ARS | Publication request: Sugar beet activities of the USDA-ARS East Lansing conducted in cooperation with Saginaw Valley Bean and Beet Farm during 2011 (including Project 905)

Submitted to: Annual Beet Sugar Development Foundation Research Report
Publication Type: Research Notes
Publication Acceptance Date: April 10, 2012
Publication Date: May 20, 2012
Citation: McGrath, J.M., Hanson, L.E., Duckert, T.M., Goodwill, T.R. 2012. Sugar beet activities of the USDA-ARS East Lansing conducted in cooperation with Saginaw Valley Bean and Beet Farm during 2011 (including Project 905)[CD-ROM]. 2012 Annual Beet Sugar Development Foundation Research Report. Denver, Colorado: Beet Sugar Development Foundation.

Technical Abstract: Evaluation and rating plots were planted at the Saginaw Valley Research & Extension Center in Frankenmuth, MI in 2011 that focused on Cercospora leaf spot performance, conducted in conjunction with Beet Sugar Development Foundation and including USDA-ARS cooperators. 263 breeding lines were tested in one- or two-row, three-replication plots from USDA collaborators from Fargo, ND (12 breeding lines), East Lansing, MI (60), and Ft. Collins, CO (161), as well as 30 Plant Introductions (PIs) from the working Beta germplasm collection of the National Plant Germplasm System in Pullman, WA. Additional East Lansing USDA entries included 927 (partially) inbred lines. A wide range of reaction to Cercospora leaf spot was observed. Disease severity peaked by late August, after which regrowth started to outpace new disease development, so that disease ratings for several accessions remained constant or decreased after that rating, thus ratings are not given after this date. At our 24 Aug rating, means of the resistant and susceptible internal control for the entire nursery (including two additional experiments) were 3.5 and 5.9, respectively, across the nursery. At the peak of the epidemic in 2010 (19 Aug), these means were 3.2 and 5.5 respectively. Means of contributor lines in the entire nursery in 2011 ranged from 2.0 to 7.8. An analysis of variance (PROC GLM - SAS) on the disease indices (visual evaluation scores) determined that there were significant differences among entries (P<0.05) on all dates of evaluation.