Characteristics of Timothy Genotypes Divergently Selected for Fiber Traits
2004; Wiley; Volume: 44; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.2135/cropsci2004.0081
ISSN1435-0653
AutoresAnnie Claessens, R. Michaud, Gaétan Bélanger, Diane E. Mather,
Tópico(s)Dyeing and Modifying Textile Fibers
ResumoCrop ScienceVolume 44, Issue 1 p. 81-88 Crop Breeding, Genetics & Cytologies Characteristics of Timothy Genotypes Divergently Selected for Fiber Traits A. Claessens, A. Claessens Dep. of Plant Science, McGill University, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, H9X 3V9 CanadaSearch for more papers by this authorR. Michaud, Corresponding Author R. Michaud [email protected] Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre, 2560 Hochelaga Blvd., Sainte-Foy, QC, G1V 2J3 CanadaCorresponding author ([email protected]).Search for more papers by this authorG. Bélanger, G. Bélanger Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre, 2560 Hochelaga Blvd., Sainte-Foy, QC, G1V 2J3 CanadaSearch for more papers by this authorD. E. Mather, D. E. Mather Dep. of Plant Science, McGill University, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, H9X 3V9 CanadaSearch for more papers by this author A. Claessens, A. Claessens Dep. of Plant Science, McGill University, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, H9X 3V9 CanadaSearch for more papers by this authorR. Michaud, Corresponding Author R. Michaud [email protected] Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre, 2560 Hochelaga Blvd., Sainte-Foy, QC, G1V 2J3 CanadaCorresponding author ([email protected]).Search for more papers by this authorG. Bélanger, G. Bélanger Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre, 2560 Hochelaga Blvd., Sainte-Foy, QC, G1V 2J3 CanadaSearch for more papers by this authorD. E. Mather, D. E. Mather Dep. of Plant Science, McGill University, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, H9X 3V9 CanadaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 01 January 2004 https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.8100Citations: 11 Contribution no. 753 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Selection for reduced fiber concentration in forage crops is considered to be an effective approach to improve digestibility but often results in reduced dry matter (DM) yield. The objective of this study was to characterize timothy (Phleum pratense L.) genotypes divergently selected for fiber component concentrations and their ratios, and to identify selection criteria that could have a meaningful effect on timothy digestibility without adversely affecting DM yield. Divergent phenotypic selection was applied for neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), acid detergent lignin (ADL), hemicellulose (HEM), and cellulose (CEL) as determined by the detergent fiber system of forage analysis and for ratios of ADL/HEM, ADL/CEL, ADL/(HEM+CEL), and HEM/CEL among 78 high yielding plants selected from among 2000 spaced plants from four populations. For each criterion, the two plants with the highest and the two plants with the lowest values within each population were selected. These plants were vegetatively propagated and composition of spring growth was evaluated in a 2-yr field experiment. The divergent NDF, ADF, ADL, CEL, ADL/HEM, ADL/CEL, and ADL/(HEM+CEL) groups of genotypes were significantly different for their respective trait. The ADL, ADL/HEM, ADL/CEL, and ADL/(HEM+CEL) groups were the most stable across years for in vitro true digestibility (IVTD), with the low groups having values of IVTD between 10 and 34 g kg−1 DM above those of the corresponding high groups. The DM yield of the low-ADL/(HEM+CEL) and-ADL/CEL groups were also greater than that of their corresponding high groups by more than 13%. Therefore, ADL/(HEM+CEL) and ADL/CEL seem to be promising selection criteria to increase digestibility while maintaining or increasing DM yield. References 1Bélanger, G., Analysis of the nutritive value of timothy grown with varying N nutrition. Grass Forage Sci. (1998) 53, 109–119 http://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2494.1998.5320109.x, 10.1046/j.1365-2494.1998.5320109.x Web of Science®Google Scholar 2Buxton, D.R., Cell-wall components in divergent germplasms of four perennial forage grass species. Crop Sci. (1990) 30, 402–408 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000020034x, 10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000020034x CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 3Buxton, D.R., Digestibility of structural carbohydrates in cool-season grass and legume forages. Crop Sci. (1991) 31, 1338–1345 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100050052x, 10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100050052x Web of Science®Google Scholar 4Buxton, D.R., and M.D. Casler. 1993. Environmental and genetic effects on cell wall composition and digestibility. p. 685–714. In H.G. Jung et al. (ed.) Forage cell wall structure and digestibility. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, iMadison, WI. 10.2134/1993.foragecellwall.c25 Web of Science®Google Scholar 5Buxton, D.R., Cell wall concentration and components in stratified canopies of alfalfa, birdsfoot trefoil, and red clover. Crop Sci. (1986) 26, 180–184 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600010043x, 10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600010043x CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 6Carpenter, J.A., Divergent phenotypic selection response in smooth bromegrass for forage yield and nutritive value. Crop Sci. (1990) 30, 17–22 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000010004x, 10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000010004x Web of Science®Google Scholar 7Casler, M.D., In vitro digestibility of dry matter and cell wall constituents of smooth bromegrass forage. Crop Sci. (1987) 27, 931–934 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1987.0011183X002700050021x, 10.2135/cropsci1987.0011183X002700050021x CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 8Casler, M.D., Correlated responses in forage yield and nutritional value from phenotypic recurrent selection for reduced fiber concentration in smooth bromegrass. Theor. Appl. Genet. (1999) 99, 1245–1254 http://doi.org/10.1007/s001220051330, 10.1007/s001220051330 Web of Science®Google Scholar 9Casler, M.D., Breeding forage crops for increased nutritional value. Adv. Agron. (2001) 71, 51–107 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(01)71012-7 10.1016/S0065-2113(01)71012-7 Web of Science®Google Scholar 10Casler, M.D., Accomplishments and impact from breeding for increased forage nutritional value. Crop Sci. (1999) 39, 12–20 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900010003x, 10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900010003x Web of Science®Google Scholar 11Coors, J.G., Selection for improved nutritional quality of alfalfa forage. Crop Sci. (1986) 26, 843–848 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600050001x, 10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600050001x Web of Science®Google Scholar 12Durand, J., Relations entre les caractères morphologiques et la qualité chez la fléole des prés (Phleum pratense). Can. J. Plant Sci. (1993) 73, 803–814 Google Scholar 13Goering, H.K., and P.J. Van Soest. 1970. Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures, and some applications). USDA Agric. Handb. 379. U.S. Gov. Print. Office, Washington, DC. Google Scholar 14Han, L.X., Responses to divergent selection for fiber concentration at two disease potentials in smooth bromegrass. Crop Sci. (2001) 41, 30–39 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2001.41130x, 10.2135/cropsci2001.41130x Google Scholar 15Hatfield, R.D., Cell wall structural foundations: Molecular basis for improving forage digestibility. Crop Sci. (1999) 39, 27–37 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900010005x, 10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900010005x CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar 16Hopkins, A.A., Predicted and realized gains from selection for in vitro dry matter digestibility and forage yield in switchgrass. Crop Sci. (1993) 33, 253–258 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1993.0011183X003300020007x, 10.2135/cropsci1993.0011183X003300020007x Web of Science®Google Scholar 17 Infrasoft International. 1993. NIRS2 version 3.00. Routine operation and calibration software development for near infrared instruments. Infrasoft International, Silver Spring, MD. Google Scholar 18Jung, H.G., Characteristics of plant cell walls affecting intake and digestibility of forages by ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. (1995) 73, 2774–2790 http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A1995RV36400033&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 10.2527/1995.7392774x CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 19Jung, H.G., and D.A. Deetz. 1993. Cell wall lignification and degradability. p. 315–346. In H.G. Jung et al. (ed.) Forage cell wall structure and digestibility. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, iMadison, WI. 10.2134/1993.foragecellwall.c13 Web of Science®Google Scholar 20Kephart, K.D., Digestibility and cell-wall components of alfalfa following selection for divergent herbage lignin concentration. Crop Sci. (1990) 30, 207–212 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000010045x, 10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000010045x Web of Science®Google Scholar 21Moore, K.J., and R.D. Hatfield. 1994. Carbohydrates and forage quality. p. 229–280 In G.C. Fahey et al. (ed.) Forage quality, evaluation, and utilization. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, iMadison, WI. 10.2134/1994.foragequality.c6 Google Scholar 22 SAS Institute. 1996. The SAS system for Windows. Release version 6.12. SAS Institute, Cary, N.C. Google Scholar 23Shenk, J.S., Two cycles of directional selection for improved nutritive value of alfalfa. Crop Sci. (1970) 10, 710–712 http://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1970.0011183X001000060035x 10.2135/cropsci1970.0011183X001000060035x Google Scholar 24Simon, U., and B.H. Park. 1981. A descriptive scheme for stages of development in perennial forage grasses. p. 416–418. In J.A. Smith and V.W. Hays (ed.) Proc. XIV International Grassland Congress, Lexington KY, June 15–24. Westview Press, Boulder, CO. Google Scholar 25Surprenant, J., Bidirectional selection for neutral detergent fiber and yield in reed canarygrass. Can. J. Plant Sci. (1988) 68, 705–712 http://doi.org/10.4141/cjps88-083, 10.4141/cjps88-083 Web of Science®Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume44, Issue1January–February 2004Pages 81-88 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)