COMPARISON OF THREE TECHNIQUES FOR SELECTION OF A MULTIPLE DISEASE RESISTANT PEANUT

Authors: BARING, M - TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY; SIMPSON, C - TEXAS AG EXP STATION; Melouk, Hassan; BLACK, M - TAMU TEXAS COOP EXT

Submitted to: American Peanut Research and Education Society Proceedings
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 7/1/2004
Publication Date: 12/1/2004
Citation: Baring, M.R., Simpson, C.E., Melouk, H.A., Black, M.C. 2004. Comparison of three techniques for selection of a multiple disease resistant peanut [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Peanut Research and Education Society, July 13-16, 2004, San Antonio, TX. 36:34.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: Several TAMU breeding line selections over the past fifteen years have resulted in a pattern in which lines selected under Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus (TSWV) pressure often have good tolerance to Sclerotinia minor. However, lines selected under Sclerotinia minor pressure do not typically have good tolerance to TSWV. Differences in pedigrees used for the two disease resistance programs do not allow for sound scientific conclusions as to whether this pattern is a scientific fact or simply an unexplained phenomenon. A study was conducted from 2000 through 2003 to determine whether significant differences could be detected among three selection techniques. Complex crosses using Tamrun 96, Sun Oleic 95R and breeding line Tx901639-3 resulted in four highly segregating F2:3 populations, which were used for this selection experiment. A total of 200 individual seeds were space planted for each of the four populations at three different disease screening nurseries across Texas and Oklahoma. All three selection techniques were based on the following traits listed in order of importance: disease resistance, plant growth habit, pod characteristics and seed characteristics. Selection technique #1 was a basic sequential method in which the first year of individual plant selections were made under TSWV pressure and then transferred the following year to the Sclerotinia minor nursery for the second cycle of selections. Selection technique #2 was basic pedigree selection method conducted at a multiple disease screening nursery for two consecutive years. Selection technique #3 was also a basic sequential method set up as the reciprocal of technique#1. This method consisted of the first cycle of selections being conducted in a Sclerotinia minor nursery during the first year. The following year the selections were transferred to a TSWV screening nursery for the second cycle of selection. The top two selections for each selection from each of the four segregating populations were then yield tested during the 2002 and 2003 growing seasons. The tests were conducted at each of the three disease screening nurseries and at a disease-free site in West Texas. Initial results from analysis to determine differences among the three techniques for yield, value per acre, grade and disease resistance have shown no significant difference. However, interactions have been noted between populations and techniques. Further analysis are being conducted and will be reported at the APRES meetings.