1 / 14

WP4 Field experiments with artificial Fusarium inoculation

WP4 Field experiments with artificial Fusarium inoculation. Partner. P3: Mattias Hermann, Germany P9: Domnica Daniela, Romania P14: Lenka Nedomova, Czech Republik P8: Luigi Cativelli, Valeria Terzi, Italy (without artificial inoculation). Comparison of planning and course 2008.

norm
Download Presentation

WP4 Field experiments with artificial Fusarium inoculation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WP4 Field experiments with artificial Fusarium inoculation

  2. Partner P3: Mattias Hermann, Germany P9: Domnica Daniela, Romania P14: Lenka Nedomova, Czech Republik P8: Luigi Cativelli, Valeria Terzi, Italy (without artificial inoculation)

  3. Comparison of planning and course 2008 • Experimental design: According to Web-application and plan • Seeding: As planned, minor differences • Inoculation: Nearly as planned, with some problems • Trait measurements: Differences due to local circumstances/conditions

  4. First Results Precision of the experiments? • Comparison variances over locations and estimation of Cultivar x Location interaction effects • Coefficients of correlations between locations

  5. ANOVA for replicated standard cultivars (PLABSTAT)

  6. ANOVA continuation

  7. Coefficients of correlation (I)

  8. Coefficients of correlation (II)

  9. Conclusions: Interactions and variances normal as expected; Good concordance between single experiments in high heritable traits

  10. Inoculation results • Romania: Successful, but assessment of field symptoms very difficult, only yes or no; FDK-seed percentages are better in differentiation • Czech Republik, Italy and Germany: Nearly no visual symptoms in plots or harvested kernels (but in Aranka) • ELISA results are needed for further differentiation

  11. Coefficient of correlation between FHB-scorings and other traits (Romania)

  12. Comparison between inoculated and noninoculated plots (effects of inoculation)

  13. Summary and conclusions • Experimental design and realisation good • Viewable Fusarium infection low, possible reasons are resistances, weather conditions, low virulence of Fusarium isolates used, etc. • No correlation of Fusarium infection level and other traits, as in other studies • ELISA results are needed for further differentiation

  14. Many thanks to the sponsors: The European Commission’s ( Council Regulation (EC) no. 870/2004), Peter Koelln KGaA, Emco spol. s r. o., Gemeinschaft zur Förderung der privaten deutschen Pflanzenzüchtung e.V. (GFP) Meeting additionally supported by the Association of the Friends and Promotors of the Julius Kühn-Institute (GFF) and Peter Koelln KGaA

More Related