Heat and drought stress on durum wheat: Responses of genotypes, yield, and quality parameters

Li, Yunfang; Wu, Yu; Hernández-Espinosa, Nayelli; Peña, Roberto J.

doi:10.1016/j.jcs.2013.01.005

Cited by 122 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, although SIG and LARC can effectively predict gluten strength of durum wheat in no-stress and heat stress environments, in general the three small-scale tests were not reliable to select for gluten strength (as measured with the MPT parameter) under drought stress conditions. Drought and heat stress can influence almost all the quality parameters more or less in common wheat and durum wheat, as well as the gluten strength, dough rheological properties, and end-use quality (Li et al 2013a(Li et al , 2013b. It is not surprising that the changing quality attributes may affect the correlation coefficients of physical and chemical testing parameters across environments.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Small‐Scale Testing Methods for Predicting Wheat Gluten Strength Across Environments

Hernández-Espinosa

et al. 2014

Cereal Chem

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cereal Chem. 92(3):231-235Gluten strength is the main factor determining the rheological and processing properties of wheat. Rapid, small-scale tests that can indirectly predict gluten strength are extremely important for wheat-breeding selection, particularly when using pedigree methodology. The efficiency and reliability of three small-scale tests (SDS sedimentation volume [SDSS], swelling index of glutenin [SIG], and lactic acid retention capacity [LARC]) across three environments (E1, no stress; E2, drought stress; and E3, heat stress) were evaluated by using 15 common wheat and nine durum wheat cultivars. In the case of common wheat, SIG highlighted its advantage for predicting gluten strength, even under stress environments, compared with LARC and SDSS, whereas SDSS showed the best relationship with bread loaf volume. For durum wheat, SIG showed the best predicting value in E1 and E3; however, under drought stress, SDSS, SIG, and LARC all lost their good ability for predicting gluten strength in durum wheat, which needs further investigation. Also, the comparison between two mixograph parameters (mixograph peak time and mixograph peak integral) for predicting gluten strength and the suitability of testing SIG and LARC with whole meal (or semolina) instead of refined flour were also investigated.Wheat is one of the main sources of calories, protein, and other nutrients for a large part of the global population. Most (95%) of the commercially cultivated species are common wheat (Triticum aestivum L., AABBDD), and only around 5% is durum wheat (T. turgidum L. subsp. durum, AABB). One of the main reasons for the global popularity of wheat is that its whole meal, refined flour, or semolina, when mixed with water, form viscoelastic dough that can be easily processed into diverse types of food products owing to the unique viscoelastic properties of its gluten protein. Generally, common wheat flour is used mainly for bread (leavened breads, flat breads, and steamed breads), noodles, cookies, and cakes, whereas durum wheat is made into pasta products globally and into regional foods such as flat breads, couscous, and bulgur. Regarding the grain quality attributes, the requirements for good quality of different enduse products vary widely. However, regardless of end-use type, gluten strength (the combination of elasticity and extensibility) is the key factor that determines the processing quality of common wheat and durum wheat (Bushuk 1998;Peña et al. 2002).Physical-chemical methods, such as SDS sedimentation volume (SDSS) or gluten index, and physical dough testing methods, such as farinograph development time, alveograph deformation energy (W), and mixograph peak time (MPT), all can be used for indirectly predicting the gluten strength. However, when it comes to their application in a wheat-breeding program, there are many factors to consider, such as breeding stage to initiate selection, sample size, repeatability, cost, labor, and time requirement. In early segregating generations (F 2 -F 4 ), particula...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Small‐Scale Testing Methods for Predicting Wheat Gluten Strength Across Environments

Hernández-Espinosa

et al. 2014

Cereal Chem

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, durum wheat frequently experiences heat stress in the regions where it is mainly grown (southern Europe, western Asia, and northern Africa). In addition, there is limited literature on the effects of heat stress on durum wheat yield compared with soft wheat (Li et al, 2013).…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early heat waves over Italy and their impacts on durum wheat yields

Fontana

Toreti

Ceglar

et al. 2015

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In the last decades the Euro-Mediterranean region has experienced an increase in extreme temperature events such as heat waves. These extreme weather conditions can strongly affect arable crop growth and final yields. Here, early heat waves over Italy from 1995 to 2013 are identified and characterised and their impact on durum wheat yields is investigated. As expected, results confirm the impact of the 2003 heat wave and highlight a high percentage of concurrence of early heat waves and significant negative yield anomalies in 13 out of 39 durum wheat production areas. In south-eastern Italy (the most important area for durum wheat production), the percentage of concurrent events exceeds 80 %.

show abstract

“…Both these show significant correlations with MPT, RBD, and GI but not SDSS and SDSS/GP and this has been reported before for durum (Edwards et al, 2007;Sissons, 2016;Sissons & Batey, 2003;Sissons et al, 2005). It has been suggested SIG could be used as a rapid small-scale test to select for gluten strength in durum wheat breeding (Li et al, 2013). This test promotes strong swelling of glutenin and removes most of the soluble protein thereby measuring the proportion of flour protein consisting of large glutenin polymers.…”

Section: Other Small-scale Tests To Predict Gluten Strengthmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…Studies on the effect of genotype and environment on dough strength in durum wheat have shown significant genotype influence (Ames, Clarke, Marchylo, Dexter, & Woods, 1999; Rharrabti, Garcı 0 a del Moral, Villegas, & Royo, 2003;Taghouti et al, 2010), suggesting that to make more rapid gains in breeding, selection at an early stage in the process is required. The swelling index of glutenin (SIG) is a small-scale test and requires only 35-45 mg that can be used on semolina or wholemeal to screen for gluten strength in durum wheat (Li, Wu, Hernandez-Espinosa, & Peña, 2013;Wang & Kovacs, 2002a). A test that gives good discrimination, is fast, reproducible, easy to operate and most importantly, requires only small quantities of sample is needed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Small‐scale methods to assess the gluten properties of durum wheat

Sissons

Smit

2018

Cereal Chem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives: Durum breeders are interested in being able to remove weak gluten genotypes from their crossing populations. Although numerous tests exist to measure gluten strength, methods that can be used in early generations, use minimal sample with little processing and have good discrimination are lacking. The purpose of this work was to evaluate several small-scale methods to predict gluten strength in durum wheat with emphasis on the gluten aggregation behavior measured using a GlutoPeak device. Findings: Using as little as 9 g of wholemeal (or semolina), a reproducible Glu-toPeak aggregation curve is developed at the end of 5 min. Wholemeal gave higher precision than semolina and is more convenient to prepare when screening breeders' material. The GlutoPeak Area and Peak Mixing Time (PMT) are good predictors of mixograph and gluten index (GI), which are traditional measures of gluten strength. Good correlations between these parameters were obtained using a diverse set of 145 durum genotypes. GlutoPeak Area gave the best prediction of GI from wholemeal samples allowing a breeder to remove weak-moderate GI samples from a population using as little as 9 g of wholemeal. The GlutoPeak test showed higher correlations with mixograph and GI than the small-scale biochemical methods, was easier to perform and uses no chemicals. However, GlutoPeak is not suitable when only mg quantities of sample are available. Conclusions: The utility of the GlutoPeak device has been further validated in this work for screening durum wheat lines for gluten strength. Wholemeal is a suitable sample (9 g minimum) and provides good precision and reproducibility with a short analysis time of 5 min and requires minimal operator skill. It is suited to screening breeders' populations for gluten strength and is preferred over SIG, HPLC determination of UPP and IP% determination using a turbidity assay. Significance and novelty: The GlutoPeak can be used to effectively screen out low-intermediate gluten strength in a durum wheat breeders' population using 9 g of wholemeal with a 5 min run time. K E Y W O R D S durum, gluten properties, small-scale

show abstract

Heat and drought stress on durum wheat: Responses of genotypes, yield, and quality parameters

Cited by 122 publications

References 24 publications

Comparing Small‐Scale Testing Methods for Predicting Wheat Gluten Strength Across Environments

Comparing Small‐Scale Testing Methods for Predicting Wheat Gluten Strength Across Environments

Early heat waves over Italy and their impacts on durum wheat yields

Small‐scale methods to assess the gluten properties of durum wheat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About