Relationship Between Hardness Genes and Quality in Barley (Hordeum vulgare)

Barley (Hordeum vulgare) genotypes were sequenced for polymorphism in the hardness genes, these being the three hordoindoline (hin a, hin b1 and hin b2) genes. The variation in haplotype was determined by sequencing for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Polymorphism between each gene was then compared to grain hardness (three methods), malt quality characteristics (hot water extract and friability) and cattle feed quality. Two haplotypes were found in a set of forty barley genotypes. For hin a, two alleles were present, namely hin a1 and hin a2. However, there was no specific hin a allele that was associated with grain hardness, malt and feed quality. Barley has two hin b genes, namely hin b1 and hin b2, and the genotypes tested here had one of two alleles for each gene. However, there were no obvious effects on hardness or quality from either of these hin b alleles. Unlike wheat, where a clear relationship has been demonstrated between a number of SNPs in the wheat hardness genes and quality (soft or hard wheat), there was no such relationship for barley. Despite the wide range in hardness, malt and feed quality, there were only two haplotypes for each of the hin a, hin b1 and hin b2 genes and there was no clear relationship between grain hardness, malt or feed quality. The genotypes used in this study demonstrated that there was a low level of polymorphism in hardness genes in current commercial varieties as well as breeding lines and these polymorphisms had no impact on quality.

Measurement of genetic and environmental variation in barley (Hordeum vulgare) grain hardness

In this study, we assessed a broad range of barley breeding lines and commercial varieties by three hardness methods (two particle size methods and one crush resistance method (SKCS—Single-Kernel Characterization System), grown at multiple sites to see if there was variation in barley hardness and if that variation was genetic or environmentally controlled. We also developed near-infrared reflectance (NIR) calibrations for these three hardness methods to ascertain if NIR technology was suitable for rapid screening of breeding lines or specific populations. In addition, we used this data to identify genetic regions that may be associated with hardness. There were significant (p<0.05) genetic effects for the three hardness methods. There were also environmental effects, possibly linked to the effect of protein on hardness, i.e. increasing protein resulted in harder grain. Heritability values were calculated at >85% for all methods. The NIR calibrations, with R2 values of >90%, had Standard Error of Prediction values of 0.90, 72 and 4.0, respectively, for the three hardness methods. These equations were used to predict hardness values of a mapping population which resulted in genetic markers being identified on all chromosomes but chromosomes 2H, 3H, 5H, 6H and 7H had markers with significant LOD scores. The two regions on 5H were on the distal end of both the long and short arms. The region that showed significant LOD score was on the long arm. However, the region on the short arm associated with the hardness (hordoindoline) genes did not have significant LOD scores. The results indicate that barley hardness is influenced by both genotype and environment and that the trait is heritable, which would allow breeders to develop very hard or soft varieties if required. In addition, NIR was shown to be a reliable tool for screening for hardness. While the data set used in this study has a relatively low variation in hardness, the tools developed could be applied to breeding populations that have large variation in barley grain hardness.

Hardness Methods for Testing Maize Kernels

Maize is a highly important crop to many countries around the world, through the sale of the maize crop to domestic processors and subsequent production of maize products and also provides a staple food to subsistance farms in undeveloped countries. In many countries, there have been long-term research efforts to develop a suitable hardness method that could assist the maize industry in improving efficiency in processing as well as possibly providing a quality specification for maize growers, which could attract a premium. This paper focuses specifically on hardness and reviews a number of methodologies as well as important biochemical aspects of maize that contribute to maize hardness used internationally. Numerous foods are produced from maize, and hardness has been described as having an impact on food quality. However, the basis of hardness and measurement of hardness are very general and would apply to any use of maize from any country. From the published literature, it would appear that one of the simpler methods used to measure hardness is a grinding step followed by a sieving step, using multiple sieve sizes. This would allow the range in hardness within a sample as well as average particle size and/or coarse/fine ratio to be calculated. Any of these parameters could easily be used as reference values for the development of near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy calibrations. The development of precise NIR calibrations will provide an excellent tool for breeders, handlers, and processors to deliver specific cultivars in the case of growers and bulk loads in the case of handlers, thereby ensuring the most efficient use of maize by domestic and international processors. This paper also considers previous research describing the biochemical aspects of maize that have been related to maize hardness. Both starch and protein affect hardness, with most research focusing on the storage proteins (zeins). Both the content and composition of the zein fractions affect hardness. Genotypes and growing environment influence the final protein and starch content and. to a lesser extent, composition. However, hardness is a highly heritable trait and, hence, when a desirable level of hardness is finally agreed upon, the breeders will quickly be able to produce material with the hardness levels required by the industry.

Maize kernel hardness classification by near infrared (NIR) hyperspectral imaging and multivariate data analysis.

The use of near infrared (NIR) hyperspectral imaging and hyperspectral image analysis for distinguishing between hard, intermediate and soft maize kernels from inbred lines was evaluated. NIR hyperspectral images of two sets (12 and 24 kernels) of whole maize kernels were acquired using a Spectral Dimensions MatrixNIR camera with a spectral range of 960-1662 nm and a sisuChema SWIR (short wave infrared) hyperspectral pushbroom imaging system with a spectral range of 1000-2498 nm. Exploratory principal component analysis (PCA) was used on absorbance images to remove background, bad pixels and shading. On the cleaned images. PCA could be used effectively to find histological classes including glassy (hard) and floury (soft) endosperm. PCA illustrated a distinct difference between glassy and floury endosperm along principal component (PC) three on the MatrixNIR and PC two on the sisuChema with two distinguishable clusters. Subsequently partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) was applied to build a classification model. The PLS-DA model from the MatrixNIR image (12 kernels) resulted in root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) value of 0.18. This was repeated on the MatrixNIR image of the 24 kernels which resulted in RMSEP of 0.18. The sisuChema image yielded RMSEP value of 0.29. The reproducible results obtained with the different data sets indicate that the method proposed in this paper has a real potential for future classification uses.

Uncertainty in length measurements of live coral trout: implications for compliance and enforcement of minimum legal size limits.

Report on evidence of shrinkage of live coral trout during professional fishing operations on the Great Barrier Reef in 2000. Excel data includes the following fields: Column A. Fish (fish number from 1 -24) Column B. Bin (1-8, container the fish was held in during the experiment) Column C. Measure (1-7, number of the measurement of each fish) Column D. Observer (1 or 2, making the measurement) Column E. Time 2 Column F. Time (time of the day the measurement was made) Column G. FL (Fork Length) Column H. TL (Total Length) Column I. Difference (difference in length between measures) Column J. Order Column K. Temperature (surface water temp under the boat)

Large-chamber methane and nitrous oxide measurements are comparable to the backward Lagrangian stochastic method

Measurement of individual emission sources (e.g., animals or pen manure) within intensive livestock enterprises is necessary to test emission calculation protocols and to identify targets for decreased emissions. In this study, a vented, fabric-covered large chamber (4.5 × 4.5 m, 1.5 m high; encompassing greater spatial variability than a smaller chamber) in combination with on-line analysis (nitrous oxide [N2O] and methane [CH4] via Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy; 1 analysis min-1) was tested as a means to isolate and measure emissions from beef feedlot pen manure sources. An exponential model relating chamber concentrations to ambient gas concentrations, air exchange (e.g., due to poor sealing with the surface; model linear when ≈ 0 m3 s-1), and chamber dimensions allowed data to be fitted with high confidence. Alternating manure source emission measurements using the large-chamber and the backward Lagrangian stochastic (bLS) technique (5-mo period; bLS validated via tracer gas release, recovery 94-104%) produced comparable N2O and CH4 emission values (no significant difference at P < 0.05). Greater precision of individual measurements was achieved via the large chamber than for the bLS (mean ± standard error of variance components: bLS half-hour measurements, 99.5 ± 325 mg CH4 s-1 and 9.26 ± 20.6 mg N2O s-1; large-chamber measurements, 99.6 ± 64.2 mg CH4 s-1 and 8.18 ± 0.3 mg N2O s-1). The large-chamber design is suitable for measurement of emissions from manure on pen surfaces, isolating these emissions from surrounding emission sources, including enteric emissions. © © American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.

Estimating daily methane production in individual cattle with irregular feed intake patterns from short-term methane emission measurements

Spot measurements of methane emission rate (n = 18 700) by 24 Angus steers fed mixed rations from GrowSafe feeders were made over 3- to 6-min periods by a GreenFeed emission monitoring (GEM) unit. The data were analysed to estimate daily methane production (DMP; g/day) and derived methane yield (MY; g/kg dry matter intake (DMI)). A one-compartment dose model of spot emission rate v. time since the preceding meal was compared with the models of Wood (1967) and Dijkstra et al. (1997) and the average of spot measures. Fitted values for DMP were calculated from the area under the curves. Two methods of relating methane and feed intakes were then studied: the classical calculation of MY as DMP/DMI (kg/day); and a novel method of estimating DMP from time and size of preceding meals using either the data for only the two meals preceding a spot measurement, or all meals for 3 days prior. Two approaches were also used to estimate DMP from spot measurements: fitting of splines on a 'per-animal per-day' basis and an alternate approach of modelling DMP after each feed event by least squares (using Solver), summing (for each animal) the contributions from each feed event by best-fitting a one-compartment model. Time since the preceding meal was of limited value in estimating DMP. Even when the meal sizes and time intervals between a spot measurement and all feeding events in the previous 72 h were assessed, only 16.9% of the variance in spot emission rate measured by GEM was explained by this feeding information. While using the preceding meal alone gave a biased (underestimate) of DMP, allowing for a longer feed history removed this bias. A power analysis taking into account the sources of variation in DMP indicated that to obtain an estimate of DMP with a 95% confidence interval within 5% of the observed 64 days mean of spot measures would require 40 animals measured over 45 days (two spot measurements per day) or 30 animals measured over 55 days. These numbers suggest that spot measurements could be made in association with feed efficiency tests made over 70 days. Spot measurements of enteric emissions can be used to define DMP but the number of animals and samples are larger than are needed when day-long measures are made.