Registration of ‘Advance’ Hard Red Spring Wheat

Abstract

Grower and end-user acceptance of new hard red spring wheat (HRSW; Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars is largely contingent on satisfactory agronomic performance, end-use quality potential, and disease resistance levels. Additional characteristics, such as desirable plant height, can also help to maximize grower acceptance. The objective of this research was to release a short-statured HRSW cultivar with competitive grain yield, grain volume weight (GVW), and end-use quality characteristics and acceptable levels of Fusarium head blight (caused by Fusarium graminearum Schwabe) resistance. 'Advance' (Reg. No. CV-1104, PI 664482) HRSW was developed at South Dakota State University (SDSU) and released by the South Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station (SDAES) in early 2012. The cross 'Granger' (PI 636134)/N98-0230 was completed during fall 2001. Granger was released by SDAES in 2004, and N98-0230 is an unreleased experimental breeding line developed by the AgriPro (Syngenta) Wheat Hard Red Spring breeding program. The population was advanced via an early-generation bulk-testing program where F 4:7 seed was included in the 2006 preliminary yield trial and the line was designated SD4023. SD4023 also was tested in the advanced yield trial from 2007 through 2011. Advance was released for its combination of high yield potential, GVW, and bread loaf volume. Additionally, its plant height is signiicantly shorter than most other HRSW cultivars developed by the SDSU-HRSW breeding program.

Registration of ‘Prevail’ Hard Red Spring Wheat

“…Through 5 yr of AYT observation (30 location‐years), plant height of Prevail (82.9 cm) was significantly ( P < 0.05) shorter than most of the 11 remaining comparison cultivars except ‘Advance’ (Glover et al, 2015; 82.1 cm), ‘Knudson’ (PI 619609; 83.8 cm), and Oxen (82.3; Table 1). Heading date of Prevail (22.7 d > 1 June) was similar to Oxen (22.9 d) and ‘Granger’ (Glover et al, 2006; 22.9) but significantly ( P < 0.05) earlier or later than the remaining comparison cultivars (Table 1).…”