Journal of Plant Registrations
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in JOURNAL OF PLANT REGISTRATIONS 1:26-27 (2007)
DOI: 10.3198/jpr2006.10.0630crc
© 2007 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Costa, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Costa, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, D.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Costa, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, D.

CULTIVARS

Registration of ‘Chesapeake’ Wheat

J. M. Costaa,*, C.A. Griffeyb, H. E. Bockelmanc, S. E. Cambrond, A. Coopera, C. Gainese, R. A. Grayboschf, A. Grybauskasa, R. J. Kratochvila, Y. Jing and D. Marshallh

a Dep. of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-4452
b Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Dep., Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061
c USDA-ARS National Small Grains Germplasm Research Facility, Aberdeen, ID 83210
d USDA-ARS, Dep. of Entomology, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
e USDA-ARS Soft Wheat Quality Lab., Wooster, OH 44691
f USDA-ARS Wheat, Sorghum & Forage Research, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
g USDA-ARS Cereal Disease Lab., St. Paul, MN 55108
h USDA-ARS, Plant Science Research Unit, Raleigh, NC 27695

* Corresponding author (costaj{at}umd.edu).

‘Chesapeake’ (Reg. No. CV-1011, PI 643935) is a soft red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) that was jointly developed and released by the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station, Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, and the Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station in 2005. Chesapeake is named after the scenic bay that separates Maryland's and Virginia's shores. Chesapeake has performed well in Maryland and Virginia. It is a high-yielding cultivar with medium stature, excellent powdery mildew [caused by Blumeria graminis (DC) E.O. Speer f. sp. tritici Ém. Marchal] resistance and early heading date.

Chesapeake was derived from the cross VA91-54-222 (‘Roane’"S") /‘FFR555W’//VA93-52-55 that was made in 1992 at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VPI&SU). Roane is a cultivar developed by VPI&SU (Griffey et al., 2001). FFR555W is a cultivar developed by FFR Cooperative. VA93-52-55 is an experimental line developed by VPI&SU with the pedigree ‘Massey’ (CItr 17953) (Starling et al., 1984)/‘Balkan’//‘Saluda’ (PI 480474) (Starling et al., 1986). The population was advanced from the F2 to F5 generation using a modified bulk breeding method. Wheat spikes from the population were selected in Virginia in each generation (F2–F5) based on the absence of obvious disease, early maturity, short straw, and desirable head shape and size. Selected spikes were threshed in bulk, and the seed was planted the following fall of each selection year. Spikes selected from the F5:6 bulk were threshed individually and planted in separate headrows in the fall of 1999 at Beltsville, MD. Chesapeake was selected in 2000 as a bulk of one of these F6:7 headrows and assigned the breeding line designation MV5-46. In addition to high grain yield, Chesapeake was selected on the basis of early head emergence and resistance to powdery mildew. Chesapeake was evaluated in the Maryland State Wheat Variety Tests and Virginia State Wheat Variety Tests for 3 yr (2003–2005), and in the USDA-ARS Uniform Eastern (UESRWWN) and Uniform Southern (USSRWWN) Soft Red Winter Wheat Nurseries in 2004 and 2005.

Coleoptiles of Chesapeake are white. Juvenile plants exhibit a semi-erect growth habit. Plant color at boot stage (Feekes growth stage 9–10) is blue-green, and a waxy bloom is present on the stem and flag leaf sheath. Anther color is yellow. Spikes are tapering, middense, and awnless. Glumes have oblique shoulders and acute beaks. Kernels of Chesapeake are red, soft, and ovate with a crease of medium width and mid-deep depth, rounded cheeks, and a large noncollared brush. Chesapeake carries the 1BL.1RS wheat-rye chromosomal translocation.

In state variety trials conducted in Maryland under a conventional tillage regime for 3 yr (2003–2005) at five locations per year, average grain yield of Chesapeake (4640 kg ha–1) was similar to that of the high-yielding cultivar USG 3209 and 300 kg ha–1 higher (P < 0.05) than that of Roane. In these tests, the average grain volume weight of Chesapeake was 735 kg m–3, which was similar to that of Roane and higher (P < 0.05) than that of USG 3209 (722 kg m–3). Head emergence of Chesapeake in Maryland was 1 d earlier (ns) than that of UniSouth Genetics (USG) ‘3209’ and 3 d earlier than Roane (P < 0.05). In Maryland, average plant height of Chesapeake (82.5 cm) was 2.5 cm taller (ns) than that of USG 3209 and similar to that of Roane. Average straw strength (lodging score 0–9) of Chesapeake (0.8) in Maryland was similar to that of USG 3209. On the basis of disease assessments (0 = no visible symptoms to 9 = severe infection) made under field conditions in Maryland in 2005 (five environments), Chesapeake was resistant (P < 0.01) to powdery mildew (score = 0.1) compared with a score of 7.2 for the susceptible check ‘Florida 304’.

In Virginia State Wheat Tests conducted under standard treatment (no fungicides) for 3 yr (2003–2005) at five to seven locations per year (n = 19), average grain yield of Chesapeake (4700 kg ha–1) was similar to that of ‘Sisson’ and 270 ha–1 lower (P < 0.05) than that of USG 3209. In these tests, Chesapeake had a test weight of 770 kg m–3, 25 kg m–3 higher (P < 0.05) than that of USG 3209 and 15 kg m–3 higher (P < 0.05) than that of Sisson. Chesapeake was also resistant to powdery mildew (score = 0) in Virginia.

Chesapeake was evaluated in the USSRWWN (36 locations) in 2004 and 2005. In 2004 Chesapeake had an average grain yield of 5346 kg ha–1, 255 kg ha–1 higher than that of the check cultivar ‘McCormick’, and had a grain volume weight (762 kg m–3) similar to that of McCormick. In 2005 Chesapeake had a grain yield of 4842 kg ha–1, 242 kg ha–1 higher than that of McCormick, and had a grain volume weight (773 kg m–3) similar to that of McCormick. Chesapeake was also evaluated in the UESRWWN (39 locations) in 2004 and 2005. In 2004 its average grain yield (5037 kg ha–1) was higher than that of the check cultivar Agripro ‘Foster’ (4902 kg ha–1) but lower than that of Roane (5218 kg ha–1). Its grain volume weight (758 kg m–3) also was higher than that of Agripro Foster (736 kg m–3) and lower than that of Roane (768 kg m–3). In 2005 the average grain yield of Chesapeake (5097 kg ha–1) was higher than that of Agripro Foster (4667 kg ha–1) and similar to that of Roane. Its grain volume weight (787 kg m–3) was higher than that of Agripro Foster (743 kg m–3) and similar to that of Roane.

Chesapeake was evaluated in the 2005 USSRWWN and UESRWWN for its reaction (0 = no visible symptoms to 9 = severe infection) to several disease and insect pests prevalent in the soft red winter wheat production area. Chesapeake was resistant (score = 0.4, n = 9 environments) to powdery mildew compared with Roane (score = 2.0). Based on seedling tests conducted by the USDA-ARS Plant Science Research Unit in Raleigh, NC, Chesapeake was resistant to 12 out of 13 isolates of powdery mildew. Chesapeake has expressed moderate resistance (score = 2.3 across six locations) to leaf rust (caused by Puccinia triticina Eriks.) compared with USG 3209 (score = 4.7). On the basis of seedling tests conducted at the USDA-ARS Cereal Disease Laboratory in St. Paul, MN, it is postulated that Chesapeake has the gene Lr26 and other unidentified genes governing resistance to leaf rust. Chesapeake is moderately susceptible (score = 5.1, n = 7) to leaf blotch (caused by Septoria tritici Roberge in Desmaz) compared with Roane (score = 4.2). Chesapeake is susceptible (score = 6.3, n = 12) to stripe rust (caused by Puccinia striiformis Westend. f. sp. tritici Eriks.) compared with Roane (score = 3.4). Chesapeake is moderately resistant to wheat spindle streak mosaic virus (score = 3.0, n = 3) compared with Agripro ‘Patton’ (score = 4.3). Seedling tests indicate that Chesapeake is resistant to stem rust (caused by Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici Eriks. & Henn) composite of races QFCS, QTHJ, RCRS, TPMK, and TTTT. In field-inoculated stem rust nurseries grown in St. Paul, MN, Chesapeake was resistant to stem rust at the adult plant stage in 2004 and moderately resistant in 2005. Chesapeake is susceptible to Fusarium head blight (caused by Fusarium graminearum Schwabe, Group II [anamorph]) on the basis of disease assessments made in the 2005 Northern Uniform Winter Wheat Scab Nursery at 12 locations. Its scab index was 29.8 compared with 11.3 for ‘Ernie’. Its scabby seed score was 30.4% but had a low average Deoxynivalenol (DON) value of 5.3 ppm, compared to a scabby seed score of 23.9% and DON of 6.2 ppm for Ernie. In the 2005 Southern Uniform Winter Wheat Scab Nursery (seven locations), Chesapeake had a scab index of 22.2 compared with 5.7 for Ernie and a scabby seed score of 30.0% and a DON concentration of 11.7 ppm compared with a scabby seed score of 16.0% and DON of 6.2 ppm for Ernie. Seedling tests conducted by the USDA-ARS at West Lafayette, IN, indicate that Chesapeake is susceptible to Hessian fly [caused by Mayetiola destructor (Say)] biotypes GP, B, C, D, E, and L. On the basis of data (n = 4 locations) in the 2005 UESRWWN, average winter freeze damage of Chesapeake (7.0) was higher than that of Roane (3.9).

Milling and baking quality evaluations of Chesapeake were conducted in 2005 by the USDA-ARS Soft Wheat Quality Laboratory at Wooster, OH, using a composite sample from three locations (Lafayette, IN; Columbia, MO; Blacksburg, VA) of the 2005 UESRWWN. Milling quality score of Chesapeake was similar to that of Roane but lower than that of Agripro Foster. Its baking quality score was higher than that of Roane but lower than that of Agripro Foster. Chesapeake was similar to Roane for flour yield (697 g kg–1) but lower than that of Agripro Foster (734 g kg–1). Softness equivalent of Chesapeake was slightly higher (55.5%) than that of Agripro Foster (54.7%) but lower than that of Roane (56.5%). Chesapeake had a larger cookie diameter (17.7 cm) than Roane (17.1 cm) but lower than that of Agripro Foster (18.0 cm). Its flour gluten strength was weak (based on a lactic acid retention capacity of 95.7%) and lower than those of Roane (108.3%) and Agripro Foster (102.3%). Grain of Chesapeake had lower protein concentration (86 g kg–1) than that of Roane (88 g kg–1) and Agripro Foster (90 g kg–1).

Initial Breeder seed of Chesapeake was developed via removal of visual variants from a 0.05-ha F10 purification block. Authorized seed classes of Chesapeake in the USA are Breeder, Foundation, and Certified. Small quantities of seed of Chesapeake can be obtained from the corresponding author for at least 5 yr from the date of publication. Seed of this release is deposited in the National Germplasm System, where it will be available after 5 yr for research purposes, including development and commercialization of new cultivars. It is requested that appropriate recognition be made if this cultivar contributes to the development of new germplasm or cultivars. Breeder seed of Chesapeake will be maintained by the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station. Foundation seed will be maintained by the Maryland Crop Improvement Association, P.O. Box 169, Queenstown, MD 21658.

Acknowledgments

The development of this cultivar was supported in part by the Maryland Grain Producers Utilization Board and the Maryland Crop Improvement Association.

Footnotes

All rights reserved. No part of this periodical may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Permission for printing and for reprinting the material contained herein has been obtained by the publisher.

Received for publication October 2, 2006.

References





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Costa, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Costa, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, D.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Costa, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, D.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome