Journals / Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry / 2006 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 6

Agro-Morphological Characterization of Some Wild Wheat (Aegilops L. and Triticum L.) Species

Pages
387–398
Publication Date
2006-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was concluded that existing ex-situ conservation programs should take into consideration that fact by sampling over short distances in order to capture as much of the variation as possible.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Wild wheat (Aegilops L. and Triticum L.) populations were collected from different regions of Turkey and characterized for 5 basic traits, in order to study their agro-morphological characteristics and variation among populations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material of the study consisted of 112 populations of wild wheat and 12 populations of cultivated wheat.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was concluded that existing ex-situ conservation programs should take into consideration that fact by sampling over short distances in order to capture as much of the variation as possible.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2002 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Wild wheat · Aegilops · Triticum

Abstract

Wild wheat (Aegilops L. and Triticum L.) populations were collected from different regions of Turkey and characterized for 5 basic traits, in order to study their agro-morphological characteristics and variation among populations. Material of the study consisted of 112 populations of wild wheat and 12 populations of cultivated wheat. Cultivated einkorn (T. monococcum L. subsp. monococcum) and cultivated emmer (T. turgidum L. subsp. dicoccon (Shrank) Thell.) were used as checks for Triticum species. Among the Aegilops material studied, Ae. tauschii Coss. var. meyeri (Griseb. ex Ledeb.) has not been defined in the flora of Turkey before and is characterized agromorphologically for the first time in this study. Materials were transplanted to Haymana-Ankara Research Farm of the Central Research Institute for Field Crops after being germinated in a greenhouse in fall 2002. Populations were characterized for plant height, number of days to heading, growth habit, number of stems per plant and spike length. All observations and measurements were performed on the same randomly selected plants. Mean values and coefficient of variation were computed for all the populations. The highest variation was recorded for number of stems, while the lowest was for plant habit. Clusters based on a Euclidian similarity matrix ranked the species according to the sections they are located in. Considerable variation was observed, even between populations collected from nearby sites. It was concluded that existing ex-situ conservation programs should take into consideration that fact by sampling over short distances in order to capture as much of the variation as possible.

Özet

Wild wheat (Aegilops L. and Triticum L.) populations were collected from different regions of Turkey and characterized for 5 basic traits, in order to study their agro-morphological characteristics and variation among populations. Material of the study consisted of 112 populations of wild wheat and 12 populations of cultivated wheat. Cultivated einkorn (T. monococcum L. subsp. monococcum) and cultivated emmer (T. turgidum L. subsp. dicoccon (Shrank) Thell.) were used as checks for Triticum species. Among the Aegilops material studied, Ae. tauschii Coss. var. meyeri (Griseb. ex Ledeb.) has not been defined in the flora of Turkey before and is characterized agromorphologically for the first time in this study. Materials were transplanted to Haymana-Ankara Research Farm of the Central Research Institute for Field Crops after being germinated in a greenhouse in fall 2002. Populations were characterized for plant height, number of days to heading, growth habit, number of stems per plant and spike length. All observations and measurements were performed on the same randomly selected plants. Mean values and coefficient of variation were computed for all the populations. The highest variation was recorded for number of stems, while the lowest was for plant habit. Clusters based on a Euclidian similarity matrix ranked the species according to the sections they are located in. Considerable variation was observed, even between populations collected from nearby sites. It was concluded that existing ex-situ conservation programs should take into consideration that fact by sampling over short distances in order to capture as much of the variation as possible.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARAGÖZ, A., PİLANALI, N., POLAT, T. (2006). Agro-Morphological Characterization of Some Wild Wheat (Aegilops L. and Triticum L.) Species. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 6, 387–398. https://ajindex.com/articles/179758

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Damania, A.B. 1993. Domestication and in situ conservation of cereal wild progenitors in the Near East. In: Biodiversity and Wheat Improvement (Ed.: A.B. Damania). Wiley. Davis, P.H. 1985. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands. V:9. Edinburgh University Press,
  2. Edinburgh. Delacy, I.H., B. Skowmand and J. Huerta. 2000. Characterization of Mexican landraces using agronomically useful attributes. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution. 47: 87-96.
  3. Diamond, J. 1997. Location, location, location: The first farmers. Science, 278: 1243-1244.
  4. Dotlacil, L., J. Hermuth, Z. Stehno and M. Manev. 2000. Diversity in European winter wheat landraces and obsolete cultivars. Czech J. Genet. Plant Breeding, 16: 29-36. Dvorák, J. 1998. Genome analysis in the Triticum-Aegilops alliance. In: Proc. of the 9th Int. Wheat Genetics Symp. (Ed.: A.E. Slinkard). Vol. 1., 8-11.
  5. Univ. of Saskatchewan. Gitte, P., O. Seberg, M. Yde and K. Berthelsen. 2006. Phylogenetic relationships of Triticum and Aegilops and evidence for the origin of the A, B, and D genomes of common wheat (Triticum aestivum). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 39: 70-82.
  6. Gökgöl, M. 1935. Türkiye Bu¤dayları. Die Türkischen Weizen. V. 1. ‹stanbul. Harlan, J.R. 1981. The early history of wheat: Earliest traces to the sack of Rome. In: Wheat Science – Today and Tomorrow. (Eds.: L.T. Evans and W.J. Peacock). Cambridge Univ. Press,
  7. Cambridge, UK. Heun, M., R. Schafer-Pregl, D. Klawan, R. Castagna, M. Accerbi, B. Borghi and F. Salamini. 1997. Site of Einkorn wheat domestication identified by DNA fingerprinting. Science, 278: 1321-1314.
  8. Humeid, B., O.F. Mamluk and A.A. Jaradat. 1988. Annual Report for 1988, Genetic Resources Unit. ICARDA. 21-23. Aleppo. IBPGR. 1978. Descriptors for Wheat & Aegilops. A Minimum List. IBPGR Secreteriat, Rome. IBPGR. 1985. Descriptors of Wheat (revised). IBPGR Secretariat, Rome. Karagöz, A. 1996, In situ conservation of plant genetic resources in Ceylanpınar State Farm. In: The Proc. of the Int. Symp. on In situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Diversity. (Eds.: N. Zencirci, Z. Kaya, Y. Anikster and W.T. Adams). P 87-92,
  9. Ankara.
  10. Karagöz, A. and N. Zencirci. 2005. Variation in wheat (Triticum spp.) landraces from different altitudes of three regions of Turkey. Genetic Res. Crop Evolution. 52: 775-785.
  11. Kızıltan, M., A. Karagöz and J.G. Waines. 1990. The plant expedition research from south eastern Anatolia (Atatürk Dam) C7 square. Wheat Information Service, 70: 15-28.
  12. Kimber, G. and M. Feldman.