2008 (Brandon and Hamiota, MB; Saskatoon and Wakaw, SK; and Lacombe, AB) where it was evaluated for the same traits as in 2007 plus reactions to scald [Rhynchosporium secalis (Oud.) J.J. Davis] isolate WRS 1493 and spot-form net blotch isolate WRS 857 in seedling tests at the CRC, and spot-form net blotch and common root rot [C. sativus (Ito & Kurib.) Drechs. ex Dast.] at AAFC, Lacombe, AB. Malting quality was determined for three locations (Brandon, Hamiota and Saskatoon) for the same traits as in the previous year plus beta glucan concentration. Resistance to pre-harvest sprouting was also assessed by determining stirring number with the Rapid Visco TM Analyser model RVA 4SA (Newport Scientific Pty. Ltd., Warriewood, New South Wales, Australia) using samples from Brandon harvested at the normal time and later to induce sprouting, and from Hamiota harvested at the normal time. BM0215-189-1 was advanced in 2009 to the Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test, where it was evaluated for 2 yr as TR09208. TR09208 was also evaluated in the 2010 and 2011 Collaborative Malting Barley Trials conducted at the pilot-scale level by the malting and brewing industry as part of the registration recommending process under the auspices of the Prairie Recommending Committee for Oat and Barley. Performance AAC Synergy is widely adapted to western Canada, and out-yielded the malting check cultivars AC Metcalfe by 13% and CDC Copeland by 7% across all soil zones over 2 yr of evaluation in the Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test (Table 1). Overall, AAC Synergy did not differ significantly in yield from the feed check cultivar Xena. In these trials, it was similar to the checks in days to heading, maturity and plant height, except for being about 1 d earlier to head and 6 cm shorter than CDC Copeland (Table 2). Although it tended to be more resistant to lodging than the checks, the differences were not significant. AAC Synergy had higher test weight than CDC Copeland, was similar to AC Metcalfe, and lower than Xena. It had higher kernel weight than the malting checks and was similar to Xena. It also had higher kernel plumpness than the checks, although the
difference from CDC Copeland was not significant. In short, AAC Synergy s combination of agronomic traits betters the malting checks, particularly when its high yield is considered. During its 2 yr in Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test, AAC Synergy had a desirable malting quality profile that was generally similar to intermediate between the malting checks AC Metcalfe and CDC Copeland (Table 3). Its most noteworthy features were higher malt extract than CDC Copeland, lower wort viscosity and malt beta-glucan concentration than the checks although beta-glucan concentration was not significant for CDC Copeland, higher kernel plumpness over a 7/64ƒ screen, and a non-significant tendency to have lower grain protein concentration than AC Metcalfe. Similar patterns were observed during the 2 yr of pilot-scale testing by industry in the Collaborative Barley Quality Trial, except that AAC Synergy had higher malt extract than both malting checks and significantly lower grain protein concentration than AC Metcalfe (Table 4). Market development is currently underway for AAC Synergy, so commercial acceptance by the malting and brewing industry is not known at this time. Other Characteristics PLANT. Erect to semi-erect juvenile growth; whitish coleoptile with very thin green strip at tip and short to medium elongation; medium green leaves with slight waxy bloom, green lower leaf sheath, glabrous sheath and blade; intermediate to upright flag leaf, medium to long length, medium width, white to purplish auricles, glabrous sheath, blade and auricles, and pronounced waxy sheath; medium green stem with thin to medium thickness, slight stem exertion, five nodes, straight to slightly curved neck, and V-shaped cup half opened and half closed collar shape. SPIKE. Two-row type, slightly tapering to parallel shape, medium density, medium in length, erect to semi-erect attitude, with medium to strong glaucosity; rough lemma awns longer than the spike with green tips, with a few barbs on lateral veins; glumes medium to long in length with short to medium long hairs confined to a band, rough glume awns with green to slightly purplish tips shorter to equal in length than the glumes; first segment of rachis short to medium length with weak to strong curvature, rachis edges strongly pubescent; sterile spikelet with weakly divergent attitude; median spikelet with longer glume and awn than grain. KERNEL. Covered (hulled), medium length and width, colourless aleurone, short to medium long rachilla with long hairs, a few abnormal rachillas, green lateral lemma nerves, clasping lodicules, no hairs on ventral furrow, and horseshoe depression basal marking. QUALITY. Excellent malting quality (Tables 3 and 4). LEGGE ET AL. * AAC SYNERGY BARLEY 803 DISEASE REACTION. Resistance to spot-form net blotch; moderate resistance to net-form net blotch and spot blotch; moderately resistant to moderately susceptible to common root rot, covered smut, false loose smut, and stem rust (carries the Rpg1 gene); moderately susceptible to FHB; and susceptible to scald, loose smut and speckled leaf blotch (Septoria passerinii Sacc.) (Table 5). Overall, AAC Synergy has a superior disease resistance package when compared with the checks, particularly to spot blotch and net blotch. Maintenance of Pedigreed Seed Stocks Breeder Seed will be maintained by the AAFC Seed Increase Unit, Experimental Farm, Box 760, Indian Head, Saskatchewan, Canada S0G 2K0. Initial Breeder Seed was produced in 2011 by the Seed Increase Unit at Indian Head from a bulk of 200 F 11 lines derived from F 9 single plant selections originally made at the AAFC Brandon Research Centre in 2009 from the same increase used to provide seed for evaluation of AAC Synergy in the Western Cooperative Two-row Barley Registration Test. Distribution and multiplication of other classes of Pedigreed seed will be handled by Syngenta Canada Inc., #8 4003 Miller Avenue, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S7K 2K6. Financial support from the producer check-off on barley collected in Manitoba and Saskatchewan by the Canadian Wheat Board and administered by the Western Grains Research Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. Appreciation is expressed to D. Gehl (AAFC, Indian Head, SK) for assistance in producing and maintaining the Breeder Seed and facilitating winter nurseries; P. Green, B. McLeod and K. Moore (AAFC, Brandon, MB) for their technical assistance; K. Price (AAFC, Cereal Research Centre, Winnipeg, MB) for providing malting quality data; S. Buffam (AAFC, Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, Ottawa, ON) for the DON analyses; and Dr. B. G. Rossnagel and D. Voth (Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK) for providing field leaf disease data. Legge, W. G., Haber, S., Harder, D. E., Menzies, J. G., Noll, J. S., Tekauz, A., Thomas, P. L., Turkington, T. K. and Bizimungu, B. 2008. Newdale barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 88: 717723. Legge, W. G., Metcalfe, D. R., Haber, S., Harder, D. E., Noll, J. S., Tekauz, A. and Thomas, P. L. 2003. AC Metcalfe barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 83: 381384. Legge, W. G., Therrien, M. C., Tucker, J. R., Banik, M., Tekauz, A., Somers, D., Savard, M. E., Rossnagel, B. G., Lefol, E., Voth, D., Zatorski, T., Harvey, B. L. and Scoles, G. 2004. Progress in breeding for resistance to fusarium head blight in barley. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 26: 436442. Mather, D. E., Tinker, N. A., LaBerge, D. E., Edney, M., Jones, B. L., Rossnagel, B. G., Legge, W. G., Briggs, K. G., Irvine, R. B., Falk, D. E. and Kasha, K. J. 1997. Regions of the genome that affect grain and malt quality in a North American two-row barley cross. Crop Sci. 37: 544554. Metcalfe, D. R. 1987. Ellice barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 67: 823826.