ISSN 1068�3674, Russian Agricultural Sciences, 2014, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 81–83. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2014.Original Russian Text © V.V. Glukhovtsev, G.Ya. Maslova, Yu.P. Borisenkov, N.I. Kitlyarova, 2014, published in Doklady Rossiiskoi Akademii Sel’skokhozyaistvennykh Nauk,2014, No. 1, pp. 3–5.

81

INTRODUCTION

An increase of productivity, quality, and stabiliza�tion of gross yield of wheat is an urgent task in the Mid�dle Povolzhye. Diseases and pests cause a lot of damageto its production every year. In 2008, Russia obtained thehighest total grain yield—108 million tons—while thelosses from diseases were 12.7 million tons [1].

Currently, the use of resistant varieties is the mostefficient, cost�effective, and most friendly method ofcrop protection against pathogens. Unfortunately, dueto the lack of works on creation of varieties resistant todiseases, their portion is only 12–15% of the sown areain Russia [2, 3]; the part of varieties resistant to pests iseven less.

In the 1960s, scientists of Konstantinov PovolzhskyResearch and Development Institute of Selection andSeed Growing began their studies on the resistance ofcrop varieties to stress factors during their vegetation.It was found that, along with the high�yield and high�quality varieties, varieties with complex resistance toadverse factors of abiotic and biotic nature arerequired in contrasting conditions. The most damag�ing pests and diseases for cereal crops were also identi�fied. Creating varieties with complex resistance tostress factors requires a multiplane approach: the useof complex multicrosses, the involvement of interspe�cific and intergeneric crosses, creation of artificialinfectious backgrounds, development of the mosteffective methods of artificial inoculation, and focusedselection.

Phytosanitary situation in the farms of the Samaraoblast deteriorated significantly in recent years. Plantresistance reduced for many reasons: because of theappearance of new races of pathogens, saturation ofcrop rotations by grains, surface tillage, direct seedingwithout treatment, etc. Brown rust (Puccinia recond�ita), powdery mildew (Erysipse graminis), and chinch(Eurygaster integriceps) are the most harmful for win�ter wheat.

The aims of this work are the economic and biolog�ical evaluations of winter wheat varieties in the com�petitive variety trial.

METHODS

Studies were performed in 2008–2011 in the com�petitive trial nursery of Povolzhsky Research Institute;the predecessor was a black fallow. Soil of the plot wasan ordinary medium�deep, medium�humic cher�nozem. The experiment was repeated four times, andthe area of the plots was 25 m2 with systematicarrangement. Tillage was performed as is accepted forthe conditions of the Samara oblast. Every year, 25–28 varieties passed the competitive trial. It should benoted that the majority of breeders work currently withmore clearly manifested monogenic (vertical) resis�tance and, thus, underestimate the field resistance,which leads to the loss of horizontal resistance proper�ties in many varieties and does not allow them to growsuccessfully for many years.

Breeding of Winter Wheat for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic Factors under Conditions of the Middle PovolzhyeV. V. Glukhovtsev, G. Ya. Maslova, Yu. P. Borisenkov, and N. I. KitlyarovaKonstantinov Povolzhsky Research and Development Institute of Selection and Seed Growing,

Samara oblast, 446442 Russiae�mail: gnu_pniiss@mail.ru

Received January 18, 2012

Abstract—As a result of many�year research, the methods of wheat breeding for resistance to pests and dis�eases have been developed. They are based on interspecific and remote crossings by the use of various typesof step hybridization and multiple individual selection with account for determination of specifically assignedtasks. On that basis, the immune conception for breeding the grain crops for productivity, plasticity in yield,and quality of grain and complex resistance to pests and diseases most propagated in the region has been cre�ated.

Keywords: winter wheat, resistance to diseases and pests, stress factors, phytopatogenes, breeding selection,complex resistance, drought

DOI: 10.3103/S1068367414020062

PLANT CULTIVATION

82

RUSSIAN AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES Vol. 40 No. 2 2014

GLUKHOVTSEV et al.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In 2008, 23 varieties were tested, 20 of them wereaffected moderately by brown rust, and only four wereslightly affected (0–1 points): Velyutinum 3609,Erythrospermum 2998, Erythrospermum 3121, andErythrospermum 3673. In the same year, Lutescens3333, Lutescens 3317, Lutescens 2628, and Eryth�rospermum 3121 varieties stood out for resistance topowdery mildew (1.0–1.5 points), while others wererated by 2.0–2.5 points.

May and June 2009 were periods of low rainfall—15 and 17 mm, respectively, with mean annual norm33 and 39 mm. Relative humidity was 33–50%. In2010, the susceptibility of winter wheat varieties withthese diseases was observed due to the high average airtemperature (23.7°C in June, 4.3°C above the long�term average). Rainfall was almost absent—3.7 mm ata rate of 39 mm per month. Favorable conditions forthe development and spread of the disease wereobserved in spring 2011 from the second decade ofMay. Powdery mildew was recorded on all varieties.Air and soil drought dried up the lower infected leaves,which slowed the spread of the disease to the upperstories.

The specificity of the selection process in terms ofthe Middle Povolzhye is due to the contrast of weatherconditions in the region: dry and badly droughty years(50%) alternate with years of average in wetting (25%)and even wet (25%). The negative effect of drought is

aggravated by massive spread of helmithosporium darkbrown root rot (Bipolaris sorokiniana) and cereal fleabeetle (Chaetocnema aridula). Drought, repeated forseveral consecutive years, causes the greatest damageto the region’s economy. Such adverse conditions werecharacteristic of 1995–1999 and 2005–2010. Manyvarieties that did not have a high resistance to droughtand a combined resistance to stress factors died or gavemeager yields of grain.

Based on years of research, a scientific concept oncreation of high�yielding, high�quality, tolerant to abi�otic and biotic factors varieties of cereals was devel�oped in Povolzhsky Research Institute. Povolzhskaya86, Kostiantynovskaya, and Kinelskaya 8 varietiesbecame a certain achievement in breeding of winterwheat (Table 1). They are characterized by high winterhardiness, resistance to ground ice crust, snow molddamage, and other stresses that contributes to highand stable yields of grain even in extremely dry years.

Winter wheat variety Povolzhskaya 86 has been inproduction for more than 16 years and has a greatdemand in Povolzhye and Urals. In 2009, a patent fora new variety of winter wheat Konstantinovskaya wasreceived, whose yield was 3.2–4.0 t/ha of high�qualitygrain even in conditions of stable drought in 2010 and2011. Both varieties showed good overwintering in2011 when tested on Natilovskaya Experimental Sta�tion, when the most part of varieties died. Winterwheat variety Kinelskaya 8 is currently in state trial. In2007–2011, an average grain yield of this variety in the

Table 1. Characteristics of the best varieties of winter wheat of Povolzhsky Research Institute

Variety Year Grain yield, cwt/ha

Weight of 1000 grains, g

Natural weight of grains, g/L

Content of, %

proteins gluten

Povolzhskaya 86 2007 29.5 43.2 735 14.1 32.8

2008 31.6 42.4 762 14.8 28.3

2009 31.2 38.0 791 15.9 31.2

2010 23.6 37.0 765 16.5 28.0

2011 24.1 46.0 750 16.4 33.6

Average 28.0 41.3 760 15.5 30.8

Konstanti�novskaya

2007 41.0 42.8 776 15.2 30.8

2008 29.5 49.3 782 14.9 30.0

2009 37.8 42.8 832 15.2 28.8

2010 27.4 37.8 788 15.5 28.8

2011 28.1 48.4 769 15.0 32.0

Average 32.8 44.2 789 15.2 30.1

Kinelskaya 8 2007 39.7 44.0 780 17.7 35.0

2008 34.8 46.9 770 14.7 36.4

2009 36.0 38.2 806 15.9 33.4

2010 27.8 36.2 772 15.8 30.4

2011 28.5 48.2 761 15.0 34.8

Average 33.4 42.7 778 15.8 33.6

RUSSIAN AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES Vol. 40 No. 2 2014

BREEDING OF WINTER WHEAT FOR RESISTANCE TO BIOTIC AND ABIOTIC FACTORS 83

competitive trial was 3.3 t/ha, natural weight of thegrain was 778 g/L, the content of protein was 15.8%,and the content of gluten was 33.6%.

Besides diseases, chinch also deals enormous dam�age to the sowings of winter wheat in the conditions ofthe Povolzhye region. Damaging plants, insects causethinning of stalks and drying of leaves; therefore, theyreduce yield, weight of 1000 grains, natural weight ofthe grain and its quality, and especially the content ofprotein and gluten; decrease its viscosity and elastic�ity; and it becomes unsuitable for high�quality breadbaking. A large population of this pest was revealedduring the spring inspection in 2011: along field edgesof seed�growing plots, there were 80–100 ind./m2 andmore; adult chinches were seen before harvesting. In2008, 2.5–9.0% of grains of many varieties were dam�aged by chinch, the quality of gluten was 2–3 group; in2009 it was 1–5% and 1–2 group, respectively, in2010–2011 it was 2.5–7.5%, 3–10%, and group 3.

Each year, to create disease�resistant varieties, weattract new sources for crossbreeding, especially wide�varieties of Krasnodar, Rostov, and Odessa breeding,as well as varieties of hard winter wheat (Chernomor,Koral, Iceberg, etc.). Evaluation of breeding material,created in recent years, shows a marked increase intheir resistance to diseases. All varieties of winterwheat presented in Table 2 are valuable as raw mate�rial, and varieties Lutescens 3666, Erythrospermum3676, and Erythrospermum 3609 are expected to passstate and production trials in coming years. From theviewpoint of practical breeding varieties with highwinter hardiness and drought resistance, yield andgrain quality stable from year to year are mostly indemand. New presented varieties of winter wheat arepromising for several other valuable features. Within2 years, their average yield of grain was 24.2–30.8 cwt/ha, weight of 1000 grains was 44.5–49.5 g,and protein content was 14.5–16.2%. All varieties are

well adapted to the conditions of Middle Povolzhyeand are of interest for trials under production condi�tions.

REFERENCES

1. Sanin, S.S., et al., Chemical protection of wheat frominfections during intensive agriculture, Zashch. Karan�tin Rast., 2011, no. 8, pp. 3–10.

2. Pavlyushin, V.A., Ustoichivye sorta – vazhneishii ele�ment fitosanitarnoi optimizatsii agroekosistem (ResistantCultivars as an Important Element of PhytosanitaryImprovement of Agricultural Ecosystems), St. Peters�burg, 2002.

3. Kol’bin, D.A. and Volkova, G.V., Cultivars of foreignselection as a source of nonspecific resistance to brownrust of wheat, in Mater. VI Mezhd. nauchn.�prakt. konf.posvyashchennoi 50�letiyu Vseross. Nauchno�Issled.Inst. Biol. Zashchity rastenii, Ross. S�kh Akad. Nauk(Proc. VI Int. Sci.�Pract. Conf. Devoted to 50th of All�Russian Scientific�Research Institute of BiologicalProtection of the Plants, Russian Academy of Agricul�tural Sciences), Krasnodar, 2010, pp. 559–563.

4. Glukhovtsev, V.V., Peculiarities of adaptive selection ofcereals in Central Volga region, Agrar. Vestn. Yugo�Vost., 2009, no. 1, pp. 12–14

5. Glukhovtsev, V.V., et al., Osnovy nauchnykh issledovaniiv agronomii (Scientific Principles of Agronomic Stud�ies), Samara, 2008.

6. Glukhovtsev, V.V., Maslova, G.Ya., Borisenkov, Yu.P.,and Kitlyarova, N.I., The results of selection of winterwheat in Volga Regional Scientific Research Institute ofSelection and Seed named after P.N. Konstantinov, inMater. Mezhd. nauchno�prakt. konf. “Povyshenieurozhainosti i kachestva produktsii zernovykh, kor�movykh i tekhnicheskikh kul’tur” (Proc. Int. Sci.�Pract.Conf. “Improvement of the Yield and Quality of Grain,Forage, and Technical Corps), Samara, 2005, pp. 7–12.

Translated by M. Shulskaya

Table 2. Economic and biological evaluation of some outstanding varieties (competitive trial 2008, 2011)

Variety Winter hardi�ness, point

Grain yield, cwt/ha

Plant height, cm

Diseased, point Weight of 1000 grains, g

Content of proteins, %powdery mildew brown rust

Povolzhskaya 86 5.0 27.8 91 1.0 1.0 48.1 15.0

Lutescens 3333 4.7 26.6 100 1.0 1.0 45.7 14.8

Lutescens 3339 4.7 24.2 84 1.5 1.5 48.8 14.9

Lutescens 3585 4.6 25.8 90 1.5 1.5 45.3 15.2

Lutescens 3317 4.9 27.0 91 1.0 1.5 44.5 14.6

Lutescens 3578 4.7 26.9 104 1.5 1.5 45.2 15.3

Lutescens 3666 5.0 29.6 102 1.0 1.5 45.7 14.5

Lutescens 3284 4.7 26.0 88 1.5 1.0 47.4 15.5

Erythrospermum 3676 5.0 29.7 110 1.5 1.0 49.5 16.0

Erythrospermum 3609 4.7 30.8 90 1.5 1.0 48.3 16.2