<abstract xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The study was carried out at the Lithuanian Institute of Agriculture in an artificially inoculated nursery during 2006-2007. Resistance to common bunt in 2006 was tested for 71, in 2007 for 118 breeding lines of Lithuanian winter wheat from the competitive trial nursery. Additionally, 148 promising lines were selected and tested from the check nursery, which possessed some resistance in their pedigree ancestors. The average disease incidence in 2006 and 2007 was 80.9 and 63.5%, respectively. The very high infection level highlighted the genotypes with the most effective resistance under conditions highly favourable for common bunt. There were no lines without infected ears. Among the 29 breeding lines tested in the two years, two lines Bill/Aspirant and Dream/Lut.9329 were infected the least, 17.2% and 1.9% in 2006 and 18.5% and 7.8% in 2007, respectively. Most of the breeding lines were highly susceptible. Lines with disease incidence over 50% accounted for over 90% in 2006 and 80% in 2007 of the total lines tested. The most resistant lines had in their pedigrees the following resistance sources: genotypes Bill, Lut.9329, Strumok, Lut.9313, Lut.9358, Tommi as well as Dream, Haldor, 91002G2.1, 96/101, Bezenchiukskaya380.</p></abstract>

The study was carried out at the Lithuanian Institute of Agriculture in an artificially inoculated nursery during 2006-2007. Resistance to common bunt in 2006 was tested for 71, in 2007 for 118 breeding lines of Lithuanian winter wheat from the competitive trial nursery. Additionally, 148 promising lines were selected and tested from the check nursery, which possessed some resistance in their pedigree ancestors. The average disease incidence in 2006 and 2007 was 80.9 and 63.5%, respectively. The very high infection level highlighted the genotypes with the most effective resistance under conditions highly favourable for common bunt. There were no lines without infected ears. Among the 29 breeding lines tested in the two years, two lines Bill/Aspirant and Dream/Lut.9329 were infected the least, 17.2% and 1.9% in 2006 and 18.5% and 7.8% in 2007, respectively. Most of the breeding lines were highly susceptible. Lines with disease incidence over 50% accounted for over 90% in 2006 and 80% in 2007 of the total lines tested. The most resistant lines had in their pedigrees the following resistance sources: genotypes Bill, Lut.9329, Strumok, Lut.9313, Lut.9358, Tommi as well as Dream, Haldor, 91002G2.1, 96/101, Bezenchiukskaya380.

Response of Lithuanian Winter Wheat Advanced Lines to Common Bunt (<italic>Tilletia tritici</italic> (BJERK.) WINT)

Lithuanian Institute of Agriculture, Akademija, Kedainiai district, LT-58344, LITHUANIA

Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. Section B. Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences.

Response of Lithuanian Winter Wheat Advanced Lines to Common Bunt ( (BJERK.) WINT)

The study was carried out at the Lithuanian Institute of Agriculture in an artificially inoculated nursery during 2006-2007. Resistance to common bunt in 2006...

Response of Lithuanian Winter Wheat Advanced Lines to Common Bunt (Tilletia tritici (BJERK.) WINT)

Published Online: Jul 08, 2009

Page range: 51 - 56

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10046-009-0010-0

Keywords
wheat, breeding lines, cultivars, common bunt, resistance, organic agriculture

This content is open access.