September 1974 Station Bulletin
No. 52
GxRAIN SORGFIUM INTERNANTIOAL
PROTEN YIELD ND QUAL.TT TRIA LS
REPORT NO, I
Department of Agronomy International Frogrrns inA griculture
Agricultural Experiment Station Purdue Universit7
West Lafa-yete , Indi_ana
GRAIN SORGHUM INTERNATIONAL
PROTEIN YIELD AND QUALITY TRIALS
REPORT NO. I
(This research was supported by the United States
Agency for International Development through contract
csd-1175 entitled "Inheritance and Improvement of
and Content in Sorghum bicolor (L.)Protein Quality Moench.")
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary...................................... i
List of Tables.............................. ii
Introduction ................................. 1 Selected Entries............................. 2
Location of Cooperators .................... 3
Planting Plans and Datn Collection ......... 4
Results and Discu-sion ..................... 5 Grain Yiwid............................ 6
Days to Flower ....................... 12 Height . ............................... 13
protein Co-zentration ................ 13 Protein Yield ......................... 14 Disease, Insect, Bird Damage and
Lodging ........................... 16
i
SUMMARY
Purdue University-USAID's first International Grain Sorghum
Protein Yield and Quality Trials were established in 1972 and sent
uporn request to research workers located in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia,
Guyana, [araguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Uruguay, Ethiopia, Egypt, Malawi,
Nigeria, Uganda, Bang!adesh, India, Indonesia, Israel, Korea, Pakistan,
lhilippines, Thailand and the U.S.A. The set contained 21 lines and
three coimmurcal gra in sorghum hybrids (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Woench)
selected on protein yield potential, diversity of phenotypes, origin
and potential adaptability to diverse environmental conditions with
a range in maturity and height. Mean yield over non-USA locations was
3627 kg/ha. The commercial hybrid, NK300, gave the highest yield at
non-USA locations and 9.54063 was the highest yielding line. Highest
yield responses to high level fertility were obtained from the
conunercial hybrid NK3GO and the line IS4225. Disease ratings indicated
that resistances to Downy Mildew and head smut were present in several
entries. Plant height and days to flower were reduced at locations
nearest the equator. Twenty entries were selected by one or more
cooperators for potential breeding purposes and/or further testing.
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page No.
1 List of grain sorghum varieites included in the First International Grain Sorghum Protein Yield and Protein Quality Trials ............................................. 2
2 Means for locations reporting data and identification of table containirig lad ividual performance data .............. 5
3 Summary of cays to fl.ower, ho ig iLt,and grain yield from
ten tropical . 7Iocat ion ....................................
4 Summary of means fl days, Lt, f low.er, height and grain yield from all twcnty-tiw) Lrpica . loca tions .............. 8
5 Rank of cntries by avtr,agc gr.-tii vicIcd f£rem 27 locations (tropical and non--tropica 1) roport ing graiLn yield and indication oil 2.itr- 1.5 roe td by _oopera tel>-;............. 9
6 Sumary of days.s to flower, he-i,.jht aind grain yield from
five Indiana locations .................................... 10
iniimi7 Spread of ranles betwoen mn ml aad .1 mom oals reported by 22 tropical Iocations fo- dav to fIlower,
height, gra in .ield, pcLnt j) ro tein a id protein yield. (Caiculated from th ranes reported n Tot le 4).......... 11
8 Grain yield ;ma lvsis of variance for 24 varieties replicated
three times at ten tropical and five non-tropical locations reporting all data .............................. 12
9 Days to flower analysis of variance for 24 varieties
replicated three times at ten tropical and five nontropical locations reporting all, data ..................... 13
10 Protein concentration and protein yield from analyses of seed returned by cooperators ........................... 15
11 General summary of lodging, disease, insect, bird
damage and catechin ecuiivalents for all reporting locations ..................................................17
12 Disease rating summary conducted by disease nursery
cooperators in the United States .......................... 18
iii
LIST OF TABLES* (continued)
Page No.Table No. Location and Cooperator
13 Argentina (Salto) - F. Nider ............................. 19
14 Argentina (Murphy) - II.Pacagnini ...................... 20
Argentina (Manfredi) - P. Parodi ....................... 2115
2216 Brazil (Fortaleza) - M. Faris...........................
17 Brazil (Recife, high fertility) -M. Faris ............. 23
18 Brazil (Recife, low fertility) -M. Faris .............. 24
19 Brazil (Florestal) - R. Schaffert ...................... 25
20 Brazil (Lavras) - R. Schaffert .......................... 26
21 Brazil (Cachoira/Douradas) - R. Schaffert .............. 27
22 Brazil (Vanauba) - K. Schaffert ......................... 28
23 Brazil (Uberoba) - R. Schaffert ........................ 29
24 Colombia (Tolina) - Agroceres ............................ 30
25 Ethiopia (Alemaya) - B. Gebrikidan ..................... 31
26 Hawaii (Honolulu) - P. Rotar ........................... 32
27 Indiana (Purdue Agron. Farm, Hligh fertility) - D. Oswalt 33
28 Indiana (PAP, 107,600 plants/ha) - D. Oswalt ........... 34
29 Indiana (PAF, 215,200 plants/ha) - D. Oswalt ........... 35
30 Indiana (PAF, 430,400 plants/ha) - D. Oswalt ........... 36
31 Indiana (Dubois, SIPAC) - D. Oswalt .................... 37
32 India (Coimbatore) - S. Suresh ......................... 38
33 Israel (Bet I)agan) - A. Blum ............................ 39
34 Korea (Suwon) - K. Park .................................. 40
35 Ncbraskn (Lincoln) - W. Ross ............................. 41
36 Nigeria (Zaria) - M. El-Rouby ........................... 42
37 Oklahoma (high fertility) -D. Weible .................. 43
38 Oklahoma (low fertility) - D. Weible ................... 44
39 Peru (Granja Tacna) - R. Zambrano ...................... 45
40 Peru (La Fontana) - R. Zambrano ........................ 46
41 Thailand (high fertility) N. Ratanadilok ............. 47
42 Thailand (low fertility) - N. Ratanadilok .............. 48
43 bganda (Serere) - J. Kern ............................... 49
44 Uruguay (Colonia) - A. Artola........................... 50
* Listing includes cooperators reporting data prior to January 1974.
-I-
INTERNATIONAL GRAIN SORGHUM
PROTEIN YIELD AND QUALITY TRIALS - REPORT NO. I
D. L. Oswalt, J. D. Axtell, G. Srinivasan, A. Spies, and R. deLong
INTRODUCTION
This International Grain Sorghum Protein Yield and Quality Trial
was conducted by Purdue University-USAID in 1972 to provide information
relative to adaptability of high yielding lines selected in Indiana for
potential protein yield and to identify sources of germplasm at a high
yield capacity for improvement of protein quality.
The protein quality improvement project supported by USAID was ini
tiated in 1966 at Purdue University. Segments of the world collection
of sorghum were screened for protein content and quality resulting in the
identification of diverse phonotypes from diverse geographic origins with
potential wide adaptability. any requests for selections of germplasin
relative to all aspects of sorghum production needs were received. The
first trial selections were based on yield and protein data collected from
one-row plots in tropical locatioms and from thr>e diverse Indiana locations.
The 24 entries were planted in three-row plots with three replications and
arranged in three height groups.
This research was funded by the United States Agency for International Development through Contract csd-1175 entitled "Inheritance and Improvement of Protein Quality and Content in Sorgthum bicolor (.) Moenich".
IResearch Agronomist, Associate Professor, Post-Doctoral Assistant, Administrative Assistant, and Field Techician. Department of Agronomy, Purdue University. Grateful acknowledgement is given to the cooperators who grew the nurseries and supplied the data listed in Tables 13 through 44.
-2-
SELECTED ENTRIES
The 24 varieties selected for the first International Grain SLrghum
Protein Yield and Protein Quality Trial are listed in Table 1. In select
ion of these lines and hybrids data from cooperators receiving one-row
nurser- sets of selected lines in 1969 and 1970 plus the data from the
three diverse locations in Indiana were utilized.
Table 1. List of grain sorghum varieties included in the first International Grain Sorghum Protein Yield and Quality Trials.
Entry Identification
1 954114 2 954255 3 954063 4 932127 5 RS610
6 BR64 7 IS7822 8 954062 9 932296
10 IS8361 11 932075 12 956036 13 954130 14 954206 15 954164 16 NK300 17 !S2319 18 954104 19 932062 20 IS198 21 IS7579 22 IS9569 23 932027 24 IS4225
Origin
TX4225-3, SCO170, P1276837 TX5975-4, IS3589, Sudan TX3927-4, P1257595, EthiopLa Purdue Selection from Short Swayi U.S. Commercial hybrid
DeKalb, Bird resistLnt commL-rcial Zaria, 113, Daiwn Pas Para, Igabi, TX3925-2, PL257595, Ethiopia Purdue Selection from 68-22-93
M66/498
hybrid Nigeria
Texas Wieatland, Nbraskn, USA (Webster) Purdue Selection from Manfredi #20 Purdue Selection from IS2822 (S. Rhodesia) TX4285-6, P1276839, (SC0172SA, iS12663) TX5374-3, SC0334 (IS3499) (Sudan) TX4570-3, P1276839, Ethiopia Northrup, King Commercial Hybrid Lwalli White Q2/3/ 2 5, Maryland, USDA TX4234-3, SC0170, P1276837 Purdue Selection from Sour of Eterita Uganda, Kigezi District 1133PL49, Nigeria No. 948, Pretoria, Pietersburg, S. Africa Purdue Selection of 83521 Lal Boora Nanbai, Shajapur,MP, India
-3-
LOCATION OF COOPERATORS
Cooperator sites were limited to research workers who had requested
seed and agreed to return to this project the data from the replicated
trials. It was aimed to supply seed to research workers in potential
sorghum producing areas of diverse environmental conditions. The loca
tion of nurseries follows:
South Argentina, Manfredi Asia Bangladesh, Dacca
and Argentina, Salto India, Hissar Central Argentina, Venado Tuerto India, Iyderabad
America Brazil, Sete Lagoas India, Jabalpur
Brazil, Vicosa India, Kalianpur Brazil, Capinopolis India, New Delhi Brazil, Sao Paulo India. P-a tnagar
Brazil, Cruz das Almas India, ,2oimbatore Brazil, Fortaleza Indonesia, N. Sumatra
Colombia, Cali Israel, Bet D)a.-n
Colombia, ibaque Korea, Suwvn
Guyana, Georgetown Pakistan, Islamabad
Paraguay, Asuncion Phili-pp i ts;, Laguna Peru, Lino Thailand, Bangkok Puerto Rico, Mayaguez
Uruguay, Colonia U.S. Arizona, Tucson Georgia, F.periment
Africa Ethiopia, Addis Ababa Hawaii, Honolulu Ethiopia, Alemaya Indiana, W. Lafayette Egypt, Cairo Indiana, Dubois Malawi, Lilongwe Indiana, Wanatah Nigeria, Kano Kansas, Minhattan
Nigeria, Zaria Maryland, Beltsville Uganda, Serere Missouri, Portageville
Nebraska, Lincoln Oklahoma, Stillwater Texas, Lubbock Texas, College Station
-4-
PLANTING PLANS AND DATA COLLECTION
Seed for all the lines was grown in Indiana and the hybrid checks
were obtained from commercial sources. Each variety was packeted in
nine lots of five grams each to facilitate planting three-row plots in
(eight entries inthree replications according to three height groups
each height group). Suggested row length was five meters with 75 cm
between rows. In most locations three meters from the center row ,xere
harvested. Computerized field books were sent in duplicate to each of
data werethe cooperators. Procedures for recording notes and reporting
sent to each cooperator. The cooperators ire to be complimented for the
way they closely followed the suggestions sent to insure a uniform set of
data. Data on the following observations were reported by cooperators:
Days to flower: days from planting until 50Z of the plants were in
half bloom.
Height: number of cm from ground to top of panicle of average center
row plant.
Disease: rating 1 = resistant to 9 = susceptible.
Insect: rating I = resistant to 9 = susceptible.
Lodging: rating I = 10% lodged to 9 = 90% or more lodged.
Bird damage: rating I = 10% damage to 9 = 90% or more damage.
No. Plants = number of panicles in sample harvested.
Yield: wet weight of panicles per plot and dry weight of panicles
or weight of dry threshed grain per plot.
-5-
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data selected from tropical and non-tropical locations are
summarized in Tables 2 through 12. Locations having omitted one or
more varieties were generally not included in these summaries. Mean
data for all varieties reported at each location are given in Table 2.
Table 2. Means for locations reporting data and identification of the
table containing individual performance data.
Location Table No. Fl lit Yielr. 7 P P Yield
(days) (cm) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) Argentina, Salto 13 78 158 2690 11.3 309 Argentina, Murphy 14 87 117 2264 Argentina, Manfredi 15 65 162 2170 Brazil, Fortaleza 16 54 161 3350 BraziLl, Recifc (high fertility) 17 48 149 2056
Brazil, Recife (low fertilicy) 18 51 137 1801 Brazil, Florestal 19 1860 11.7 205 Brazil, Lavras 20 80 125 2640 10.8 282 Brazil, Cachoira/Dourdas 21 219 4530 12.3 544 Brazil, Vainauba 22 54 125 4790 11.5 545 Brazil, Uberaba 23 162 9210 9.4 863 Colombia, Agroceres 24 62 158 2730 Ethiopia, Alemaya 25 78 126 Hawaii, Hlonolulu 26 62 214 3360 10.6 380 Indiana, Purdue Agronomy Farm 27 86 190 5800 11.1 637 Indiana, PAF (107,600 plants/ha) 28 86 184 5450 Indiana, PAF (215,200 plants/ha) 29 84 191 5720 Indiana, PAF (430,400 plants/ha) 30 83 193 5600 Indiana, Dubois (C kC) 31 76 179 6658 India, Coimbatore 32 59 154 4310 Israel, Bet Dagan 33 74 172 5560 Korea, Suwon 34 97 158 3090 10.1 312 Nebraska, Lincoln 35 81 164 4120 10.4 420
Nigeria, Zaria 36 59 162 3119 Oklahoma, Stillwater (A) 37 79 188 1690 11.0 185 Oklahoma, Stillwater (B) 38 79 190 1.360 Peru, Granja "'acna 39 69 79 3155 Peru, La Fontana 40 62 144 2170 Thailand, Bangkok (high fertility) 41 59 153 950 11.7 98 Thailand, Bangkok (low fertility) 42 64 118 Uganda, Serere 43 59 138 Uruguay, Colonia 4- 81 159 5673
Grain Yield
Grain yields varied greatly between locations with the mean yield
3). Maximum yieldat ten tropical locations being 3627 kg/ha (Table
at least cne tropical locationmeai~s which exceeded 9000 kg/ha in
were reported for ten lines and two commercial hybrids (Table 4 - yie.d
range means). The highest mean yields for all tropical locations were
obtained from the two commercial hybrids, K300 and P6, both of which
normally show partial resistance to bird damage an) are iLtermedi" e and
high in tannin content respectively. 'The highest average yield in the
tropical locations from a line was obtainad from 954063 (Entry 3, Table
4). NK300 (commercial hybrid) showed the greatest yield stability in the
tropical locations. Twelve different entries. ranked first in yield at
one or more of 27 locations reporting yield da (Table 5). The mean
grain yield rank from the five Indiana locations (Table 6) showed a
highly significant correlation (r .579**) with the mean grain yield
rank (Table 3) from ten tropical locations, indicating the success
achieved in selecting potentially consistent high yield varieties. The
greatest spread betweer the lowest reported yield mean of a variety at
one location and its highest reported mean of another location was found
for hybrios BR64 and NK300, and the taller lines (Table 7). The wide
spreads can b- interpreted to suggest an ability to respond to favorable
conditions when the ervironment exists for grain production. The smaller
spread would indicate more stability across environments, but not
necessarily a greater yield potential. In tropical locations the lowest
maximum yield in the trial was 6320 kg/ha (RS610 hybrid, Table 4), while
12 of the entries had yalds above 9000 kg/ha reported at one or more
locations.
-7-
Table 3. Summary of days ten tropical lo
to flower, cations.*
height and grain yield data from
Entry No.
Days to Flower Height Average Range Average
(cm) Range
Grain YLeld Avcrage
(kg/ha) Range Rank
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
68 65 64 61 60 65 61 66
55 57 45 49 53 45 54 57
--------
84 77 ?7 76 69 75 76 79
106 108 119 117 119 135 118 140
70 89 99 95 96 122 105 119
- 129 - 123 - 144 - 146 - 130 - 160 - 148 - 179
257' 2880 356, 301, 400C 3790 2910 323C
480 - 5910 900 - 5010 850 - 6050 1160 - 6780 800 - 6390
1550 - 7320 1030 - 6500 920 - 5710
23 18 4 15 2 3 17 9
9 66 57 - 82 137 116 - 161 319) 550 - 6470 10 10 62 47 - 85 .55 118 - 201 35(0 700 - 7630 4 11 60 45 - 86 148 104 - 192 31,1) 820 - 6850 13 12 62 47 93 145 130 - 203 31.3) 710 - 6950 11 13 73 60- 88 141 97 - 152 267) 480 - 4060 22 14 70 64 -82 154 125 - 195 3290 860 - 6060 8 15 70 60- 82 150 106 - 177 2630 220 - 5030 21 16 63 47 -86 163 147 - 180 4580 156 - 9190 1
17 65 45 - 93 173 124 - 287 1870 600 - 2780 24 18 72 66 - 88 179 128 - 229 2780 180 - 6390 19 19 69 51 - 103 196 165 - 294 3320 220 - 5790 7 20 72 59 - 107 190 176 - 286 2930 190 - 6490 16 21 69 49 - 100 193 182 - 298 3180 300 - 4520 11 22 70 53 - 100 196 145 - 302 2750 300 - 4450 20 23 69 54 - 100 196 158 - 300 3060 260 - 3890 14 24 66 55 - 77 210 158 - 260 3350 290 - 5890 6
Mean 66 154 3140
Includes locations: Thailand (high fertility), Brazil (Fortaleza), Hawaii, Argentina (Salto), Peru (Granja Tacna), Brazil (Lavras), Colombia, Argentina (Manfredi), Israel and India.
-8-
Table 4. Summary of means of days to flower, height and grain yield
from all twenty-two tropical locations.
Entry
No. Ident. Days Mean
to Flower Rango
1lcigjht Mean Range
Grain Yield
Mean Range Rank
(days) (cm) (kg/ha)
1 954114 70 55 - 104 121 70 - 148 2898 480 71.40 23
2 3
954253 954063
68 67
52 45
--
93 95
107 120
83 X80
-
-129
152 31.72
/295
4'90 850
- 7180 10991
22
3
4
5
6 7
932127
RS610
BR64 IS7822
62 64 66 62
49 46
45 51
----
76 86 87 7o
115 118 130 11.5
82 - 147 64 - 103
)0 - 170
62-- 10
3606 4243
4837 3502
1160 8)00
151)0 1070
- 92*70 - 02O - 13'387 - 9- " I
9 4 2
11
8 954062 68 55 - 91 136 71 - 179 3553 (3:)()-2 ". u 12
9 10
932296 IS8361
68 64
55
47 --
91
79 134
148 63
76 -
-
i34 257
3740 J6.1 9
35() 700
--
7900 70U
8 10
11 12 13
932075 956036 954130
61 64 76
45 47 58
---
81 78
122
1M0 140 134
96 93 79
-
-
-
191 196 212
3791 391.1 :1461
820 710 460
---
9320 10430 9630
7 6
14
14 954206 73 55 - 101 147 66 - 219 40'9 1130 - 7810 5
15 16
954164
NK300 73 64
59
47 --
118 80
150
1,,0
102 90
--
':,237 24.1 .
3363 5437
220
150 --
0890
12300 15
1
17 IS2319 67 45 - I1 173 77 -- 310 2219 818 -- 7670 24
18
19 20
954104
932062 IS9198
76
74 75
59
51 59
---
114 123 106
1.90 1.96 192
78
88 82
-
-
277 342 306
3206
3357 3()9
180
880 40
- 8-;450 - 10180 - 101I0
21 16 19
21 IS7579 71 49 - 118 194 70 - 335 3269 730 - 8680 20
22 IS9569 72 53 - 106 193 39 - 318 3357 680 - 12080 16
23 932027 73 54 - 120 193 65 - 330 3491 950 - 1.1120 13
24 !S4225 69 55 - 97 210 69 - 289 3304 290 - 8270 18
All entries 69 45 - 122 152 60 - 3J2 3627 220 - 13870
-9-
Table 5. Rank of entries by average grain yield from 27 locations (tropic!i and non-tropical) reporting grain yield and indication of entries selected by cocoerators.
Entry No. of times ranking No.of times Average grain Selected by No. Ident. 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1 - 4 yield rank Cooperators
1 954114 0 0 0 0 0 22 yes 2 954255 0 0 0 1 1 12 yes 3 954063 0 0 6 3 9 5 yes 4 932127 1 0 1 1 3 8 yes
5 RS610* 2 3 1 4 10 4 no 6 BR64* 4 2 6 4 16 2 yes 7 IS7822 0 1 2 0 3 9 yes 8 954062 0 1 2 2 5 6 yes
9 932296 0 1 1 0 2 11 yes
I' IS8361 1 1 0 0 2 14 yes 11 932075 0 0 0 0 0 18 no
12 956036 1 0 0 2 3 13 yes 13 954130 0 0 1 0 1 15 yes
14 954206 1 1 2 3 7 7 yes 15 954164 0 2 0 1 3 10 yes
16 NK300* 10 7 3 2 22 1 yes
17 IS2319 0 0 0 0 0 23 yes 18 954104 1 1 0 0 2 19 yes
19 932062 0 0 1 2 3 17 no 20 IS9198 2 1 0 0 3 24 yes 21 IS7579 1 2 0 1 4 16 no 22 IS9569 1 2 0 1 4 21 yes 23 932027 0 1 2 1 4 20 yes
24 IS4225 2 1 1 2 6 3 yes
Number ranking first one or more times: 12
* Commercial U.S. hybrids, all other entries are lines.
-10-
Table 6. Summary of days to flower, height and grain yield from five
Indiana locations.
Entry Days to flower _eiht _L)_ Grain idk I(/ha)
No. Mean Range Mean Ran Mean Range Rank
1 84 75 - 88 125 105 - 160 4510 2880 - 5560 21
2 86 74 - 89 125 100 - 145 583.) 4,A8 - 9 10
3 78 72 - 85 135 110 - 150 6740 5180 -830 3
4 75 69 - 82 145 130 -- 195 5770 4170- 760, 13
5 70 63 - 79 125 90 - 140 600 4680 - 8.00 5
85 72 - 89 145 130 - 155 6490 5530 - 8040 66 7 75 71 80 144 130 - 160 5820 3710 807: 12
8 82 70 - 87 172 1:35 - 200 6640 .5160 -- K 4
9 82 75 - 87 167 155 - 180 5380 2260 7360 17 10 77 72 - 84 181 1.40 - 210 ,4420 2440 - 6070 22
11 80 73 - 87 185 150 - 200 4230 3020 - 6030 24
12 82 75 - 89 179 160 - 190 .3720 4390 - 7240 14
13 84 76 - 89 164 15C - 190 5OOU 4020 1740 16
14 86 78 - 89 190 170 - 20 6200 2430 - 8180 7
15 85 77 - 87 180 145 - 210 5700 1450. - 8720 15
- 86 188 165 - 220 9270 6040 - 17760 116 76 69
17 87 7b - 93 242 210 - 260 4270 2410 - 6880 23
18 86 84 - 90 213 195 - 250 80 2530 - 7940 19
19 89 83 - 97 234 210 250 5830 3650 - 8440 10
20 101 94 113 241 220 - 270 4840 2450 - 7970 20
21 89 85 - 90 256 230 - 285 5200 3380 - 8250 18
22 89 84 97 238 220 - 270 5910 4130 -- 9540 8
23 89 81 97 235 210 - 270 5860 3570 - 8780 9
24 83 72 - 87 284 245 - 310 8310 4680 - 17310 2
Mean 83 187 3850
-11-
Table 7. Spread of ranges between minimum and maximum means reported by 22 tropical locations for days to flower, height, grain yield, percent protein and protein yield. (Calculated from the ranges reported in Table 4).
Entry Days to Percent Protein No. Ident. flower Height Yield Protein Yield
(Spread) (Spread) (cm)
(Spread) (kg/ha)
(Spread) (Spread) (kg/ha)
954114 49 78 6660 2.7 719 2 954255 41 46 6690 2.2 746 3 954063 50 72 10140 3.9 849 4 932127 26 65 8110 3.4 706 5 RS610* 40 99 5520 4.7 665 6 BR64* 42 110 12320 3.3 1321 7 IS7822 25 98 8800 1.8 855 8 954062 36 109 7020 3.5 867
9 932296 36 131 7350 2.9 681 10 IS8361 32 191 8330 5.9 552 11 932075 36 95 8500 2.6 766 12 956036 31 103 9720 1.6 921 13 954130 74 133 9150 3.8 801 14 954206 46 153 6740 3.1 592 15 954164 59 152 6670 5.3 694 16 NK300* 33 151 10740 3.6 1583
17 IS2319 73 233 6860 4.1 779 18 954104 55 199 8170 4.1 594 19 932062 72 254 9300 3.8 886 20 IS9198 47 224 10270 4.8 749 21 IS7579 69 265 7950 3.9 571 22 IS9569 53 229 11400 6.1 953 23 932027 66 265 10170 5.5 805 24 IS4225 42 220 7980 3.4 1873
Mean Spread 47 153 8523 3.7 855
* Commercial U.S. hybrids, all other entries are lines.
-12
ten The analysis of variance combining the grain yield
data of
locations indicated significanttropical locations and five Indiana
(.01 level) locaLion and variLty differences as well as location by
selections by cooperators and variety interactions ('T'able 8). The
yield rank (Table 5) demonstrated the differencest[,o :ariations in grainS
between locations and cooperator preferences.which existed
for 24 varieties replicatedTable 8. Grain yield analysis of variance tropical and five non-tropical locationsthree times at ten
reporting all data.
F ValueSource of Error Degrees of Freedom Mean Squares
14 254441736 415**Location (L)
474020 N.S.Replications (R) 2
26017599 42**Varieties (V) 23
28 842806 N.S.L x R 8**5027533322L x V
46 599495 N.S.R x V
644 613032Residual Total 1079
Grand Mean = 3790 kg/ha
C.V. = 20.6%
** Significant at the .01 level.
Days to Flower
The overall mean for 22 tropical locations was 69 days to flower
the five Indiana locations mean was 83 days (Table 6).(Table 4) while
A wide spread in range for days to flower is reported in Table 7. The
lines 932127 and IS7822 showed Lhe smallest range spreads of 20 and 25
indicating they were less influenced by lightdays, respectively, thus
time of floral initiation.and temperature on
-13-
The location and variety influence and location by variety inter
actions on days to flower are significant (Table 9).
Table 9. Days to flower analysis of variance for 24 varieties replicated three times at ten tropical and five non-tropical locations reporting all data.
Source of Error Degrees of Freedom Mean Squares F Value
Location (L) 14 5997 1999** Replication (R) 2 4 N.S. Varieties (V) 23 1528 306** L,x R 28 7 N.S. L x V 322 93 19 Rx V 46 5 N.S. Residual 644 5
Total 1079
** Significant at the .01 level
Height
The average height for tropical locations was 152 cm (Table 4)
compared to the five Indiana location average of 187 cm (Table 6). Heights
of specific varieties varied greatly among the taller selections (Table 7).
Line 954255 showed the greatest stability among the shorter selections,
932075 among the medium-tall selections and 954014 among the taller select
ions in most tropical locations (Table 7).
Protein Concentration
The mean for all tropical locations and all other locations was 11.0
percent protein in the grain analyzed. The line IS2319 maintained the
highest protein percent mean (12.7%) and had the lowest mean yield (2219
kg/ha) for all tropical locations (Table 3). Protein percentages varied
-14
greatly among locations with lines 956036 and IS7822 showing the smallest
difference in range of percent protein in tropical locations (Tabie 7),
but it will be noted that their mean purcent of protein was 10.3 with a
low of 9.4 and 9.5 percent and maximum of 11.6 and 11.3 percent respect
ively. In these trials all but entries 54114, 954255, 932075 and I52319
ranked first, second or third one or more times at one or more locations
reporting data.
Protein Yield
Protein yield reflects grain yield and the three varieties (NK300,
BR64 and IS4225) that ranked one to three in grain yield were also one
to three in protein yield and had Lhe gr(reatest range in yield ("L'able 10)
indicating their abi lity to favorably respond to high production when
environmental conditions lpermitLed. it will be noted Lhat many of these
varieties gave good pro toin yields.
The spread in percent proLein (Table 7) demonstrates the influence
of environment, yield of plots and maturity on protein synthesis in
grain sorghum. IS7822 and 956036 showed the greatest stability in
measured protein concentration as indicated by spread between lowest
and highest analysis of grain samples (Table 7) and they also ranked
10 and 9 respectively in protein yield (Table 10).
-15-
Table 10. Protein concentration and protein yield from analysis of seed returned by cooperators.
No. of Protein Yield Grain Entry locations % Protein (kg/ha) Yield
No. Ident. reporting Ave. Range Ave . Rag e Rank Rank
1 954114 ii 10.95 10.8 - 13.5 354 59 778 17 22 2 954255 Li 1.1.48 10.3 - 12.5 397 51 - 797 12 12 3 954063 11 10.74 8.7 - 12.6 480 107 - 956 4 5 4 932127 12 10.22 8.8 - 12.3 425 128 - 834 7 8 5 RS610* 12 10.30 8.5 - 13.2 479 106 771 5 4 6 BRo4* 12 9.94 8.1 - 11.4 566 177 - 1498 2 2 7 IS7822 12 10.21 9.5 - 11.3 404 112 - 967 10 9 8 954062 12 10.91 8.4 - 11.7 454 99 - 966 6 6
9 932296 11 10.39 8.8 - 11.7 357 62 - 743 16 1i 10 IS8361 10 11.63 9 1 - 15.0 370 82 634 14 14 11 932075 10 10.66 9.2 - 11.8 364 - 857 1891 15 12 956036 11 10.48 9.5 - 11.6 410 - 991 970 13 13 954130 11 11.67 9.0 - 13.8 404 66 - 867 10 15 14 954206 10 10.43 9.1 - 12.2 415 124 - 716 8 7 15 9541.64 11 11.79 8.3 - 13.6 378 29 - 723 13 10 16 NK300* 11 10.85 8.8 - 13.2 710 193 - 1770 1 1
17 IS2319 10 12.70 11.0 - 15.1 297 95 - 87,, 93 18 954104 10 11.03 8.5 - 12.6 345 124 - 718 19 19 19 932062 9 11.23 9.4 - 13.6 288 71 - 9'7 23 17 20 IS9198 8 10.50 7. I- 12.1 2 23 1.9 - 7 24 24 21 IS7579 8 10.48 8.5 - 12.4 346 167 - 738 1, 16 22 IS9509 11.,2 ,.7 - 14 32, 98, - 1051 1 23 932027 8 11.68 - 118 8.3 13.8 329 923 20 20 24 IS4225 9 11.28 9.5 - 12.9 507 31 - 1904 3 3
Average 10.97 7.1 - 15.1 401 19 - 1904
Correlation of protein yield with grain yield: r = .933.
* Commercial U.S. hybrids, all other entries are lines.
-16-
Disease, Insect, Bird Damage and Lodging
Three entries received mean disease ratings less than five indicating
they cre somewhat less susceptible to diseases while only five entries had
average insect ratings of five or greater indicating these five were very
susceptible to diseases in general (Table ii). All lines received some bird
damage as indicated by the reports of five locations and this is expec ted
as none are copletely bird resistant. All lines show relatively low
incidences of lodging with the degree of lodging being closely an..c.ated
with heights and dates of maturity as indica ted by flowering dates (Tables
4, 5 and 6). The disease nursery avaluations conducted in Arizona and
Texas (Table 12) indicate some potential resistances mav be available,
but no variety in the trial was free of all tested diseases. It is note
worthy that lines 954063, 954062, IS2319 and IS7579 rama:ined uninfected
when subjected to additional downy mildew tests by USDA in Frederick,
Maryland.
-17-
Table 11. General summary of lodging, disease, insect, bird damage and catechin equivalents for all reporting locations.
Entry No. Ident. Lodging
Average ratings (I) Disease Insect Bird Damage C.E. (2)
1 954114 0.5 5.0 5.0 1.0 0.23 2 954255 0.7 5.0 4.0 1.5 3.35 3 954063 0.5 5.0 4.0 1.4 0.23 4 932127 1.0 6.0 5.0 2.0 0.98 5 RS610* 0.7 5.5 3.7 1.2 0.48 6 BR64* 0.2 4.0 3.7 0.6 8.10 7 IS7822 1.0 5.6 4.2 2.6 1.79 8 954062 1.0 6.0 4.2 1.6 0.21
9 932296 2.5 5.3 4.0 1.4 0.62 10 IS8361 2.0 6.0 4.4 1.4 0.56 11 932075 2.3 6.0 4.3 2.2 0.44 12 956036 1.0 5.8 3.7 1.4 1.32 13 954130 0.5 5.7 3.1 1.2 0.18 14 954206 1.1 4.9 4.3 0.8 0.21 15 954164 1.4 6.1 3.4 0.8 0.29 16 NK300* 2.5 6.5 3.9 1.0 4.01
17 1S2319 3.8 6.1 4.4 2.0 0.58 18 954104 2.7 5.1 4.4 0.9 0.28 19 932062 3.3 5.2 5.1 1.4 3.22 20 IS9198 2.2 4.6 4.9 0.6 7.50 21 IS7579 3.9 5.0 4.4 1.2 0.27 22 IS9569 3.4 6.3 5.4 0.8 3.16 23 932027 3.5 5.4 5.1 0.8 2.85 24 iS4225 4.5 6.3 4.3 1.6 2.46
* Coimercial U.S. hybrids, all other entries are lines.
(1) Number of locations reporting ratings were 9,8,7,5, and 1 for lodging, disease, insect, bird damage and catechLn equivaLents, respectively. Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
(2) Catechin equivalents (C.E.) indicate tannin levels of the whole grain as determined by a methanol extract with the Vanillin-ICI procedure.
-18-
Disease rating summary conducted by disease nursery cooperatorsTable 12. in the United States.
New Milo Charcoal Downy Head
Bact _-5
erial
Gray 6
leaf 7-
Zonate 8
Vlaf
Identification disease rot mildew smut stripe spot Rut sot
Entry Source Rep (1.) (2) Rep (1) (2)
1 2 3* 4 5
95uit1.4 9)4255 954()63 9 32 L27 1S6]1(
2.51) 2.0 1.0 1.0 3.0D
1.00 .55
2.75 2.35 .84
0 0 0 5 4
(J 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 1.
0 0 0 0 4
2 i 1 1 1
2 3 2 3 2
3 4
4 4
3 4 2.5 4 4
6 7 8* 9
10 I 12 13 14 15
Bl{4 IS7822 954062 (32290 1S8361 932075 9.56036 934 13()
(54206 9541.64
3.0D 2.5D 1.0 3.0D .1.5 1.() 1.5D 1.0 1.0 1.0
.55 1.90 2.59 1.54 2.25 1.89 1.25 2.55 1.16 1.94
7 10
0 0
1 4 0 1 2
2 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
2.5 2.5 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2
3 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4+
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3.5
16 17* 18 )
Nm300 ]1S2319 95414 932062
1,0 1.0 1.5D 1 .0
2.30 1.11 .91
1.27
4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 3
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 3
20 21* 22
IS9198 .$7579 iS9569
i. 0 L..0 1.0
--1.15 1.24
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 1 1
2.5 2.5 --
3 4 --
2.5 3 -
23 24
932027 1S4225
1.0 1.0
1.3 2.77
0 10
0 1
0 0 0
1 1
2.5 2
4 4
3 4
uiost plants dead, i - entryYuma, Arizona by Robert- Voigt. 1972. - no disease , 5 =
segregatingt ofIIesistVIce andl suspectibility.
Robrt Voigt. 1972.Mlacroj)[l1011i II;] i. disease ,-val]uaL on at TuIcson, Arizona by
0 noi ilI[s tatiOi to 4 = sever,. infestation, - = too late in maturity to ovaluate.
3 Berclair ihead Smut Nursery near Beeville, Texas by R. A. Frederiksen. 1972. Represents
15-20 plants in each replication.number of pilats diseased out of an avevrage of
Same as 3.
5,6,7,8 A sama. location as '. 0se absent, 4 - severe disease with over 25Z
of leaf area destroyed.
Downy mildew.* Checked by USDA, Frederick, Maryland - i'.,intection - Cenidia (2 reps.)
-19-
Table 13. Argentina (Salto) Cooperator: F. Nider
Days Resistance Ratings (1) Grain Pro- Protein 298 to [It. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 76 103 0 2630 11.8 310
2 954255 74 103 0 3400 11.1 377
3 954063 74 123 0 4950 11.0 545
4 932127 71 122 0 3690 12.3 454
5 RS 610 63 107 0 3650 11.4 416
6 BR 64 75 127 0 5510 10.1 557
7 IS 7822 72 132 0 3850 9.5 366
8 954062 75 147 0 3930 11.5 452
9 932296 78 145 0 2680 11.4 306
10 IS 8361 73 163 0 2630 11.8 310
11 932075 73 158 0 2880 11.2 323
12 956036 76 160 0 3320 10.7 355
13 954130 80 138 0 2270 13.3 302
14 954206 82 157 0 2110 10.6 224
15 954164 82 145 0 2270 12.6 286
16 NK 300 77 173 0 6240 10.4 649
17 IS 2319 80 200 3 810 13.2 107
18 9b4104 85 177 0 1180 11.3 133
19 932062 82 203 4 1220 11.5 140
20 Is 9198 91 181 3 850 10.0 85
21 IS 7579 84 197 4 730
22 IS 9569 82 13 4 1220 11.6 142
23 932027 82 208 5 1340 11.2 150
24 IS 4225 75 218 7 1140 11.3 129
Mean 78 158 2690 11.3 309
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 12/72
C.V.% 2.6 7.9 23.8
LSD 5% 3.4 20.6 1053
-20-
Table 14. Argentina (Murphy) Cooperator: H. Pacagnini
(1) Days Resistance Ratings Grain Pro- Protein
298 to lit. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 86 115 2330
2 954255 85 113 2250
3 954063 82 115 3140
,4 932127 76 107 2210
5 RS 610 76 107 2370
6 BR 64 86 127 2950
7 IS 7822 76 107 2240
8 954062 83 128 2420
9 932296 91 153 2940
10 IS 8361
11 932075
12 956036 76 135 2420
13 954130
14 954206 93 146 4050
15 954164
16 NK 300 77 160 3370
17 IS 2319
18 954104 91 2160
19 932062 98 1440
20 IS 9198 106 1820
21 IS 7579
22 IS 9569 97 1800
23 932027 99 1570
24 IS 4225 88 1690
Mean 87 117 2264
Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 10/72
-21-
Table 15. Argentina (Manfredi) Cooperator: P. Parodi
(1) Days Resistance Ratings Grain Pro- Protein
298 to Ht. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield Entry ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 61 117 5 5 1 2040
2 954255 62 123 5 5 0 3070
3 954063 61 .23 3 3 0 294C
4 932127 59 123 5 5 0 2590
5 RS 610 55 115 4 4 3 2770
6 BR 64 65 143 3 3 0 3780
7 IS 7822 61 125 3 3 2 2170
8 954062 61 148 6 5 1 2650
9 932296 63 135 3 2 0 1470
10 IS 8361 60 150 5 4 0 2510
11 932075 63 150 5 4 0 3520
12 956036 65 148 3 3 0 3720
13 954130 67 150 3 3 0 3610
14 954206 64 152 5 5 0 3530
15 954164 61 113 5 5 4 4090
16 NK 300 60 160 5 4 0 4520
17 IS 2319 69 220 4 4 0 1600
18 9.54104 71 140 4 4 0 2180
19 9:32062 71 223 5 4 0 2230
20 IS 9198 74 210 6 4 0 2050
21 IS 7579 77 220 5 2 0 1380
22 IS 9569 73 243 7 7 0 1190
23 9:32027 75 220 6 7 0 2090
24 IS 4225 69 240 6 5 0 3280
Mean 65 162 2170
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 11/72
C.V.% 5.3 5.1 28.0
LSD 5% 5.7 13.5 1246
-22-
Table 16. Brazil (Fortaleza) Cooperator: M. Faris
Days Resistance RaLiags (l) Grain Pro- Protein
298 to Ht. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 95411.4 55 116 2550
2 954255 57 122 3990
3 954063 45 144 4400
4 932127 49 104 3330
5 RS 610 53 130 3960
6 BR 64 45 155 3300
7 IS 78 2 54 11 2860
8 954062 57 179 4010
9 932296 57 139 2410
10 IS 8361 47 146 3390
11 932075 45 141 4580
12 956036 47 130 2730
13 954130 74 152 1930
14 954236 66 180 2110
15 954164 68 165 2500
16 NK 300 47 178 4070
17 IS 2319 45 124 2670
18 954104 70 229 180
19 932062 51 200 4350
20 IS 9198 59 192 5140
21 IS 7579 49 192 4520
22 IS 9569 53 187 3770
23 932027 54 195 3880
24 IS 4225 55 248 3670
Mean 54 161 3350
(1) Rtings were 0 (free) 1% 9 (severe) ior all factors.
Date planted: 11/72
C.V.% 3.5 11.3 29.9
LSD 5% 3.1 36.6 2013
-23-
Table 17. Brazil (Recife - high fertility) Cooperator: M. Faris
Days Resistance Ratings (1) Grain Pro- Protein 298 to Ht. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 53 118 1343
2 954255 47 135 2137
3 954063 53 120 2087
4 932127 44 133 2247
5 RS 610 46 120 2710
6 BR 64 48 127 2403
7 IS 7822 41 110 2207
8 954062 50 133 1817
9 932296 49 120 2243
10 IS 8361 41 140 1880
11 932075 41 132 2090
12 956036 43 123 2170
13 954130 61 143 1467
14 954206 59 145 1547
15 954164 58 160 1840
16 NK 300 41 143 3343
17 IS 2319 41 152 1143
18 954104 61 227 273
19 932002 A6 187 2567
20 iS 9198 50 167 2527
21 IS 7579 46 177 2230
22 IS 9569 47 172 2750
23 932027 46 180 2750
24 IS 4225 46 210 1640
Mean 48 149 2056 (1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 4/73
C.V.% 1.57 12.1 18.9
LSD 5% 1.25 29.7 640.9
-24-
Table 18. Brazil (Recife - low fertility) Cooperttor: M. F:Lri.
Days ResisLance :kE.L' I Giain iro- P-utuir
298 Entry Idnr.
to flower
lIt. cii
Di.,-Uase
In seeE Bird
L.udg-i.n4
yield kk-i
tein i !
yield K/ha
1 954114 59 117 1.273
2 954255 51 113 2t,33
3 9540o3 55 ±10 1757
4 932127 46 140 1bb8
5 RS 6.10 46 122 553
6 BR 64 51 143 24411
7 IS 7822 45 105 1623
8 954062 52 140 2017
9 932296 51 115 1.950
10 IS 83b1 44 137 1952
11 932075 41 130 1787
12 956036 44 118 1b 43
13 954130 64 155 1443
14 954206 61) 150 19 0
15 9541b4 60 153 1697
16 NK 300 42 136 3350
17 iS 2319 42 125 b73
18 954104 65 178 $10
19 93202 50 142 1d17
20 IS 9198 53 147 1643
21 IS 7579 47 155 1793
22 IS 9569 49 148 197/
23 932027 49 140 1857
24 IS 4225 52 160 11T0
Mean 51 127 l.b01
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for z.ll factors.
Date planted: 4/73
,o 3.32 12.7
LSD 5% 2.77 2S.6 717
-25-
Table 19. Brazil (Florestal) Cooperator: R. Schaffert
Days Resistance Ratings (1) Grain Pro- Protein
298 to Ht. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha Z kg/ha
1 954114 970 10.8 105
2 954255 1830 11.8 210
3 954063 1010 11.9 120
4 932127 2780 8.9 247
5 RS 610 3460 9.8 339
6 BR 64 3810 10.3 392
7 IS 7822 3130 10.2 380
8 954062 2040 10.8 220
9 932296 1690 10.1 171
10 IS 8361 2370 1.2.0 284
11 932075 2650 11.1 294
12 956036 4960 10.4 488
13 954130 880 13.3 117
14 954206 1220 12.2 149
15 954164 1220 13.6 166
16 NK 300 3460 10.2 353
17 IS 2319 1090 14.0 153
18 954104 1020 12.2 124
19 932062 540 13.2 71
20 is 9198 540 11.9 64
21 IS 7579 1350 12.4 167
22 IS 9569 680 14.4 98
23 932027 950 12.4 118
24 IS 4225 740 12.3 91
Mean 1860 11.7 205
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted:
C.V.% -39.9
LSD 5% 1225
-26-
Table 20. Brazil (Lavras) Cooperator: R. Schafierr.
Days Resistance Ratim's(I ) (Grain Pro- 1'rcJe in 298 L u lL. Dis- Ini- Lodg-- yield LAiii yieLd Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing k2/ kigX!ha
1 954114 84 70 1130 12.1 37
2 954255 77 89 309U 11..4 352
3 954063 77 99 33j0 10.11 34
4 932127 68 95 2360 9.2 217
5 RIS 610 oL 96 11200 9.7 413
6 BR 64 73 122 413) 1.0.3 425
7 IS 7822 68 105 1.070 10.5 112
8 954062 79 119 2790 -1.1 330
9 93229b 82 116 3b60 11.7 45'
10 IS 836] 73 118 5020 lu.8 5 2
11 932075 b8 104 10V0 -(.4 11i
12 956036 68 130 21 LU 10.1 ".3
13 954130 88 97 1700 12.1 206
14 954206 82 125 4460 11.3 504
15 9541,64 82 106 3180 11.2 .556
16 NK 300 80 147 4490 iU.4 467
17 IS 2319 82 148 2090 1' .4 238
18 954104 88 128 1990 11. 4 227
19 932002 88 165 1890 1U.6 200
20 IS 9198 95 176 1540 9.,/ 149
21. IS 7579 88 182 3790 9.4 356
22 IS 9569 95 145 1490 11.] 165
23 932027 88 158 2020 11.4 230
24 IS 4225 70 158 290 10.8 31
Mean ___.80 125 2ZU40 10.8 282 (i)Ratings were 0 (free) Lo 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted:
C.".' 3.3 8.4 45.4
LSD 5% 4.48 17.9 2685
-27-
Table 21. Brazil (Cachoira/Douradas) Cooperator: R. Schaffert
Days Resistance Ratings ( I ) Grain Pro- Pro.ein 298 to Ht. Dis- In- Lodg- yilid tein yield Entry ident, flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha X k/,
1 954114 123 4670 13.5 630
2 954255 128 3810 12.4 472
3 954063 152 6950 10.6 737
4 932127 142 5330 11.9 634
5 RS 610 163 6320 12.2 771
6 BR 64 168 7420 9.5 705
7 IS 7822 153 6000 10.7 642
8 954062 162 6800 14.2 966
9 932296 157 5450
10 IS 8361 257 3060 15.0 459
11 932075 167 4850 11.5 558
12 956036 173 5820 11.1 646
1.3 954130 210 5520 12.1 698
14 954206 173 5090 10.5 534
15 954164 220 4820 12.9 622
16 NK 300 230 7100 13.2 937
17 IS 2319 310 1.850 15.1 279
18 954104 277 2820 12.6 355
19 932062 342 2120 9.9 210
20 is 9198 306 2030 11.6 235
21 IS 7579 335 2650 11.0 290
22 IS 9569 318 2630 14.8 389
23 932027 330 2550 13.8 352
24 IS 4225 265 2970 12.9 383
Mean 219 4530 12.3 544 (1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted:
C.V.% 7.3 13.6
LSD 5'. 26.1 1012
-28-
Table 22. Brazil (Vanauba) Cooperator: R. Schaffert
298 Days to Ht.
Resistance Ratings(1 )
Dis- In- Lodg-Grain yield
Pro-tein
Protein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 56 80 3610 12.2 440
2 954255 53 83 3610 12.5 451
3 954063 55 80 4320 11.7 505
4 932127 53 97 6190 10.7 662
5 RS 610 46 98 5780 9.8 566
6 BR 64 53 123 6190 11.1 687
7 IS 7822 53 97 4320 11.3 488
8 954062 55 120 3030 11.4 345
9 932296 55 122 5340 11.5 614
10 IS 8361 56 133 4760 11.9 566
11 932075 55 133 4010 11.8 473
12 956036 56 137 5880 10.1 594
13 954130 58 133 4930 12.3 606
14 954206 55 113 6360 10.6 674
15 954164 59 132 5880 12.3 723
16 NK 300 55 145 6870 11.7 804
17 IS 2319 55 180 2510 12.5 314
18 954104 59 137 4860 11.4 554
19 932062
20 IS 9198
21 IS 7579
22 IS 9569
23 932027
24 IS 4225 53 230 2500 11.2 280
Mean 54 125 4790 11.5 545
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted:
-29-
Table 23. Brazil (Uberaba) Cooperator: R. Schaffert
Days Resistance Ratings(I ) Grain Pro- Protein 298 to Ht. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 106 7140 10.9 778
2 954255 97 7180 11.1 797
3 954063 123 10990 8.7 956
4 932127 116 9270 9.0 834
5 RS 610 113 6310 9.5 599
6 BR 64 117 13870 10.8 1498
7 IS 7822 119 9870 9.8 967
8 954062 143 7940 9.4 746
9 932296 129 7900 9.4 743
10 IS 8361 148 6970 9.1 634
11 932075 149 9320 9.2 857
12 956036 137 10430 9.5 991
13 954130 131 9630 9.0 867
14 954206 128 7870 9.1 716
15 954164 150 6890 8.3 572
16 NK 300 156 12300 11.0 1353
17 IS 2319 216 7670 11.4 874
18 954104 193 8450 8.5 718
19 932062 234 10180 9.4 957
20 Is 9198 231 10810 7.1 768
21 IS 7579 242 8680 8.5 738
22 IS 9569 226 12080 8.7 1051
23 932027 234 11120 8.3 923
24 IS 4225 248 8270 9.5 786
Mean 162 9210 9.4 863
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted:
C.V. 8.6 30.3
LSD 5% 22.9 4586
-30-
Table 24. Colombia (Tolima) Cooperator: Agroceres
Days Resistance Ratings ( 1 ) Grain Pro- Protein 298 to lit. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha / kg/a
1 9541.14 67 107 5 3 4 1 2200
2 954255 63 92 8 2 6 1 900
3 954063 bb 99 6 2 6 1 1640
4 932127 58 120 7 3 6 1 1690
5 RS 610 59 133 4 2 4 1 2900
6 BR 64 65 133 6 3 3 1 2600
7 IS 7822 56 121 8 3 6 1 1590
8 954062 62 138 7 2 5 1 1290
9 932296 61 152 6 3 6 2 1860
10 IS 8361 56 165 6 4 4 2 3060
11 932075 57 161 6 4 6 4 2960
12 956036 60 152 6 3 4 2 2170
13 954130 69 147 5 3 4 2 2440
14 954206 68 152 5 3 4 2 2270
15 954164 69 177 6 3 4 2 2840
16 NK 300 57 153 7 4 5 2 2860
17 IS 2319 56 178 2 4 4 2 2780
18 954104 66 220 2 3 4 8 6390
19 932062 66 211 3 3 4 3 4230
20 IS 9198 62 191 3 4 3 3 2540
21 IS 7579 56 193 4 3 5 7 4470
22 IS 9569 66 197 5 4 4 8 2930
23 932027 66 192 4 3 4 6 2720
24 IS 4225 59 213 5 2 6 9 4180
Mean 62 158 2730
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 3/72
C.V.% 3.5 6.6 29.6
LSD 5% 3.6 17.3 1330
-31-
Table 25. Ethiopia (Alenmaya) Cooperator: B. Gebrikidan
298 Entry Ident.
Days to
flower lit. cm
Resistance Dis- In-ease sect
Ratings ( l ) (;rain lodg- yield
Bird ingkg9Jh
Pro-tein Z
Protein yield kg/ha
1 9541.1.4 82 ]il
2 954255 84 97
3 954063 82 108
4 932127 71 1.06
5 RS 610 81 125
6 BR 64 67 112
7 IS 7822 70 116
8 954062 81. 126
9 932296 78 117
10 IS 8361 71 120
11 932075 73 114
12 956036 72 1.30
13 954130 95 106
14 954206 87 1.24
15 9541.6/t 94 119
16 NK 300 7i 147
.17 IS 2:319 68 97
18 954104 97 134
19 932062 75 143
20 is 91.98 81 143
21 IS 7579 68 141
22 IS 9569 73 147
23 932027 71 149
24 IS 4225 83 192
Mean 78 126
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 5/72
C.V. 3.9 23.8
Lbd 5% 5.0 13.4
-32-
Table 26. llawaii (Honolulu) Cooperator: P. Rotar
(1.) Days lResis canoe Ratings Grain Pro- Protein
298 Lk) lit. Dis- 11- Lodg- yi e ld ti n yield Entry Id ct. flower cm ease sect Bird in, kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 62 131 2 2 2530 11 .8 299
2 954255 60 121 3 1 2340 12. 1 283
3 954063 64 144 2 1 4630 10.9 505
4 9321.27 55 147 3 1 2870 10.1 290
5 RS 610 52 162 4 1 5610 9.8 550
6 BR 64 55 170 3 1 4870 9.2 448
7 IS 7822 56 160 3 2 3380 9.8 331
8 954062 64 157 2 4 3830 10.9 417
9 932290 57 194 4 5 281.0 10.5 295
10 IS 8361 62 231 3 5 2960
11 932075 5j 191 3 6 3080
12 956036 59 1-96 1 2 2960
13 9541.30 70 212 4 1 3400
14 954206 67 219 1 2 3100
15 954164 70 257 2 2 2430
16 N4K 300 03 241 3 7 5490
17 IS '319 50 263 4 8 2630
18 9541.04 70 265 3 6 2290
19 932062 64 275 3 8 3250
20 IS 9198 6/ 207 3 8 3270
21 IS 7579 65 270 4 9 4680
22 IS 9569 65 288 3 8 2940
23 932027 06 295 3 9 2750
24 IS 4225 5' 283 4 7 2820
Mean 02 , 1.4 3360 10.6 380
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 8/72
C'.V. % 2.6 9.2 24.4
LS1 5' 2.6 32.4 1347
-33-
Table 27. Indiana (Purd.e Agronomy Farm - Cooperator: D. Oswalt high fertility)
298 Entry Ident.
Days to
flower lit. cm
Resistance I)is- in-ease sect
Ratings Lodg-
Bird ing
Grain yield k g/ha
Pro-tein
;L"
Protein yield
/t.1 1 9541.14 84 113 3920 13.1. 513 2 954255 87 115 5040 12.2 615 3 954063 81 147 6250 11.6 725 4 932127 80 15]. 5790 10.4 602 5 RS 610 78 140 6650 10.8 718 6 BR 64 85 147 6600 9.0 594 7 IS 7822 80 155 5420 10.5 569 3 954062 82 173 6960 11.7 814 9 932296 84 167 3450 10.6 366
10 IS 8361 81 188 4540 12.3 558 11 932075 81 187 3750 10.8 405 12 956036 84 177 5330 10.4 554 13 954130 87 168 5240 11.6 608 14 954206 86 190 3450 10.2 352 15 954164 85 182 2960 .2.4 367 16 NK 300 82 207 17760 10.6 1776 17 IS 2319 91 237 3310 13.7 453 18 954104 86 205 421.0 11. 1 467 19 932062 92 230 4800 10.3 494 20 IS 9198 104 255 3960 9.6 380 21 IS 7579 89 257 4310 10.3 444 22 IS 9569 92 232 5060 10.9 552 23 932027 93 240 1030 11.3 455 24 IS 4225 813 287 1.7310 11.0 1904
Mean 86 190 5800 11.1 637 (1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 5/73
C.V.7 2.9 4.7 16.9 LSD 5/ 4.1. 14.5 1611
-34-
Table 28. Indiana (Purdue Agronomy Farm- Cooperator: D. Oswalt 107,600 plants/ha)
(1) Days Resistance Ratings Grain Pro- Protein
298 to lit. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 86 130 4600
2 954255 89 110 5560
3 954063 84 130 5820
4 932127 77 140 4940
5 RS 610 70 120 6180
6 BR 64 88 140 651.0
7 IS 7822 77 140 5190
8 954062 87 160 5750
9 932296 87 170 4640
10 IS 8361 73 190 3630
11 932075 86 190 4960
12 956036 87 180 5960
13 954130 87 150 5140
14 954206 88 1.80 6290
15 954164 86 170 5270
16 NK 300 81 180 7130
17 IS 2319 91 240 4270
18 954104 85 230 5090
19 932062 91 240 6220
20 IS 9198 104 230 3350
21 IS 7579 90 260 5110
22 IS 9569 90 230 6220
23 932027 89 230 7000
24 IS 4225 87 290 5990
Mean 86 184 5450
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Dare planted: 5/73
C.V.% 2.5 7.6 17.5
LSD 5% 3.5 22.6 1560
-35-
Table 29. Indiana (Purdue Agronomy Farm- Cooperator: D. Oswalt 21.5,200 p].anzs/ha)
1)ays Resistance RatinLgi s Grain Pro- Pro te in 298 to lit. )[s- In- Lodg- y ie td rei n y i eld Entry Ident. flower cm ease sec t Bird ing kg/ha j aI/ta
i 95411, 87 130 4800
2 954255 89 130 6020
3 954063 77 140 7400
4 932127 76 140 6290
5 RS 610 69 130 7030
6 BR 64 88 140 6500
7 IS 7822 73 150 5150
8 954062 85 1%0 646L,0
9 932296 82 170 5530
10 IS 8361 77 200 5130
11 932075 82 190 3790
12 956036 85 180 5650
13 954130 87 170 5140
14 954206 88 190 b270
15 9541.(, 86 190 6250
1.6 NK 300 73 200 6820
17 IS 2319 90 250 4790
1.8 954104 87 210 5150
19 932062 90 230 6380
20 IS 9198 104 240 5570
21 IS 7579 89 240 5160
22 IS 0569 89 240 5410
23 932027 88 220 5670
24 IS 4225 87 300 4950
Mean 84 191 5720
Ratings were , ( FreB) to 9 (severe) for all fictors.
Date planted: 5/73
C.V 11.7 5..5 1l .4 LSD 5% 3.4 11.2 1357
-36-
Table 30. Indiana (Purdue Agronomy Farm- Cooperator: D. Oswalt
430,400 plants/ha)
298 Entry l~ento
Days to
flower
lit. cm
Resistance Ratings (1)
Dis- In- Lodg-
ease sect Bird ing
Grain yield kg/ha
Pro-tein %
Protein yield kg/ha
I 954i14 86 130 3960
2 954255 89 140 6380
3 954063 76 140 6960
4 932127 71 160 5790
5 RS 610 69 130 7760
6 BR 64 88 150 6080
7 IS 7822 71 150 5570
8 954062 82 190 6870
9 932296 79 180 6900
10 IS 8361 75 170 4190
11 932075 77 190 4250
12 956036 81 180 5130
13 954130 85 170 5600
14 954206 85 210 7240
15 954J64 86 200 7010
16 NK 300 70 190 7860
17 IS 2319 89 250 2840
18 954104 87 220 4110
19 932062 83 230 4700
20 IS 9198 97 250 4560
21 IS 7579 88 260 4920
22 IS 9569 88 240 4310
23 932027 88 230 5710
24 IS 4225 87 290 5840
Mean 83 193 5600
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 5/73
C.V.% 2.3 6.7 15.7
LSD 5% 3.2 21.3 1445
-37-
Table 31. Indiana (Dubois) Cooperator: D. Oswalt (SIPAC)
(1) Days Resistance Ratins 0. (ra in Pro- Protein
298 Entry Ident.
to flower
Ht. cm
D3is-ease
in-sect Bird
Lod;-in%_
yieldk:i/ha
Lein Z
yieldkg/ha
1 9541.14 76 117 5250
2 954255 75 130 6130
3 954063 73 118 7270
4 932127 71 132 6040
5 RS 610 63 110 5400
6 BR 64 73 148 6760
7 IS 7822 72 135 7800
8 954062 72 147 7180
9 932296 76 155 6370
10 IS 8361 73 160 4590
11 932075 75 163 4420
12 956036 76 180 651.0
13 954130 77 157 6870
14 954206 81 178 7730
15 954164 79 155 6990
16 NK 300 74 168 7760
1.7 IS 2319 80 223 6800
18 954104 82 212 6670
19 932062 87 243 7030
20 IS 9198 94 240 6780
21 IS 7579 87 258 6550
22 IS 9569 87 25n 8530
23 932027 85 253 6910
24 IS 4225 72 252 7460
Mean 76 1.79 6658
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all factors.
Date planted: 5/73
C.V.Z 3.1 6.2 14.2
LSD 5%Z 4.9 22.9 1950
-38-
Table 32. India (Coimbatore) Cooperator: S. Suresh
(1)
1jays Resistlance Ra t i,'js Gr; ill Pro- Protein
298 t lit. Di)s- In- L d - vi u 1cl ei yi eld
Entry Ideit . fl oweL!r cm ease sect Bird :ing kg/ i 2 ___ n!ha
1 9541.14 63 113 4320
2 954255 54 119 5 140
3 954063 57 120 3320
4 932127 54 105 2990
5 RS 610 55 128 6870
6 BR 64 64 134 3260
7 IS 7822 53 105 3670
8 954062 60 149 5770
9 93229 (; 58 136 4870
10 IS 8301 52 171 4910
11 932075 53 151 3400
12 956036 53 134 4150
13 954130 68 153 3870
14 954206 63 1.50 3470
15 954164 65 157 3110
16 NK 300 51 15i 391.0
17 IS 2319 56 168 2470
18 954104 59 201 4960
19 932062 61. 189 5600
20 IS 91-98 67 183 1660
21 IS 7579 60 191 4620
22 IS 9569 61 184 5520
23 932027 61 190 6030
24 S 4225 02 213 5520
lean 59 154 4310
Ratins were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date plantcd : 2/73
C.V.Z .2 7.4 18.8
LSD 5,. 1.2 13.7 1329
-39-
Table 33. Israel (Bet Dagan) Cooperator: A. Blum
Days Resistance R;i L ,ings () ,ri in Pro- Prote in 298 to ilL. Dis- In- Lo11- viu] d Loin yield Entry Ident. flower cim ease sectL iBrd inha7 /ha
1 954114 73 1.29 D9 10
2 954255 74 114 4090
3 954063 70 134 6050
4 932127 67 146 6780
5 RS 610 67 130 6390
6 BR 64 75 160 7320
7 IS 7822 70 148 6500
8 954062 71. 126 5160
9 932296 72 161 6470
10 IS 8361 68 176 7630
11 932075 68 161 6850
12 956036 71 1.54 6950
13 954130 81 1.44 3920
14 954206 77 195 6060
15 954164 80 1.43 3400
16 NK 300 69 157 9190
17 IS 23L9 79 201. 1490
18 954104 80 190 2450
19 932062 73 209 5790
20 IS 9198 81 212 6490
21 IS 7579 79 220 4330
22 IS 9569 74 231 4460
23 932027 74 242 3890
24 IS 4225 74 254 5890
Mean 7/ 172 5560 Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 4/72
C..V. 1 , 5.3 1 1.5
LSD 5/ 1 .]. 1.5. 2 1053
-40-
Cooperator: K. ParkTable 34. Korea (Suwon)
298
Days to Ht.
(1) Resiscance Ratings
Dis- In- L-dg-Grain yiuld
Pro-Lein
Protein yield
Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
I 954114 104 106 4 2 0 0 2340
2 954255 93 105 4 3 1 0 4090
3 954063 95 122 4 5 1 0 4520
4 932127 72 121 5 4 4 0 3320 10.5 349
5 RS 610 86 121 2 2 0 0 5810 8.5 494
6 BR 64 87 141 1 4 0 0 6600 8.1 535
7 IS 7822 70 116 7 5 7 2 1630 9.8 160
8 954062 91 157 5 4 0 1 2620 10.7 280
9 932296 88 143 2 4 0 0 4400 8.8 387
10 IS 8361 79 140 4 3 1 1 2020
11 932075 81 123 5 5 5 3 2260
12 956036 78 132 6 3 3 1 2370 10.2 242
13 954130 122 165 3 1 1 2 3830 10.2 391
14 954206 101 162 4 2 0 4 4120 9.1 375
15 954164 118 178 5 1 0 0 2160 11.0 238
16 NK 300 78 168 5 2 0 1 5890 9.6 565
17 !S 2319 118 202 5 6 0 5 860 11.0 95
18 954104 114 198 4 1 0 2 2720 10.3 280
19 932062 123 200 6 5 0 3 1420 11.4 162
20 iS 9198 4 2 0 5
21 IS 7579 118 210 4 2 C, 3 2720 11.4 310
22 IS 9569 106 173 6 5 0 4 1440 10.7 122
23 932027 120 192 5 5 0 4 1210
24 IS 4225 97 259 7 4 2 4 3170
Mean 97 158 3090 10.1 312
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 5/72
C.V.% 8.2 6.1 18.0
LSD 5% 13.2 16.0 915
-41-
Table 35. Nebraska (Lincoln) Cooperator: W. Ross
1) Days Resistance Ratings Grain Pro- Proteiin
298 to lit. )i s- In- Lodg- yield t, in ,i U d Entry ident. flower cm ease s c t Bird ing k__'/ ha
1 954114 7/1 105 0 4960 10.8 53C
2 954255 73 103 0 5010 10.5 526
3 954063 73 11.8 0 5230 9.8 513
4 932127 73 122 1 5760 9.6 553
5 RS 610 67 117 0 5320 9.6 511
6 BR 64 75 132 0 5160 9.5 490
7 IS 7822 73 128 0 5640 9.6 541
8 954062 73 138 1 5710 11.2 640
9 932296 77 138 9 511.0 9.1 465
10 IS 836]. 77 153 3 4710 11.0 518
11 932075 73 143 3 4090 9.5 386
12 956036 93 203 0 1690 11.6 196
13 954130 79 1.33 0 4060 10.6 430
14 954206 78 1.57 1. 5160 9.7 501
15 9541.64 81 137 5 5030 10.3 518
16 NK 300 77 157 1 5510 8.8 485
17 IS 231.9 92 217 9 2670 11.8 315
18 954104 7. 183 8 6200 10.2 428
19 932062 91 207. 2 1780 i.2 199
20 iS 91.98 107 233 0 160 12.1 .19
21 iS 7579 92 220 8 2950 9.4 277
22 IS 9569 92 218 3 .630 12.0 196
23 932027 91 210 3 1800 11.6 209
24 is 4225 77 260 9 5640 11.1 626
Mean 81 i6/ /1: 20 10.4 420
( ,)Rating; wcro 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for nil factors.
Date plnnted: 6/72
C.V. 0.8 4.6 10.5
LS) 57 1.0 12.z ' 710
Table
298 Entry
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1.5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Mean
(1)
Date
36. Nigeria (Zaria)
Days to lit.
ident. I Low r cm
954114 56 110
954255 52 20
150
932127 51
954063 58
100
RS 610 54 110
BR 64 55 120
IS 7822 51 110
954062 58 140
932296 56 140
IS 8361 59 140
932075 53 135
956036 54 135
954130 65 150
954206 64 165
954164 63 170
NK 300 58 170
IS 2319 56 170
954104
932062 68 220
IS 9198 73 225
IS 7579 65 240
IS 9569 63 220
932027 67 225
IS 4225 54 250
59 162
Ratings were 0 (free) to
planted: 6/72.
-42-
Resistance Dis- In-ease sect
6 0
6 4
4 4
6 6
4 8
4 6
6 4
4 4
6 8
4 4
4 2
6 6
2 6
4 4
4 4
4 4
6 6
2 4
2 4
6 8
6 4
4 4
8 8
9 (severe)
Cooperator: M. EI-Rouby
Ratings Graiin Pro- Protein
Lod- vyeld tein yield
Bird in,,. g/ha "'_1l/ha
2850
2490
5160
3220
2370
4310
2060
2970
2430
3280
2370
2910
2970
5160
5400
6740
1940
1580
2000
970
3520
4010
1030
3119
for all ratings.
--43-
Table 37. Oklahoma (high Certjit,,,L) Cooperator: D. Weible
(1)v Ii
298 to lit. 1i- .- ,mi,- v dleiItin yield Entry i'dent I ow( r cm 1:: L rl mn". "'k /ha
1 954;14 75 1P919 3 "2 8-1
2 95A,2235 118
Ony. tn r R.It in- Z .... ( -. in; Pro- Protein
. 0 2090 10.9 227
3 £5 P6 3 67 11.7 0 200 9.2 230
932127 72 V, 0 1,,6 8.8 128] /
5 RS 610 5;9 1.07 0 0 2P.OC 9.3 264
6 BP. 64 62 125 0 0 2,00 10.0 280
7 iS 792 2 75 34 6 2 0 1170 9.6 180 8 954062 7I 150 5 0 1340 10.2 137
9 932296 7A 132 3 0 1720 9.9 1.70
10 1 8361 5 01 2 1. 1340 1.0.7 143
.i2 0 86 19' 1 0 ,1420" 10.0 142275
12 933, 25 125 3 0 1420 11. It 162 13 15A130. 1i50 1 1 1530 10.11 1.55
1. 954206 77 1.7 4 C) 127G
164 1 0 0 12.1 276
16 NK 300 86 1 0 1 0 2090 11.1 232
......92 2S7 3 2 .090 12.9 141
.18 95.104 ] 1 7 0 1460 11.3 165
9 9320....21.. 1 .200 13.6 163
20 J. 9198 103 -286 % O 670 12.0 80
4..1 '579 9> 288 0 .160 1..0 182
1 . ,2/ 12.2 181
23.-, 932-)27" 30 ]. 0 1430 3.. 1920 ,,,
T4 A ;i . ]. 2970 1.. 336Is M e In 7(. it",X 691) L 0.{ 185
Ratings wnr o (frC! ) to 9 (slrere) for all1ains.
Datc plantod: 6/72. r ' '5 . .
C.v. Y.. 25.6 641
I., 1 . .... 6 .7 2 . , 9
-44-
Table 3F. Oklahoma (low fertility) Cooperator: D. Weible
298 Entry Ident.
Days to
flower lit. cm
Resistance Ratings ( 1 )
Dis- In- Lodg-
ease sect Bird ing
Gr~iin yield kg/ha
Pro-tein
Z
Protein yield kg/ha
1 954114 71 123 6 1 600
2 954225 64 119 0 0 1790
3 954063 65 121 0 0 2280
4 932127 76 145 1 0 1870
5 RS 610 59 109 0 3 1900
6 BR 64 60 129 0 0 3060
7 IS 7822 76 145 0 0 2020
8 954062 68 149 1 3 970
9 932296 62 129 0 1 2460
10 IS 8361 82 180 1 1 1230
11 932075 81 192 1 0 2090
12 95603b 81 192 4 0 1750
13 954130 72 152 3 0 1050
14 954206 74 148 6 0 860
15 954164 78 164 0 0 1790
16 NK 300 83 174 1 0 2390
17 IS 2319 93 285 2 3 600
18 954104 75 194 7 0 450
19 932062 103 294 5 0 220
20 IS 9198 104 280 9 0 190
21 IS 7579 100 298 5 0 300
22 IS 9569 100 302 7 0 300
23 932027 100 300 6 0 260
24 IS 4225 59 228 0 0 2280
Mean 79 190 1360
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 6/72.
C.V.% 1.8 9.7 21.7
LSD 5% 2.4 30.3 487
-45-
Table 39. Peru (Granja Tacna) Cooperator: R. Zambrano
Days Resistance Ra tings Gr'a in Pro- Pro L2i 298 to Hft. Dis- In- Lod - yield tuin vfid Entry Ident. f lo.er cin ease sect Bird ijkg_ /_/ a
1 954114 7 'l1 0 1890
2 954255 71 85 2 2260
3 954063 66 90 2 3460
4 932127 66 82 5 2590
5 RS 610 73 64 1 2810
6 BR 64 70 60 0 1580
7 IS 7822 62 62 1 2980
8 954062 69 7]. 1 1920
9 932296 74 63 2 4930
10 IS 8361 69 76 3 2820
11 932075 71 112 0 2230
12 956036 66 93 1 3000
13 9541-30 73 79 0 3070
14 954206 66 66 0 4690
15 954164 62 102 2 2740
16 NK 300 69 90 1 3460
17 IS 2319 73 77 1 1090
18 954104 69 78 2 5290
19 932062 74 88 2 3790
20 IS 9198 66 82 3 4390
21 IS 7579 73 70 2 1610
22 IS 9569 66 89 0 2390
23 932027 62 65 0 4500
24 IS 4225 73 69 1 6240
Mean 69 79 3155
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 10/72.
-46-
Table 40. Per," (LaFontana) Cooperator: R. Zambrano
Days Resistance _Lins (1 Gra in Pro- P rotein
298 to t. Dis-- In- Lodg- yield Lein yield
try [deoL. -.Fv.lwc cm ease sect Bird ing__ k/ha k/ha
1. 954114 G1L I 3 0 96h
2 954250 59 95 _5 0 490
3 954063 02 125 3 0 3490
4 932127 58 l10 3 0 780
5 RS 610 6i 117 4 0 1690
6 BR 64 (4 1.30 4 0 2440
7 IS 7822 5.3 105 5 1 2370
S 54U62 61 151 3 0 2470
9 93229o 60 W9 3 0 1540
10 -' 6 l : 136 2 0 1160
1.1 9.207 .A iH 2 1 1430
12 9.56036 02 123 4 1 1840
113 954130 71 45 5 0 4170
I14 954206 61 i15 2 0 2810
15 95416 7. 151 5 0 2770
16 Al 300 54 17 3 0 4300
17 IS 2301.9 LEO 3 0 760
18 954104 At5 i 6o6 1 500
19 9320W. 6 171. 4 0 3090
20 is 91.98 70 216 4 0 4440
2L [S 7579 63 W3 1. 1 300
22 IS 959 62 1.72 4 0 3600
23 932U27 7 180 4 1 2740
24 IS 4223 bo 206 4 0 1930
Mean I.1, 4 2170
Rat ings wprm 0 (frL) Lol9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: I1/72.
-47-
Table 41. Thailand (high fertility) Cooperator: N. Ratanadilok
Days Resistance-Ratings Grain Pro- Protein
298 to lt. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield Entry Iden. flower cm case sect Bird ing kk/ha7. _i_ha /
1 954114 61 95 9 8 1 1 480 12.3 59
2 954255 59 108 9 9 1 4 490 10.3 51.
3 954063 61 117 8 8 2 3 850 12.6 107
4 932127 58 123 9 9 1 4 1160 11.2 130
5 RS 610 57 128 9 8 2 2 800 13.2 106
6 BR 64 60 141 7 7 1 0 1550 11.4 177
7 IS 7822 55 103 8 9 1 0 1030 11.2 115
8 954062 62 162 9 8 1 0 920 10.8 99
9 932296 57 132 9 8 1 6 550 11.3 62
10 IS 8361 59 153 9 7 1 4 700 11.7 82
11 932075 51 147 9 7 1 5 820 11.1 91
12 956036 53 152 9 7 1 3 710 9.8 70
13 954130 60 140 9 4 1 0 480 13.8 66
14 954206 67 143 8 5 1 1 1130 11.0 124
15 954164 60 130 9 4 1 0 220 13.0 29
16 NK 300 57 177 9 6 1 6 1560 12.4 193
1.7 IS 2319 53 154 9 9 2 5 1040
18 954104 66 160 6 6 1 0 870
19 932062 59 200 6 8 1 5 880
20 IS 9198 62 198 5 3 1 1 1350
21 IS 7579 59 197 6 8 1 3 1650
22 IS 9569 60 206 7 7 1 4 1630
23 932027 60 190 7 7 1 4 1380
24 IS 4225 64 202 6 9 1 2 490
Mean 59 153 950 11.7 98 (1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 8/72.
CV. 4.3 11.4 64.0
LSD 5A 4.2 28.7 993
-48-
Table 42. Thailand (low fertility) Cooperator: N. Ratanadilok
(1)
Days Resistance Ratings Grain Pro- Protein
298 to !It. Dlis- In- L]odg- yield tein yield
Entry Ident. .flower cm ease sect hird ing kg/ha % k/ha
1 9541.1-4 63 100 9 9 1 0
2 954255 6 90 7 9 1 0
3 954063 O 103 7 9 1 0
4 932127 68 100 7 9 1 0
5 IS 610 67 105 8 9 1 0
6 BR 64 64 113 7 9 1 0
7 IS 7822 62 91 8 9 1 0
8 954062 63 91 8 9 2 0
9 932296 62 101 7 9 1 0
10 IS 8361 62 128 9 9 1 2
11 932075 61 96 8 9 1 0
12 956036 61 130 8 9 1 1
13 954130 9 8 1 0
14 954206 101 7 9 1 0
15 954104 63 105 9 9 1 0
16 NK 300 6L 121 9 9 1 2
17 IS 2319 64 130 8 9 1 2
18 9541.04 67 146 8 8 1 0
19 932062 64 157 8 9 1 3
20 [S 9198 67 151 6 8 1 0
21 IS 7579 63 120 7 9 1 1
22 IS 9569 61 152 7 8 1 0
23 932027 61 122 8 8 1 1
24 IS 4225 65 152 9 9 i 0
Mean 64 118
)Raing:swere 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 6/72.
-49-
Table 43. Uganda (Serere) Cooperator: J. Kern
Days Resistance Ratings ( I ) Grain Pro- Protein 298 of 1t. Dis- In- Lodg- yield tein yield Entry Ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 61. 148 4 0 1
2 954255 54 129 5 0 0
3 954063 60 150 5 0 0
4 932127 53 145 5 0 3
5 RS 610 67 129 5 0 0
6 BR 64 55 136 5 0 0
7 IS 7822 58 115 5 0 1
8 954062 59 145 5 0 0
9 932296 58 129 5 0 1
10 IS 8:361 60 109 5 0 0
11 932075 53 154 5 0 0
12 956036 60 134 4 0 0
13 954130 60 131 5 0 0
14 954206 60 164 6 0 0
15 954164 60 160 5 0 0
16 NK 300 57 142 6 0 3
17 IS 2319 55 139 6 1 0
18 954104 60 141 6 0 1
19 932062 56 145 5 2 1
20 IS 9198 61 132 4 0 0
21. IS 7579 62 130 4 1 0
22 IS 9569 60 145 6 0 0
23 932027 61 133 5 0 0
24 IS 4225 54 .53 7 0 3
Mean 59 138
Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 8/72.
-50-
Table 44. Uruguay (Colonia) Cooperator: A. Artola
Days Resistance Ratings (1 ) Grain Pro- Protein
298 to 1IL. Dis- In- Lodg- yield Lein yield
Entry ident. flower cm ease sect Bird ing kg/ha % kg/ha
1 954114 84 11.1 2 4050
2 954255 84 19 1 4850
3 954063 82 124 6 6400
4 932127 67 111 6 5610
5 RS 610 73 120 8 5890
6 BR 64 82 129 2 6800
7 IS 7822 67 119 3 4930
8 954062 82 137 6 5260
9 932296 84 147 6 5780
10 IS 8361 74 141 6 5100
1 932075 6
12 956036 74 132 8 5300
13 954130 88 136 8 4180
14 934206 88 168 3 6430
15 954164 84 136 8 4590
16 NK 300 74 160 8 7860
17 IS 2319 78 186 9 4470
18 954104 91 190 8 5000
19 932062 84 197 6 6500
20 IS 9198 95 219 6 5210
21 IS 7579 80 212 6 6510
22 IS 9569 84 185 8 7720
23 932027 82 199 3 7210
24 IS 4225 84 289 6 4820
Mean 81 159 5673
(1) Ratings were 0 (free) to 9 (severe) for all ratings.
Date planted: 10/72.
