Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
American Malting Barley Association, Inc.
Malting Barley in North America
Scott E. Heisel
Champlain’s Garden - 1610
Newfoundland -1617
Martha’s Vineyard - 1602
Jamestown -1611
Spanish Introduction - 1494
1701
Land Races
Mixtures of many lines Change when grown in new area
First pure varieties were from selections out of land races Chevalier – 1824 selection
“hybrid” barley originating in the late 1800’s
August 10, 1788
“Should this letter get to your hands in time for the
Sailing of Captn. Ellwood, and you can readily
procure 25 bushls. of the best kind of Winter Barley I
beg you to send it by him that I may try the success
of it. The continual rains destroyed my Crop of spring
Barley this year, but, if it had been otherwise, the
Barley which you sent me the year before was so
mixed with Oats (a circumstances I did not know till
this Summer, as it was harvested while I was in
Philadelphia) that it would no longer do to sow it.
Could I be supplied with a quantity of that (spring
Barley) which is really good from your City? Could I
get it upon better terms from Rhode Island? and at
what price (delivered here) might it be received from
either place?”
September 16, 1788
………… “If you have not already purchased the
Winter Barley I would not wish you to do it, for I think
it is very probable that I may be able to get the
quantity which I shall want of the Brewer in
Alexandria in exchange for Spring Barley, or if I
should be disappointed there, that I can obtain it
upon better terms and perhaps of a better quality
upon James River than at Philadelphia, as you
observe that the crops of it have generally failed, and
none has yet been seen that is fit for seed.”
Transportation
• Barley produced locally
• Barge transportation
• Railroads opened new production areas
> 50,000
20,000-50,000
10,000-20,000
5,000-10,000
2,000-5,000
1,000-2,000
500-1,000
200-500
100-200
1-100
Undisclosed*
2012 Harvested Barley Acres By County 2012 USDA Census of Agriculture
*Data not disclosed to avoid identifying an individual operation. Typically means only a single barley farm in the county.
CANADIAN BARLEY GROWING AREA
ALBERTA SASKATCHEWAN
MANITOBA
2012 Harvested Barley Acres By County Midwest US
2012 USDA Census of Agriculture
> 50,000
20,000-50,000
10,000-20,000
5,000-10,000
2,000-5,000
1,000-2,000
500-1,000
200-500
100-200
1-100
Undisclosed*
*Data not disclosed to avoid identifying an individual operation. Typically means only a single barley farm in the county.
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014
US Barley Acreage Million Acres
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
Canadian Barley Acreage
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1986 2012
US Barley Use
Malting
Feed
Exports
Seed
Food
21.8% Malting 57.3% 51.1% Feed 30.7% 22.7% Exports 4.6% 3.1% Seed 3.8% 1.3% Food 3.6%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
1986 2012
US Barley Production & Malt Use CO, ID, MN, MT, ND, WY
Total
Malting
Use
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Other
Two-Row
Six-Row
US Barley Variety Types Malting as a % of Total
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Two-Row
Six-Row
US Barley Variety Types Head Type as a % of Total Malt
Note: 1986-2012 based on USDA Variety Surveys and 2013-2015 based on Industry contracting survey.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Production
Consumption
Stocks
World Barley Production & Consumption Millions of Metric Tons
Why Has Barley Acreage Declined?
Static domestic malt use, limited barley & malt exports
Decline in use for feed = primary secondary use Competition from abundant supplies of corn and dried distillers grain (DDGs)
Static & limited food use – although has FDA Healthy Heart Claim USDA Barley Health Benefits Project – AMBA/NBIC lobbying
High risk crop – many chances for failure in making malting grade Good return as malting, low or no return as feed Risks: - Fusarium head blight (scab), other diseases, drought & heat stress, quality requirements
Competition with other crops – GROWERS HAVE OTHER OPTIONS Corn, soybeans, canola = large and growing markets Substantial investment by biotech seed companies, including GM variety development, in these crops and now wheat
Why Has Barley Acreage Declined?
Barley research & variety development primarily in public sector State and provincial universities; USDA-ARS and Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada
Limited and declining public sector investment
Limited variety development by companies US = Two brewers, one maltster, one private sector company – all traditional breeding - minor part of their business, driven to meet needs, not profit - depend on public sector for other research needs
Little or no interest by biotech seed companies in barley Low acreage compared to other major crops
Substantial cost to commercialize a GM variety
Biotech Crops with improved traits, including GM, have pushed barley out of higher rainfall areas into more marginal, dry ones
What happens to barley when it faces competition from GM drought tolerant corn, wheat and other crops that are being developed?
Barley Development
GM Barley Conclusions
No commercial GM barley expected in foreseeable future
Cost of commercialization precludes public sector university or federal
research agency commercialization
Would require Biotech seed company to commercialize – none appear
interested at this time
If work was initiated now, and gene discovery & construction, gene
transfer, and utility already demonstrated, it would still take an
estimated 10 years+ to complete the process to a commercially
approved GM barley
US Malting Barley Variety Development Programs (breeding, genetics, supporting and other research)
Montana State University AB-InBev
North Dakota State University Malteurop
Oregon State University MillerCoors
University of California – Davis Limagrain
University of Minnesota
University of Nebraska
USDA-ARS, Aberdeen, ID
USDA-ARS, Raleigh, NC
Utah State University
Virginia Polytech & State University
Washington State University
AMBA member
Funded by AMBA
US Breeding Programs
MSU NDSU
ARS
ARS
UM MillerCoors
ABI
OSU
UN
WSU
ARS VT
UC
Canadian Malting Barley Variety Development Programs
Primary
AAFC, Brandon, MB
University of Saskatchewan
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development
Secondary
Sapporo Breweries Ltd.
Syngenta
US Varieties are entered into Canadian testing system for
potential registration and production
Brewing & Malting Barley Research Institute (BMBRI) – AMBA’s
Canadian Counterpart
Adequate & Effective National Public Sector
Barley Research Infrastructure
Facilities
Direction Funding AMBA, Federal, State, Growers, Brewers, Maltsters
Personnel
Coordination of US Malting Barley Research
Lobbying Congress, Federal Agencies, and State Universities to positively impact all these research infrastructure components
The industry also lobbies with barley growers for favorable federal farm program provisions (e.g. crop insurance)
10 – 12 Years to develop a new malting barley
variety.
Year 1 (winter): Crossing in Greenhouse. Often
one parent of good quality and another with
good agronomic characters.
Year 1 (summer): Grow 600 plants per cross
grown in field.
Years 2- 4: Agronomic selection with summer
nurseries and winter nurseries. Yield, height,
plumpness, color, protein….
Traditional Breeding
Year 5: Advanced yield trials at several
locations.
Years 6-10: Varietal and regional yield at many
locations.
Traditional Breeding
Years 3-5: Early generation pilot scale testing at
the USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit.
Years 6-7: AMBA pilot scale trials testing. Two
nurseries at two locations evaluated by four
collaborators. Five lines per breeding program.
Years 8-9: Commercial malting and brewing
trials
Barley Biotechnology Toolbox
Gene tracking Technology (genotyping) Initial methodology = one gene
Current technology = tens of thousands of genes at one time
Current major genotyping technology Based on Single Nucletotide Polymorphisms (SNPs)
Illumina BeadXpress system (old) – Illumina iSelect system (new)
Exome capture sequencing
Next generation technology for genotyping Genotyping by Sequencing (GBS)
Gene tracking applications Marker Assisted Selection (MAS)
Track introgression of one or a few genes
Genomic Selection (GS)
Track thousands of genes to develop lines with desired agronomic & quality traits
Barley Biotechnology Tool Box
X - No GM variety development
Targeted genetic improvements without being transgenic (GM)
Induce base pair gene changes by the plant not through gene
transformation technology
Rapid Trait Development System (RTDS) - Cibus
(considered mutagenesis technology by USDA)
Doubled Haploid (DH) Barley Line Development
Rapid development of genetically homozygous varieties
Keeping Barley Competitive With Other Crops
Barley biotechnology research in of itself is not enough to keep barley
competitive with biotech seed crops
Coordinated research in many disciples is needed Breeding, genetics, molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, pathology, management
Adequate & effective national public sector barley research infrastructure
Stakeholder funding, direction, and collaboration American Malting Barley Association (AMBA)
Brewing & Malting Barley Research Institute (BMBRI, Canada)
Brewers Association (BA)
Individual malting & brewing companies
State barley grower organizations
GM Barley?
Current Status & Considerations
Growing consumer resistance and concerns about GM
Mixed views of malting, brewing, distilling, and food end-users Strongly opposed - to neutral - to supportive
Thus no clear signal to biotech seed companies to pursue
Developmental costs of GM barley too high to recover investment Low acreage compared to major crops and thus limited seed sale potential
A unique trait, with exclusive IP rights, and substantial economic
benefits (e.g. drought tolerance, major disease resistance) that could be used
worldwide, may provide viable market
Agricultural Policy
Players • American Malting Barley Association
• National Barley Growers Association & Individual State Grower Organizations
• Federal Agencies – RMA, FSA, FDA, EPA, DOE, FGIS
Farm Bill • Pre 1996 Farm Bill (Freedom to Farm), USDA programs encouraged stable base acre
• Current programs uncoupled to production and based on historic plantings
• Congress unlikely to implement programs that impact planting decisions
Crop Insurance • USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA)
• Critical to mitigate risk of growing malting barley
• Coverage per acre relative to other crops
American Malting Barley Association, Inc.
Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
Miller Brewing Company
Sierra Nevada Brewing Company
Briess Malting Company
Cargill Malt
Froedtert Malt
Great Western Malting Company
Rahr Malting Company
AB-InBev
Bell’s Brewery
Boston Beer
Briess Malt & Ingredients
Brooklyn Brewery
Brown-Forman
Cargill Malt
Craft Brew Alliance
Deschutes Brewery
Dogfish Head Craft Brewery
Gambrinus Company
Great Western Malting
Heineken Mexico
InteGrow Malt
Malteurop North America
MillerCoors
New Belgium Brewing
New Glarus Brewing
Oskar Blues Brewery
Rahr Malting
Schell’s Brewing
Sierra Nevada Brewing
Stone Brewing
Summit Brewing
REGULAR MEMBERS (24)
American Malting Barley Association, Inc.
Abita Brewing
Alaskan Brewing
Allagash Brewing
Anchor Brewing
Ballast Point Brewery & Spirits
Bear Republic Brewing
Big Sky Malts
Blacklands Malt
Blue Ox Malthouse
Boulevard Brewing
Cigar City Brewing
C’N’C Malting Company
Cold Spring Brewing
Colorado Malting
Deer Creek Malthouse
Epiphany Craft Malt
Farm Boy Farms
Firestone Walker Brewing
Flying Dog Brewery
Founders Brewing
Full Sail Brewing
Georgetown Brewing
Gold Rush Malt
Harpoon Brewery
Langunitas Brewing
Lakefront Brewery
Left Hand Brewing
Leopold Bros Distillery
American Malting Barley Association, Inc.
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS (56)
Long Trail Brewing
Lost Coast Brewery
Malterie Frontenac
Matt Brewing
New Holland Brewing
Odell Brewing
Oran Station Brewing Supplies
Penns Mault
Pilot Malt House
Rahr & Sons Brewing
Real Ale Brewing
Riverbend Malt House
Rogue Ales
Russian River Brewing
Saint Arnold Brewing
Schlafly Beer
Smuttynose Brewing
Southern Tier Brewing
Sprecher Brewing
Straub Brewery
Sun King Brewing
Troegs Brewing
Uinta Brewing
Urban Chestnut Brewing
Utah Brewers Cooperative
Valley Malt
Victory Brewing
Wachusett Brewing
American Malting Barley Association, Inc. ASSOCIATE MEMBERS (56)
1994 1999 2006 2012 2014
MIDWEST
Spring 6-Row 59.5% 55.5% 48.1% 34.3% 14.3%
Spring 2-Row 7.1% 10.0% 0.0%* 14.0% 34.3%
Winter 6-Row 1.4% 0.6%
Winter 2-Row 6.9% 7.1%
Subtotal 66.6% 65.5% 59.8% 56.6% 54.7%
*Funding for Midwest 2-Row eliminated for 2006.
WEST
Spring 6-Row 14.3% 15.6% 14.3% 2.1% 0.1%
Spring 2-Row 13.1% 15.6% 13.1% 26.3% 26.9%
Winter 6-Row 3.8% 0.1%
Winter 2-Row 11.2% 15.1%
Winter 6.0% 3.3% 9.7%
East
Winter 6-Row 0.8%
Winter 2-Row 2.3%
AMBA Strategic Plan Development Allocation Goals
Six-Row Adjunct Two-Row All Malt Two-Row
AMBA Member Interest* 20% 55% 25%
Barley Factors
Plump Kernels (on 6/64) > 80% > 90% > 90%
Thin Kernels (thru 5/64) < 3% < 3% < 3%
Germination (4ml 72 hr. GE) > 98% > 98% > 98%
Protein 13.0% 13.0% 12.0%
Skinned & Broken Kernels < 5% < 5% < 5%
Malt Factors
Total Protein 12.8% 12.8% 11.8%
on 7/64 screen > 60% > 70% > 75%
MALTING BARLEY BREEDING GUIDELINES
IDEAL COMMERCIAL MALT CRITERIA
*Based on a survey of AMBA's regular members.
June, 2014
Six-Row Adjunct Two-Row All Malt Two-Row
Measures of Malt Modification
Beta-Glucan (ppm) < 120 < 100 < 100
F/C Difference < 1.2 < 1.2 < 1.2
Soluble/Total Protein 42-47% 40-47% 38-45%
Turbidity (NTU) < 10 < 10 < 10
Viscosity (absolute cp) < 1.50 < 1.50 < 1.50
Congress Wort
Soluble Protein 5.2-5.7% 4.8-5.6% < 5.3%
Extract (FG db) > 79.0% > 81.0% > 81.0%
Color (°ASBC) 1.8-2.5 1.6-2.5 1.6-2.8
FAN > 210 > 210 140-190
Malt Enzymes
Diastatic Power (°ASBC) > 150 > 120 110-150
Alpha Amylase (DU) > 50 > 50 40-70
MALTING BARLEY BREEDING GUIDELINES
IDEAL COMMERCIAL MALT CRITERIA
General Comments
• Barley should mature rapidly, break dormancy quickly without pregermination and germinate uniformly.
• The hull should be thin, bright and adhere tightly during harvesting, cleaning and malting.
• Malted barley should exhibit a well-balanced, modification in a conventional malting schedule with four
day germination.
• Malted barley must provide desired beer flavor.
Pilot Malting Trials
BARLEY
Skinned & Broken Kernels (%) 4.8 8.1 7.8
3-Day Germination (%) 98.6 98.8 98.4
On 7/64 (%) 67.2 61.3 65.5
Plump (On 6/64 + 7/64) (%) 97.2 97.6 97.3
Moisture (%) 9.3 9.1 9.2
Total Protein (% d.b.) 11.1 11.7 12.4
MALT
Moisture at Steep-out (%) 45.6 44.6 45.2
On 7/64 (%) 87.5 85.6 88.5
Extract, Fine Grind (% d.b.) 81.1 81.1 81.4
F-C Difference 1.0 1.5 0.8
Wort Viscosity 1.50 1.52 1.47
Wort Color (Deg. Lov.) 1.88 1.88 1.94
Wort Turbidity (Hach NTU) 4.7 5.3 3.7
Diastatic Power (Deg. L) 148 154 170
Alpha Amylase (D.U.) 72.3 73.9 80.7
Soluble Protein (% d.b.) 4.77 5.22 5.31
Total Protein (% d.b.) 11.0 11.3 12.1
Soluble/Total Protein (% d.b.) 44.8 47.2 44.6
Moisture (%) 4.0 4.0 4.0
Beta-Glucan (ppm) 157 203 110
Friability 89.1 87.2 81.6
Free Amino Nitrogen (FAN) 197 218 235
2Ab04-X01084-27 Harrington AC Metcalfe
Two-Row Two-Row Two-Row
2Ab04-X01084-27 (Aberdeen - S1)
AMBA Pilot Scale Malting Evaluation Program - Western Nursery
2010 & 2011 2010 & 2011 2010 & 2011
Pilot Malting Trials
AMBA Quality Evaluation Program
Step 3 – AMBA Plant Scale Evaluation Program
VARIETY/LINE PROGRAM
Western Winter Two-Row
02Ab669 USDA-ARS, ID
02Ab671 USDA-ARS, ID
02Ab431 USDA-ARS, ID
Western Spring Two-Row
Aberdeen-S1 (2Ab04-X01084-27) USDA-ARS, ID
Aberdeen-S2 (2Ab07-X31089-31) USDA-ARS, ID
Midwest Spring Two-Row
ND Genesis ND State University
Midwest Spring Six-Row
ND26891 ND State University
Step 2 - AMBA pilot scale malting evaluations by collaborating members - Average of 35+ lines/year
Step 1 - Micro malting evaluations @ USDA-ARS Cereal Crops Research Unit, Madison, WI – 5,000 to 6,000 lines/year – AMBA provides supporting funds
Two-Rows
Six-Rows AAC Synergy (2015)
ABI Voyager (2014)
AC Metcalfe (2005)
CDC Copeland (2007)
CDC Meredith (2013)
Charles* (2009)
Conlon (2000)
Conrad (2007)
Endeavor* (2015)
Expedition (2013)
Harrington (1989)
Hockett (2010)
Merit (2000)
Merit 57 (2010)
Moravian 37 (2010)
Moravian 69 (2010)
Pinnacle (2011)
Scarlett (2008)
Wintmalt* (2013)
Celebration (2011)
Innovation (2014)
Lacey (2000)
Legacy (2001)
Quest (2011)
Stellar-ND (2006)
Thoroughbred* (2015)
Tradition (2004)
Variety name & year first recommended
*Winter American Malting Barley Association, Inc.
2015 AMBA Recommended Malting Barley Varieties
2015 MIDWEST CONTRACTED BARLEY VARIETIES (Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota & Wisconsin)
Lacey
20.7%
Other
4.2%
Pinnacle
7.2%
CDC Meredith
4.3%
Quest
1.9%
Tradition
59.5%
Innovation
1.5%
CDC Copeland
1.9%
2015 WESTERN CONTRACTED BARLEY VARIETIES
(Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Washington & Wyoming)
AC Metcalfe
14.8%
ABI Voyager
7.4%
CDC Copeland
3.6%
Hockett
9.8%
Other
8.1%
Moravian 69
8.1%
Conrad
7.0%
Moravian 115
5.0%
Merit 57
4.5%
Seeded Yield Production
2014 2015 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015
----(000s acres)---- (bu/acre) --------------(000s bushels)------------
Minnesota 75 100 52.0 70.0 5,175 3,120 5,950
North Dakota 620 900 67.0 66.0 46,080 35,845 54,450
South Dakota 28 40 52.0 * 1,026 884 *
Three States 723 1,040 65.1 64.9 52,281 39,849 60,400
California 80 70 73.0 70.0 3,150 1,825 1,750
Colorado 57 65 124.0 134.0 7,714 6,696 8,308
Idaho 560 610 94.0 100.0 57,660 47,940 58,000
Montana 920 1,010 58.0 55.0 43,160 44,660 47,300
Oregon 40 65 50.0 59.0 3,500 1,500 3,245
Washington 115 115 60.0 57.0 14,040 6,300 5,985
Wyoming 80 85 107.0 107.0 6,052 6,741 6,955
Seven States 1,852 2,020 74.3 75.1 135,276 115,662 131,543
Other 400 353 77.7 74.9 29,188 21,283 17,747
Total U.S. 2,975 3,413 72.4 71.8 216,745 176,794 209,690
US Barley Production
Seeded Yield Production
2014 2015 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015
----(000s acres)---- (bu/acre) --------------(000s bushels)------------
Alberta 3,200 3,400 67.3 60.6 254,700 189,750 170,600
Saskatchewan 2,000 2,400 54.2 54.2 156,700 99,800 120,100
Manitoba 300 350 61.5 70.8 32,400 16,300 23,360
Other 380 361 59.8 62.9 26,388 21,123 21,466
Canada 5,880 6,511 61.9 58.8 470,188 326,973 335,526
Canadian Barley Production
THANK YOU