Printer Friendly

Agronomic characterization of tropical maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines converted to quality protein character/Caracterizacion agronomica de lineas tropicales de maiz (Zea mays L.) convertidas al caracter de calidad de proteina/Caracterizacao agronomica de fileiras tropicais de milho (Zea mays L.) convertidas ao carater de qualidade de proteina.

Maize (Zea mays L.) is the most important crop in Mexico due to the extended use of corn as food, the economic benefits generated and its social impact. It is currently grown in a great diversity of ecological niches and under different production systems. The large diversity of landraces that are coupled to different local applications attests to its importance. In 2012, 7.37 x 106ha were planted in Mexico with this crop, with an average yield of 3.19t x [ha.sup.-1] (SIAP, 2012).

In Mexico, there are 31 million people with malnutrition, out of which 18 million suffer from severe malnutrition; 50% of these are children under 5 years old in rural areas, and 30% live in urban areas (Chavez and Munoz, 2004; Espinosa et al., 2006). In this framework, maize is essential in the diet of Mexicans, whose apparent consumption per capita is calculated as 209.8kg/year (Morris and Lopez, 2000). Widespread consumption of high quality protein maize could improve the nutritional level in Mexico, especially in children, lactating women and the elderly; However, achieving their extensive use requires the participation of stakeholders at different decision levels, as well as the coordination of various institutions to support such a program (Espinosa et al., 2005).

The high quality protein maize is derived from opaque gene [O.sub.2][O.sub.2], containing more lysine and tryptophan, component aminoacids of proteins essential for growth and human development (Ortega et al., 1986; Mertz, 1994; Vasal, 2002). The quality of the protein in these maize varieties is similar to that of milk (Bressani, 1994). Vasal and Villegas (2001), using the traditional breeding techniques, incorporated special genes called 'modifier genes', responsible for the texture of the endosperm. These modifying genes confer to the endosperm of grains a harder texture than that of opaque maize, giving to it the appearance of normal maize. Larkins et al., (1994) indicated that maize grains with gene [o.sub.2][o.sub.2], contain 40-50% more lysine and 3540% more tryptophan. In tropical maize H-519C, H-553C and V-537C, it was found that the tryptophan content increased in 59, 44 and 74%, respectively, while the lysine content increased in 50, 46 and 47% for each genotype (Sierra et al., 2001).

In a maize breeding program it is important to develop new inbred lines that combine properly in order to produce high yields and a superior agronomic performance (Hallauer and Miranda, 1988). The procedures for developing new varieties of high protein quality maize, as well as the maintenance of parent lines, have been well documented. However, little has been written about the process of conversion of normal maize to the character of high quality protein and its relationship with some traits of economic importance (Trifunovic et al., 2003; Scott et al., 2009).

The conversion of normal maize inbred lines D539, LT-154, CABG, LRB14, LT-155 (parents of the outstanding maize hybrids H-520 and H-512) to quality protein maize (QPM) was started at the Cotaxtla Experimental Station in 2002 (Sierra et al., 1993, 2004), adapted to the tropical area; as well as the synthetic variety VS-536 (Sierra et al., 1992), which is the variety of greatest use in the Mexican Southeast. The inbred lines were crossed with the CML-144 line, and VS-536 was crossed with V-537C as the donor character. After selfing the crosses and selecting the best lines a backcrossing method was used to recover the QPM inbred lines and the VS536 (Sierra et al., 2001). The objectives of this study were: a) To know grain yield and agronomic characteristics of maize inbred lines converted to the quality protein character and b) Expand the genetic base of high quality protein maize germplasm.

Materials and Methods

Geographic location

The study was carried out in the INIFAP Cotaxtla Experimental Station, municipality of Medellin de Bravo, in central Veracruz state, Mexico, located at 18[degrees]56'N and 96[degrees]11'W, and 15masl; the climate according to the Koppen classification modified by Garcia (1981), belongs to the climate group Aw1 (w), warm subhumid, with temperatures average 25[degrees]C and annual rainfall of 1400mm distributed from june to november, with a dry season from december to may.

Germplasm

Thirteen inbred lines converted to the character of high quality protein (QPM), derived from the line LT-154, were included in this assessment, as well as 25 lines from LT-155, 19 lines from a composite of broad genetic base (BGBC), 7 lines from D-539, 2 lines from LRB-14, 45 lines from VS-536, 8 recycled lines from V-537C. In order to compare advantages in grain yield and other agronomic traits, the inbred maize lines CML142, CML150, CML159, CML264Q and CML491Q high quality protein were included, as also were included the tropical lines LT-154, LT-155, LT-156 and LT-157 in its normal version, used as checks.

Description of the experiments

During the autumn/winter 2011/12 and spring/summer 2012 seasons, two experiments were planted with QPM maize inbred lines under a alpha lattice 16x8 design, with 128 treatments and two replications in one-row plots, 2.5m long and 80cm wide with a density of 62500 plants/ha. Weed control was achieved with atrazine in pre-emergence application, fertilization with the formula 161-46-00 was used and pests were also controlled during the development of the crop.

Variables and data logging

During crop development and at harvest time, plant and ear height, days to tassel, lodged plants, appearance and health of the plant and ear, husk cover, rotting ear, grain yield, segregation of the opaque character and grain texture data were recorded.

Quality protein

In the conversion of normal inbred lines to QPM the inbred line CML144 was used as donor; for the conversion of VS-536, the V-537C variety was used. The selection of lines, in addition to the agronomic variables, allowed at harvest time a visual qualification of segregation of opaque grains in a scale from 0 to 3, where 0: no presence, 1: few, 2: regular, and 3: a lot of opaque grains, as an indicator of the presence of the character of high quality protein. For determining protein quality, five synthetics were formed with lines that represent the groups of converted lines that determined the lysine and tryptophan content, following the methodologies of AACC (1998) and AOAC(1984).

Statistical methods

Analysis of variance for all variables were done. The variables registered as percentage, such as percentages of lodging, of bad husk cover and of rotten ears, were transformed to degrees bliss for analysis according to the formula [square root of x+1], because some plots showed values of zero. For the separation of means the minimum significant difference test was applied at the 0.05 and 0.01 probabilities. A combined analysis for the two evaluation environments was made, as well a comparison of groups of lines, where the t test was applied at 0.05 and 0.01 probabilities (Reyes, 1990).

Results and Discussion

Combined analysis had shown differences in most of the traits, except for percentage of ears with bad husk cover for genotypes and environments effects (Reyes, 1990). Differences for grain yield, days to tasseling and percentage of lodging in the genotype by environment interaction were also found in the present study. In all instances, the variance due to the environments was greater for all variables, except for percentage of bad husk cover (Table I).

The best lines converted to the high quality protein character (p <0.01) for yield and agronomic characteristics across the two environments of evaluation were the four lines derived from LT154 (Table II), with yields of 4.9, 4.4, 3.6 and 3.4t x [ha.sup.-1], respectively; and 48 to 113% more in relation to the normal line LT154 (Table II). Also, these inbred lines showed good agronomical characteristics; such as good appearance and health on plant and ear, tolerant to lodging, with good husk cover, dent and semi-dent texture; in addition to the advantages that the high quality protein maize represents for consumers (Ortega et al, 1986; Bressani, 1994; Larkins et al., 1994; Mertz, 1994; Vasal, 2002; Chavez and Munoz, 2004; Espinosa et al., 2005, 2006). These advantages in yield and agronomic traits are important because of their adaptation to the tropical area described by Garcia (1981) and the adoption by the seed industry and farmers (Hallauer and Miranda, 1988).

In reference to the four lines derived from LT155 (Table II), their upper yields (>4.0t x [ha.sup.-1]) had a significantly better performance ([alpha] = 0.05), 3-10% more than the normal line LT155 control. In addition, these lines were relatively early maturing and had lower plant height; three of them with semi-dented grain texture and the line (LT155xCML144) F2xLT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-18 had a flint texture.

As to the four inbred lines derived from the CABG shown in Table II, with yields of 4.1 to 5.1t x [ha.sup.-1], they revealed a better grain yield performance ([alpha] = 0.05), 8% more than the normal line LT155, and reached maturity earlier than its normal version LT156. Segregation of the opaque character recorded values of 1 to 2.5, attributes that indicate the presence of the high quality protein character.

A similar behavior was observed for lines (CABGxCML144) CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-4, CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-5 (CABGxCML144) and (CABG CML144) CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-2 (not shown).

The four inbred lines from the D539 (Table II) showed a better grain yield performance ([alpha] = 0.05), 3-22% more than the best normal check line LT155, with yields up to 4.0t x [ha.sup.-1]. These lines had good aspect of plant and ear, and dent and semi-dent texture.

Five lines derived from VS-536, the variety of greatest use in Southeastern Mexico, constitute a group with outstanding performance (Table II). They showed yields 3-10% higher ([alpha] = 0.05) than the normal line LT155. These lines have good plant and ear aspect, with dent and semi-dent texture.

The best inbred lines, recycled from V-537C and first high QPM variety (p [less than or equal to] 0.05), were FAMV537C-1-1-2, FAMV537C-1-1-1, FAMV537C-2-1-1 and FAMV537C-2-2-1, with yields well above 4t x [ha.sup.-1], 20-44% more than the normal line LT155 yield. These lines along with the lines derived from the D-539 line had the highest yields averages and were relatively earlier in maturity than the LT155 line used as check.

In general, the lines converted to QPM with better yield and agronomic traits than the normal were found (Hallauer and Miranda, 1988; Sierra et al, 2001). Availability of QPM maize germplasm is useful for developing better hybrids and synthetics for the Mexican tropics and also for reducing malnutrition (Mertz, 1994; Sierra et al, 2001; Vasal and Villegas 2001; Espinosa et al, 2006).

The lines derived from D539, V-537C, VS-536, LT155, LT154 and CABG had better performance for grain yield and also showed earlier maturity, lower plant height and, with the exception of the lines derived from V-537C, better plant and ear aspect and lower percentage of ears with bad husk cover and ear rot, in relation to the normal lines. Besides, the quality protein maize lines were tolerant to lodging. In relation to the segregation of the opaque character, in all groups a higher frequency between grades 1 and 2 was found, which means that the character of high quality protein is present, without the disadvantage represented by ears with high frequency of opaque grains. Finally, for grain texture, excepting lines derived from LRB and CMLs, which show a flint texture, the rest of the groups had a higher frequency of dent and semident textures.

Groups of lines derived from the normal line D-539 and recycled from variety V-537C, had yields with significantly ([alpha] = 0.01) higher means, with 4.30t x [ha.sup.-1], 39% more than the normal lines. In other groups statistical difference was not found (Reyes, 1990). The group of lines derived from VS-536 had a mean yield of 3.5t x [ha.sup.-1], 13% above the normal lines. Lines derived from LT154 and LT155 had mean yields of 3.40t x [ha.sup.-1], 10% more compared to the normal lines. The groups of lines CABG and CMLs obtained a mean yield of 3.20t x [ha.sup.-1], 3% more than the normal lines. Finally, a group of two lines derived from the LRB14 had lower average yields, 23% lower than the normal lines. This suggests that lines converted to the character of high quality protein showed good yield and agronomical traits, and are adapted to the tropics, so they can be used as parental germ-plasm in developing new maize hybrids and synthetics; also indicating that this group of lines broadens the genetic basis for this feature (Table III).

In relation to the quality protein content, synthetics formed with representatives of each group of converted lines, had 36-55% more lysine and 62-106% more tryptophan in relation to the normal 'Tuxpeno' maize (Table IV), which represents a significant added value for the nutrition of consumers (Ortega et al, 1986; Bressani, 1994; Larkins et al, 1994; Mertz, 1994; Sierra et al, 2001; Vasal, 2002; Chavez and Munoz, 2004; Espinosa et al, 2005, 2006). Therefore, promissory lines of different origins converted to the character of high quality protein, with good yield and agronomical traits, that can form new synthetics and hybrids adapted to the Mexican tropic were found.

Conclusions

The majority of groups of inbred lines converted to quality protein character showed better grain yield and agronomical traits than the normal original lines; with the exception of the LRB lines. In relation with the high quality protein maize, the germplasm base was broadened, as new lines from different origins were obtained, with good agronomical behavior, that can form better combinations for developing new hybrids and varieties for the Mexican tropics. The best inbred lines, for yield and agronomics traits, were derived from D-539 and recycled from V-537C. In relation to the quality protein character, synthetics formed with representatives of each group of converted lines, these had 36-55% more lysine and 62-106% more tryptophan in relation to the normal 'Tuxpeno' maize, which is a significant added value for the nutrition of consumers.

Received: 05/20/2014. Modified: 07/24/2014. Accepted: 07/25/2014.

Mauro Sierra Macias. Doctor of Sciences in Genetics, Universidad de Colima, Mexico. Researcher, Instituto Nacional de Invetigaciones Forestales, Agricolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP), Mexico. Address: Campo Experimental (CE) Cotaxtla, Km 34.5 Carretera Federal Veracruz-Cordoba, Medellin De Bravo. C.P. 94270, Veracruz, Mexico. e-mail: sierra.mauro@inifap.gob

Pablo Andres Meza. Master of Sciences in Tropical Agroecosystems, Colegio de Postgraduados (COLPOS), Veracruz, Mexico. Researcher, CE Cotaxtla, INIFAP, Mexico.

Flavio Rodriguez Montalvo. Agronomical Engineer, Universidad Veracruzana, Mexico. Researcher, CE Cotaxtla, INIFAP, Mexico.

Noel Gomez Montiel. Doctor of Sciences in Genetics, COLPOS, Montecillo, Mexico. Researcher, CE Iguala, INIFAP, Mexico.

Alejandro Espinosa Calderon. Doctor of Sciences in Genetics, COLPOS, Montecillo, Mexico. Researcher, CE Valle de Mexico, INIFAP, Mexico.

Roberto Valdivia Bernal. Ph.D. in Genetics, Iowa State University, USA. Professor, Universidad Autonoma de Nayarit, Mexico.

Artemio Palafox Caballero. Master of Sciences in Rural Development, COLPOS, Montecillo, Mexico. Researcher, CE Cotaxtla, INIFAP, Mexico.

Margarita Tadeo Robledo. Master of Sciences in Genetics, COLPOS, Montecillo, Mexico. Professor, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.

Omar Velasquez Garcia. Agronomical Engineer, Instituto Tecnologico de Comitancillo, Mexico. Student, CE Cotaxtla INIFAP, Mexico.

REFERENCES

AACC (1998) Approved Methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemists. 10th ed. American Association of Cereal Chemists. St. Paul, MN, USA. 120 pp.

AO AC (1984) Official Methods of Analysis. 13th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Rockville, MD, USA. pp. 132-133.

Bressani R (1994) Opaque 2 corn in human nutrition and utilization. In Quality protein maize. 1964-1994. Proc. Int. Symp. on Quality Protein Maize. EMBRAPA/CNPMS. Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil. pp. 41-63.

Chavez VA, Munoz CM (2004) La Tortilla de Alto Valor Nutritivo. Mc Graw Hill. Mexico, 110 pp.

Espinosa CA, Gomez MN, Sierra MM, Caballero HF, Coutino EB, Palafox CA, Rodriguez MFA, Garcia B, Betanzos ME (2005) Los maices de calidad proteinica y la produccion de semillas en Mexico. Ciencia y Desarrollo: 1-10.

Espinosa CA, Gomez MN, Sierra MM, Betanzos ME, Caballero HF (2006) Variedades e hibridos de maiz de calidad proteinica en Mexico. Ciencia 57: 28-34.

Garcia E (1981) Modificaciones al Sistema de Clasificacion Climatica de Koppen. 3a ed. Instituto de Geografia. Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. Mexico. 252 pp.

Hallauer AR, Miranda BJ (1988) Quantitative Genetics in Maize Breeding. 2nd ed. Iowa State University Press. Ames, IO, USA. 664 pp.

Larkins BA, Dannehoffer DF, Bostwick EO, Moro GA, Lopez MA (1994) Opaque 2 modifiers, what they are and how they work, In Quality protein maize. 1964-1994. Proc. Int. Symp. on Quality Protein Maize. EMBRAPA/CNPMS. Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil. pp. 133-148.

Mertz E (1994) Thirty years of opaque 2 maize. In Quality protein maize. 1964-1994. Proc. Int. Symp. on Quality Protein Maize. EMBRAPA/CNPMS. Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil. pp. 1-10.

Morris ML, Lopez P MA (2000) Impactos del Mejoramiento de Maiz en America Latina 1966-1997. CIMMYT. Mexico. 45 pp.

Ortega CA, Villegas E, Vasal SK (1986) A comparative study of protein changes in normal and Quality Protein Maize during tortilla making. Cereal Chem. 63: 446-451.

Reyes CP (1990) Diseno de Experimentos Aplicados. 3a ed. Trillas. Mexico, 348 pp.

SIAP (2012) Anuario Estadistico de la Produccion Agricola de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Servicio de Informacion Agroalimentaria y Pesquera www.siap.sagarpa.gob.mx (Cons. 11/2014).

Scott MM, Peterson JM, Hallauer AR (2009) Evaluation of combining ability of quality protein maize derived from US public inbred lines. Maydica 54: 449-456.

Sierra MM, Rodriguez MFA, Castillo GR, Preciado ORE, Marquez SF (1992) VS-536, Variedad sintetica de maiz para el tropico de Veracruz y Regiones similares. Folleto Tecnico No. 2. Campo Experimental Cotaxtla. SARH. INIFAP CIRGOC. Veracruz, Mexico. 11 pp.

Sierra MM, Rodriguez MFA, Preciado ORE, Castillo GR, Ortiz CJ, Marquez SF, Tosquy VOH (1993) H-512, Hibrido de Maiz de Cruza Doble para el Tropico Humedo de Mexico. Folleto Tecnico No. 3. Campo Experimental Cotaxtla. SARH. INIFAP CIRGOC. Veracruz, Mexico. 13 pp.

Sierra MM, Palafox CA, Cano RO, Rodriguez MFA, Espinosa CA, Turrent FA, Gomez MN, Cordova OH, Vergara AN, Aveldano SR, Sandoval RJ, Barron FS, Romero MJ, Caballero HF, Gonzalez CM, Betanzos ME (2001) Descripcion Varietal de H-519C, H-553C y V-537C, Maices con Alta Calidad de Proteina para el Tropico Humedo de Mexico. Folleto Tecnico No. 30. Campo Experimental Cotaxtla. SARH. INIFAP CIRGOC. Veracruz, Mexico. 21 pp.

Sierra MM, Palafox CA, Rodriguez MFA, Espinosa CA, Gomez MN, Caballero HF, Barron FS, Zambada MA (2004) H-518 y H-520, Hibridos Trilineales de Maiz para el Tropico Gumedo de Mexico. Folleto Tecnico No. 38. Campo Experimental Cotaxtla. SARH. INIFAP CIRGOC. Veracruz, Mexico. 16 pp.

Trifunovic S, Cordova H, Crossa J, Pandey S (2003) Head to head and stability analysis of maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines. Maydica 48: 263-269.

Vasal SK (2002) High quality protein corn. In Hallauer AR (ed.) Specialty Corns. 2a ed. CRC. Boca Raton, Fl, EEUU. pp. 85-129.

Vasal SK, Villegas E (2001) The Quality Protein Maize Revolution. Improved Nutrition and Livelihoods for the Poor. CIMMYT. Mex. 7 pp.

Vidal VA, Vazquez CMG, Coutino EB, Ortega CA, Ramirez DJL, Valdivia BR, Guerrero HMJ, Caro VFJ, Cota AO (2008) Calidad proteinica en colectas de maices criollos de la sierra de Nayarit, Mexico. Rev. Fitotecn. Mex. 31: 15-21.
TABLE I
MEAN SQUARES AND SIGNIFICANCE OF COMBINED ANALYSIS OF
VARIANCE WITH HIGH QUALITY PROTEIN MAIZE LINES. COTAXTLA,
VERACRUZ, MEXICO, 2012 (a) AND 2012 (b)

Source of          DF          GY           Days to        Plant
variation                (t [ha.sup.-1])     tassel        height

Genotypes (G)      127    2.73 **            16.28 **      754.22 **
Environments (E)   1     51.19 **          1211.5 **    144743.9 **
(GxE) Interaction  127    1.26 **             6.22 **      220.34 NS
MSE                254    0.87                4.35         242.65

Average                   3.48               61            171
CV (%)                   26.83                3.43           9.10

Source of           Plant       Ear      % Lodging
variation           aspect     aspect

Genotypes (G)       0.40 **    0.59 **     8.34 **
Environments (E)    3.48 **   13.64 **   212.14 **
(GxE) Interaction   0.23 NS    0.23 NS     4.34 **
MSE                 0.19       0.23        3.08

Average             2.34       1.98       11.37
CV (%)             18.58      24.19       66.48

Source of           % Cob     % Ear rot     Segr
variation

Genotypes (G)       7.50 **    3.33 **     0.61 **
Environments (E)    1.62 NS   28.43 *      7.56 **
(GxE) Interaction   2.78 NS    2.21 NS
MSE                 2.90       2.28        0.38

Average             6.66       8.98        1.59
CV (%)             80.25      56.48       38.75

(a): autum-winter season, (b): spring-summer season,
* Statistical significance at p <0.05,
** statistica significance at p <0.01, NS: non significant,
DF: degrees of freedom, GY: grain yield,
% Cob:% of bad husk cover, Segr: segregation of grain
opaque character, CV: coefficient of variation,
MSE: mean square error.

TABLE II
GRAIN YIELD AND AGRONOMIC TRAITS IN ELITE INBRED LINES
OF QUALITY PROTEIN MAIZE. COTAXTLA, VERACRUZ, MEXICO,
2012 (a) AND 2012 (b)

Genealogy                                        GY          Rel
                                           t x [ha.sup.-1]    %

(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-2          4.9 *        120
(LT-154 x CML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-1        4.4 *        108
(LT154xCML144)LT1 54R[C.sub.2]-2-1 -2           3.6 *        88
(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154 R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2         34 **        83
Ur-154                                           2.3         56
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-9             4.5 *        110
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-2-1-1             4.4 *        108
(LT155 xCML 144)LT 15 5R[C.sub.2]-2-2-3         4.2 *        103
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-18            4.2 *        103
LT-155                                           4.1         100
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-6              5.1 *        125
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-2              4.4 *        108
(CABGxCML144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-3-2-5               4.1 *        100
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-4-1 -2             4.1 *        100
LT-156                                           2.6
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-4              5.0 *        122
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2              4.7 *        115
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1              4.6 *        113
(D539xCML144)D539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-5               4.2 *        103
(LRB14xCML144)LRB14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2             3.1 *        76
(LRB14xCML144)LRB-14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1            1.6 **       39
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-3-1           4.5 *        110
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-3-1-7           4.4 *        108
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-2-7           4.3 *        105
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-4           4.2 *        103
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-6           4.2 *        103
FAM V-537 C-1-1-2                               5.9 *        144
FAM V-537 C-1-1-1                               5.7 *        139
FAM-V-537 C-2-1-1                               5.4 *        132
FAM v-537 C-2-2-1                               4.9 *        120
CML-142                                         4.7 *        115
CML-159                                          3 2         78
CML-491                                          3 2         78

Average                                          3.5
MSE                                              0.87
LSD 0.05                                         1.3
LSD 0.01                                         1.71

Genealogy                                   DT     PH     PA (1)

(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-2      59     180     1.9
(LT-154 x CML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-1    62     189     2.0
(LT154xCML144)LT1 54R[C.sub.2]-2-1 -2       62     160     2.4
(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154 R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2     63     184     2.6
Ur-154                                      66     156     2.6
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-9         58     176     2.3
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-2-1-1         58     171     2.0
(LT155 xCML 144)LT 15 5R[C.sub.2]-2-2-3     59     180     2.1
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-18        58     175     2.5
LT-155                                      61     183     2.4
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-6          60     203     1.6
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-2          61     194     2.0
(CABGxCML144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-3-2-5           61     148     2.8
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-4-1 -2         60     159     2.4
LT-156                                      63     184     1.8
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-4          61     190     1.9
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2          62     203     2.3
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1          61     154     2.0
(D539xCML144)D539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-5           60     161     2.4
(LRB14xCML144)LRB14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2         60     190     2.3
(LRB14xCML144)LRB-14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1        61     163     3.3
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-3-1       60     166     2.1
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-3-1-7       59     174     1.8
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-2-7       60     155     2.6
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-4       58     169     2.0
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-6       59     175     2.3
FAM V-537 C-1-1-2                           59     168     1.9
FAM V-537 C-1-1-1                           59     184     1.8
FAM-V-537 C-2-1-1                           58     161     2.5
FAM v-537 C-2-2-1                           59     168     2.9
CML-142                                     62     204     2.3
CML-159                                     60     176     2.5
CML-491                                     64     170     2.4

Average                                     61     171     2.3
MSE                                        4.4    242.7    0.2
LSD 0.05                                   2.88   21.58    0.61
LSD 0.01                                   3.78   28.37    0.81

Genealogy                                  EA (1)    %      %
                                                    Lod    Cob

(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-2      1.6     4.2    1.8
(LT-154 x CML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-1    1.6     0.0    8.3
(LT154xCML144)LT1 54R[C.sub.2]-2-1 -2       1.6     0.0    0.0
(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154 R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2     1.8     2.3    4.5
Ur-154                                      2.3     0.0    0.0
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-9         1.8     6.0    0.0
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-2-1-1         1.6     16.7   20.2
(LT155 xCML 144)LT 15 5R[C.sub.2]-2-2-3     1.8     0.0    23.0
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-18        2.0     36.0   7.9
LT-155                                      1.8     21.9   7.9
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-6          1.5     8.6    11.8
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-2          1.5     5.6    7.3
(CABGxCML144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-3-2-5           2.8     0.0    6.7
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-4-1 -2         1.9     3.6    0.0
LT-156                                      2.4     0.0    0.0
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-4          1.6     22.3   11.8
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2          1.4     9.1    10.9
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1          1.9     1.7    0.0
(D539xCML144)D539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-5           1.6     19.4   3.6
(LRB14xCML144)LRB14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2         2.1     3.6    6.6
(LRB14xCML144)LRB-14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1        2.8     6.9    5.6
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-3-1       2.3     22.1   3.1
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-3-1-7       1.8     0.0    0.0
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-2-7       1.6     5.4    13.5
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-4       1.8     0.0    0.0
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-6       1.6     9.2    0.0
FAM V-537 C-1-1-2                           1.0     1.7    8.9
FAM V-537 C-1-1-1                           1.3     0.0    0.0
FAM-V-537 C-2-1-1                           1.8     15.0   8.8
FAM v-537 C-2-2-1                           2.5     0.0    34.0
CML-142                                     2.0     0.0    3.6
CML-159                                     1.9     10.5   8.8
CML-491                                     2.0     7.3    0.0

Average                                     2.0     11.4   6.7
MSE                                         0.2     3.1    2.9
LSD 0.05                                    0.61    2.44   2.36
LSD 0.01                                    0.81    3.20   3.10

Genealogy                                   %     Segr   Text
                                            ER

(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-2     4.1    2.0     D
(LT-154 x CML-144)LT-154R[C.sub.2]-5-1-1   8.9    1.5     D
(LT154xCML144)LT1 54R[C.sub.2]-2-1 -2      5.8    0.5     SD
(LT-154xCML-144)LT-154 R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2    13.6   1.5     SD
Ur-154                                     10.2   1.0
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-9        4.5    2.0     SD
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-2-1-1        4.6    2.0     SD
(LT155 xCML 144)LT 15 5R[C.sub.2]-2-2-3    11.9   3.0     SD
(LT155xCML144)LT155R[C.sub.2]-1-1-18       9.5    1.5     F
LT-155                                     2.3    1.5
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-6         6.2    2.5     SD
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-1-1-2         2.1    1.0     D
(CABGxCML144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-3-2-5          13.8   1.0     SF
(CABGxCML 144)CABGR[C.sub.2]-4-1 -2        6.3    2.0     SD
LT-156                                     4.1    1.5
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-4         10.2   1.5     SD
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2         12.3   2.0     D
(D539xCML144)D-539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1         11.3   3.0     SD
(D539xCML144)D539R[C.sub.2]-1-1-5          5.4    2.0     SF
(LRB14xCML144)LRB14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-2        10.6   1.0     F
(LRB14xCML144)LRB-14R[C.sub.2]-1-1-1       8.7    2.0     F
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-3-1      8.2    2.0     D
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-3-1-7      9.9    1.5     D
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-1-2-7      4.8    1.0     F
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-4      6.1    1.5     SD
(VS-536xV-537C)VS-536R[C.sub.2]-2-2-6      4.0    2.0     D
FAM V-537 C-1-1-2                          3.3    2.0     SF
FAM V-537 C-1-1-1                          5.3    1.5     SD
FAM-V-537 C-2-1-1                          6.7    2.5     D
FAM v-537 C-2-2-1                          15.6   2.5     SD
CML-142                                    3.4    1.5     F
CML-159                                    6.6    1.5     F
CML-491                                    12.0   1.0     F

Average                                    9.0    1.6
MSE                                        2.3    0.4
LSD 0.05                                   2.10   1.26
LSD 0.01                                   2.76   1.66

(a): autum-winter season, (b): spring-summer season,
* Statistical significance at p [less than or equal to] 0.05,
** statistican significance at p [less than or equal to] 0.01,
GY: grain yield, REL%: relative percentage, DT: days to tassel,
PH: plant height, PA: plant aspect, EA: ear aspect,%
Lod: percentage of lodging, % Cob: percentage of
bad husk cover, % ER: percentage of ear rot,
Segr: segregation of grain opaque character,
CV: coefficient of variation, MSE: mean square error,
LSD: least significant difference, Text: grain texture,
D: dent, F: flint, SD: semi-dent, SF: semi-flint,
(1): scale of 1 to 5 where, 1 is the best and 5 the worst.

TABLE III
AVERAGE YIELD AND AGRONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
OF GROUPS OF MAIZE INBRED LINES CONVERTED TO THE OF
HIGH QUALITY PROTEIN CHARACTER. COTAXTLA, VERACRUZ,
MEXICO, 2012 (a) AND 2012 (b)

Num lines   Genealogy       GY (t         TC      Rel %   Days to
                         [ha.sup.-1])                     tassel

6             D-539          4.30       3.80 **    139      61
8             V537C          4.30       4.00 **    139      59
45            VS-536         3.50       1.52 NS    113      61
7             LT154          3.40       0.95 NS    110      61
33            LT-155         3.40       1.14 NS    110      61
18             CABG          3.20       0.36 NS    103      61
5              CMLS          3.20       0.31 NS    103      61
2             LRB-14         2.40       1.70 NS     77      61
4           LTs normal       3.10                  100      63
128          Average         3.50                           61

Num lines   Plant    Plant     Ear        %
            height   aspect   aspect   Lodging
                      (1)      (1)

6            173      2.2      1.8      11.1
8            162      2.5      1.9       5.4
45           170      2.3      1.9      14.3
7            171      2.3      1.9       8.2
33           170      2.4      2.1      13.2
18           175      2.3      2.0       7.5
5            181      2.4      2.2       7.2
2            176      2.8      2.4       5.3
4            178      2.3      2.2       7.0
128          171      2.3      2.0      11.4

Num lines   % Cob   % ER   Segr   Text

6            4.8     9.7   2.2     SD
8           14.0    10.7   2.0     SD
45           4.0     8.6   1.5     SD
7            2.9     9.4   1.0     SD
33           8.4    10.0   1.5     SD
18           5.8     6.8   1.5     SD
5           18.3    12.2   1.6     F
2            6.1     9.7   1.5     F
4            6.9     5.3           SD
128          6.7     9.0

(a): autum-winter season, (b): spring-summer season,
**: Statistical significance at p [less than or equal to] 0.01,
NS: non significant, GY: grain yield, TC: calculated
T, Rel%: relative percentage, %Cob: percentage of bad
husk cover, %ER: percentage of ear rot, Segr: segregation
of grain opaque character, Text: grain texture, (1): scale
of 1 to 5 where, 1 is the best and 5 the worst,
SD: semi-dent, F: flint.

TABLE IV
CONTENT OF LYSINE AND TRYPTOPHAN IN
SYNTHETICS WITH MAIZE LINES CONVERTED TO THE
CHARACTER OF HIGH QUALITY PROTEIN. COTAXTLA,
VERACRUZ, MEXICO, 2011

Genotype             % Lysine   Relative %    Genotype

Synthetic 1           0.390        155       Synthetic 5
Synthetic 5           0.375        149       Synthetic 1
Synthetic 2           0.359        142       Synthetic 4
Synthetic 4           0.342        136       Synthetic 2
General mean          0.367
Tuxpeno (normal) *    0.252        100

Genotype             % Tryptophan   Relative %

Synthetic 1             0.113          206
Synthetic 5             0.095          173
Synthetic 2             0.093          169
Synthetic 4             0.089          162
General mean            0.098
Tuxpeno (normal) *      0.055          100

* de Vidal et al. (2008).
COPYRIGHT 2014 Interciencia Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2014 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:texto en ingles
Author:Sierra-Macias, Mauro; Andres-Meza, Pablo; Rodriguez-Montalvo, Flavio; Gomez-Montiel, Noel; Espinosa-
Publication:Interciencia
Date:Aug 1, 2014
Words:5447
Previous Article:Ibero-America in mainstream science (Thomson Reuters/Scopus): a fragmented region/Iberoamerica en la ciencia de corriente principal (Thomson...
Next Article:About human settlement in the South-Central Andes and its relation to the Amazonian region/En torno al poblamiento de los Andes sur-centrales y su...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters