Evaluation of the silage potential of resistant to rhizomania sugar beet lines

Document Type : Scientific - Research

Authors

1 Instructor of Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) - Agricultural Research Education and Extension, Karaj, Iran.

2 Assistant professor of Department of Sugar Beet Research, Fars Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center (AREEO) Shiraz, Iran.

3 Associate Professor of Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) - Agricultural Research Education and Extension, Karaj, Iran.

Abstract

A quality decrease of sugar beet roots under silage condition may vary for susceptible and resistant to rhizomania cultivars. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of resistant to rhizomania sugar beet pollinators under silage condition in Karaj (non rhizomania infected area) in 2014 and in Zarghan(infected to rhizomania site), Fars, Iran in 2015-16. The experiment was conducted in split plot in time based on a randomized complete block design with three replications. Studied factors included 11 sugar beet line comprised of nine genotypes, on susceptible and one resistant cultivars and silage duration including three levels of 20, 40 and 60 days. Different traits such as root dry matter, sucrose, sodium, potassium, alpha amino nitrogen, brix, and extraction coefficient of sugar were measured before and after silage. Roots were scored in terms of rot occurrence after silage. Results showed that rot severity of the roots in Zarghan was higher than Karaj. In Zarghan, the root rot of the sugar beet genotypes 31924, 31927, 31929, 32003, 32814 were lower than other genotypes after 60 days silage. During the three-years experiment, the silage potential of the sugar beet genotype 32003 with 71.86% extraction coefficient of sugar was more than other genotypes which can be used as a genotype with better silage condition in sugar beet breeding programs.

Keywords

References

Abdollahian Noghabi M, Babaee B, Fotohi K. Improving the quality of the technology and reducing the waste of sugar beet harvesting and storage. In: Taleghani D, SadeghZadeh Hamati S. Mesbah M. National Strategy Paper for Sugar Beet Research. Sugar Beet Seed Institute 2010; chapter 15; 520 pp (in Persian(.
Abdollahian Noghabi M, Babaei B, Mansouri B, Noushad h. Effect of storage method in field silage on weight loss and quality of sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2009; 25 (1), 71-86. (In Persian, abstract in English(.
Akeson WR. Methods for estimating sucrose loss in laboratory storage tests. Journal of the American society of sugar beet technologists. 1980; 21 56-73.
Alimoradi A. Biochemical changes of sugar beet quality in storage duration. Iran Sugar Industries Journal. 2002; 154 136-125.
Asadi, M. Beet-sugar handbook. 2007; A John Wiley and Sons, incorporation, 884 pp.
Buttner G, Pfahler B, Marlande B. Greenhouse and field techniques for testing sugar beet for resistance to Rhizoctonia root and crown rot. Plant Breeding, 2004; 123 158-166.
Burcky K, Maier J. Sugar loss in beets stored in field clamps with and without cover. Zukerindustrie. 2005; 130 (12) 891-896.
Campbell LG, Klotz KL. Postharvest storage losses associated with rhizomania in Sugar beet. Plant Diseases. 2008; 92 572-580.
Campbell LG, Windels CE, Fugate, KK, Brantner JR. Postharvest losses associated with severity of rhizoctonia crown and root rot of sugarbeet at Harvest. Journal of Sugar Beet Research. 2014; 51 (1) 31-51.
De Biaggi M, Stevanato P, Trebbi D, Saccomani M, Biancardi, E. Sugar beet resistance to rhizomania: State of the art and perspectives. Sugar Technology. 2010; 12 (3–4) 238–242.
Kenter C, Hoffmann C, Märländer B. Sugar beet as raw material Advanced storage management to gain good processing quality. Sugar industry. 2006; 131 706-720.
Kenter C, Hoffman C. Influence of drought stress on quality and storage properties of sugarbeet. Sugar Industry. 2008; 133 155-160.
Kenter C, Hoffmann CM. Changes in the processing quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) during long-term storage under controlled conditions. International journal of food science and technology. 2009; 44 910-917.
Klotz KL, Campbell LG. Effects of Aphanomyces root rot on carbohydrate impurities and sucrose extract ability inpostharvest sugar beet. Plant Disease. 2009; 93 94-99.
Kunz M. Beet. The International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis (ICUMSA) general subject 6. 1998; 138-146.
Lescure JP. Beet sugar Processing. The International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis (ICUMSA), general subject 8. 1998; 153-161.
Luterbacher MC, Asher MJC, Beyer W, Mandolino G, Scholten OE, Frese L, Biancardi E, Stevanato P, Mechelke W, Slyvchenko O. Sources of resistance to diseases of sugar beet in related Beta germplasm: Soil borne diseases. Euphytica. 2005; 141 49-63.
Martens M, Oldfield JFT. Storage of sugar beet in Europe report of an IIRB enquiry. Journal of the Institute for Sugar Beet Research, 1970; 5 102-28.
Reinefeld E, Emmerich A, Baumgarten G, Winner C, Beiss U. Zur voraussage des melassezuckers aus rubenanalysen. Zucker; 1974; 27 2-15.
Strausbaugh CA, Rearick E, Camp S, Gallian JJ, Dyer AT. Influence of beet necrotic yellow vein virus on sugar beet storability. Plant Diseases. 2008; 92 581-587.
-Strausbaugh CA, Eujayl I, Rearick E, Foot P, Elison D, Sugar beet cultivar evaluation for storability and rhizomania resistance. Plant Diseases. 2009; 93 632-638.
Van der poel PW, Schiweck H, Schwartz T. Sugar technology beet and cane sugar manufacture Verlag Dr Albert Bartens KG 1998; 1120 pp.
Vukov K, Hangyal K. Sugar beet storage. Sugar Technological Review, 1985; 12 143–265.
Wyse R. Effect of harvst injuries on respiration and sucrose loss in sugarbeet roots during storage. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists, 1978; 20 193–202.
Journal of Sugar Beet
Volume 35, Issue 1
September 2019
Pages 1-12

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics