Theor Appl Genet (1992) 84:57-64
N
9 Springer-Verlag 1992
Selection indices for quality evaluation in wheat breeding
G. Branlard 1,., j. Pierre 2, and M. Rousset
1 INRA, Station for the Improvement of Plants, 63039 Clermont-Ferrand, France
2 INRA, Station for the Improvement of Plants, 35650 Le Rheu, France
Received August 5, 1991; Accepted November 11, 1991
Communicated by H. F. Linskens
Summary. From multilocation trials involving 125 cultivars of wheat of mainly French and European origin four
tests - protein content, Pelshenke, modified Zeleny and
the mixograph - were used to establish six selection indices. Three of these indices - IW1, IW 2 and IW 3 - were
calculated in order to evaluate the genetic potentiality of
the lines for dough strength as given by the Chopin
alveograph. The indices IV1, IV2 and IV3 were established to evaluate loaf volume as measured by the French
bread-making standard. A quality index IQ was calculated from the allelic effects of the high-molecular-weight
(HMW) subunits of glutenin from 195 cultivars assessed
by the Chopin alveograph and the Pelshenke test. Comparison of the relative efficiency of each of the six indices
to the individual tests revealed the superiority of the indices over one or several technological parameters. The
six selection indices and the quality index were compared
using 30 very diverse 174 lines. Their ability to retain the
good quality lines is discussed in particular.
Key words: Bread wheat - Technological quality - Loaf
volume - Gluten strength - Heritability
Introduction
Breeders use various tests to evaluate wheat quality.
These tests are based on the end-use quality objective of
the breeding programmes, but there are also one or several indirect technological tests commonly used in a particular country and they must be feasible in the F3, F4 or
F s generations. In addition to the analysis of the allelic
composition of the high-molecular-weight subunits of
glutenins (HMW-GS) (Payne et al. 1981) and of gliadins
* Correspondence to: G. Branlard
(Sozinov and Poperelya 1980) which can be carried out
from single kernels, or half grains (Bietz et al. 1975),
breeders may have many other technological tests at their
disposal. Some tests ha~e been found to be more useful
than others for predicting the quality of North American
wheats (Baker et al. 1971 ; Fowler and de la Roche 1975).
With respect to European bread wheats, Branlard et al.
(1991) compared 17 technological tests for their ability to
be both highly heritable and correlated to quality. Some
technological parameters, for example, modified Zeleny,
Pelshenke test and mixograph criteria, were more suitable for predicting gluten strength or loaf volume than
others. As wheat quality is the result of many components, each having different technological properties,
which cannot be evaluated by only one indirect test, it
appears that a very judicious combination of a few test
parameters is necessary for improving the efficiency of
wheat quality breeding. Some studies have formed quality indices by combining several technological parameters
(Cox et al. 1989). Surprisingly, no selection index has been
established for wheat quality as has been for many other
agronomic characteristics of plants. The theory of genetic
indices first developed by Smith (1936) on wheat was used
with success for improving the genetic value of different
traits in many crops, such as grain yield in maize (Robinson et al. 1951) grain and straw yield in oats (Eagles and
Frey 1974) or yield and protein content in maize (Motto
and Perenzin 1982; see Baker 1986 for review).
In the study presented here several indices will be
established, six of which were calculated from a limited
number of technological tests, each using a small amount
of grain, and another from the allelic composition of the
allelic composition of the HMW-GS. Their relative efficiency for improving the genotypic value of strength and
loaf volume will be calculated and particularly discussed
with particular reference to use F4 offspring.
58
consistency of the curve (MTM), height and thickness, respectively, of the curve at the maximum (MHM and MTH). Height
and thickness, respectively, of the curve after 7 rain of mixing
(MH7 and MT7), the product (MTM x MHM) and the sum of
the six previously defined traits (MIN).
The criteria for which the indices were developed are the
strength W of the Chopin alveograph and the bread loaf volume
LV as given by the French standard breadmaking procedure
( A F N O R V-03-713).
Material and methods
The six technological indices consisted of IW~, IW z and IW 3,
established for improving the genotypic values of strength as
evaluated by the Chopin alveograph, and IV1, IV2 and IV3 for
bread loaf volume.
Plant material
The six indices IWi and IV~ were established from a total of 125
bread wheat cultivars of European origin and experimentally
evaluated for 3 years (1985 1987) in six, seven and five locations,
respectively, in France. These multilocation trials enabled us to
compare 46 technological parameters (Branlard et al. 1991). Seventy other cultivars of very diverse genetic origins and range of
quality were grown each year by the INRA wheat laboratory of
Clermont-Ferrand. These seventy cultivars were used to relate
gliadin and HMW-GS polymorphism to technological quality
(Branlard and Dardevet 1985 a, b) and were added to the previous ones also grown at Clermont-Ferrand. The means of the
technological values of these 195 cultivars were used to establish
the quality index IQ from their allelic HMW-GS composition.
The relative efficiency and the correlations between the indices IWi, IVi and IQ were computed fi'om the 125 cultivars. The
indices were compared using 30 F 4 lines derived from offspring
from several complex crossings including 8 diverse bread wheat
cultivars as different combinations between 37 parents. This
population was selected during a 3-year breeding programme
from 1987 to 1989. In the second year, plants were selected for
resistance to disease and for quality using IQ. In the third year
these 30 lines were used as experimental material for agronomic
purposes at seven locations, and their technological qualities
were evaluated from only one location.
Indices from technological traits
The three strength indices, IW1, IW2 and IW3, and the three loaf
volume indices, IV1, IV2 and IV3, were calculated by combining
two or three of the following tests: Pro, Pel, Zym and Mixo. The
mixograph test had seven parameters, consequently the maximum number of parameters used as explanatory variates xj of
the strength and loaf volume was ten. The initial variates xj were
standardized x'j = ( x j - m j ) / a j (where mj and aj are the mean
and standard deviation of xj respectively), before calculating the
multiple regression for predicting the strength W or the loaf
volume LV. IW 1 and IV 1 were calculated as functions of three
tests: Pro, Pel and Zym. IW2 and IV 2 were calculated from Pro,
Pel and Mixo, whereas IW3 and IV3 used only Pro and Mixo.
The optimum number p of explanatory variates x'j introduced in
the multiple regression was obtained as previously described
(Branlard and Dardevet 1985 a).
The general formula of indices IWi and IVi is written as
follows
IVi o r l W i = K
~ ci f l j h 2 x J
(1)
j=l
where h~ is the general heritability calculated for each parameter
xi, as described by Branlard et al. (1991), flj is the partial regression coefficient of the step-wise multiple regression calculated to
predict W or LV from the variates x], cj -- 1/xmj where xmj is the
maximum value of x j, and K is a coefficient applied to the sum
in order to obtain an index value near 100 when all xj values are
equal to their maximum x m j.
The h~, flj, xmj coefficients are given in Table 1. As the
product Kcj flj h~ is constant, let be aj = Kcj flj h~ for a given j;
then the index formula (1) can be written:
Technological tests
From the 17 technological tests previously compared, the following were retained to build the indices of technology IWi and
IVi: protein content (Pro), Pelshenke (Pel), modified Zeleny
(Zym) and mixograph (Mixo).
The protein content was estimated on wholemeal flour by
Near Infrared Reflectance (NIR). The modification of the
Zeleny consisted in performing the test from a 70% instead a
20% extraction rate flour. From the 10 g mixograph, seven
parameters were obtained: time taken to reach the maximum
P
IWi = Z aj xj
j=l
Table 1. Coefficients used in calculating the selection indices: h 2, general heritability; W i and Vi, flj coefficients obtained from the
multiple regression to explain dough strength W and loaf volume LV, respectively
Parameter
Abbreviation
Units
Maximum
Hz
Wl
W2
W3
Protein
Pelshenke
Zeleny modified
Mixographe time
at maximum
Height at maximum
Thickness
at maximum
Height at 7 min
Thickness at 7 min
MTM x MHM
Index mixo
Pro
Pel
Zym
MTM
%db
rain
ml
rain
18
305
59
5.7
0.247
0.633
0.632
0.472
0.175
0.337
0.526
0.192
0.299
0.255
MHM
MTH
cm
cm
9.4
5.6
0.437
0.403
MH7
MT7
MTM x M H M
MIN
cm
cm
-
7.9
3.2
36.0
47.5
0.546
0.565
0.557
0.618
Rz
n = 125
VI
V2
V3
-0.159
0.095
0.652
-0.123
0.145
0.091
-0.250
1.692
-1.574
0.365
0.333
0.728
0.316
-2.241
0.193
2.090
-0.233
0.81
0.78
0.60
0.60
-0.104
0.75
0.43
59
Quality index IQ from HMW-GS
The quality indice IQ was calculated as the sum of the coefficients attributed to the HMW-GS alleles present in a given
genotype. The coefficient attributed to each allele was globally
proportional to the allelic effect observed for the following
parameters: strength, tenacity, swelling given by the alveograph
and Pelshenke. For a quality parameter k the effects were calculated for each locus and expressed in percent of the total variation Axp observed amongst the three loci Glu-A1, Glu-B1 and
Glu-D1. The effect Xkij of the allele i from the locus j was
obtained as follows: Xkij = ( X k i j - - Xkrj) X 100/Axk; where Xki j is
the mean value of the parameter k calculated from the varieties
having the allele i at the locus j; for example, mean of the
swelling of the wheats having the band 2* at GIu-A1.
Xkrj is the mean value of the parameter k calculated from the
varieties having the allele inducing a low quality. For a given
locus j the same allele r (named here in the reference allele) was
used for the four quality parameters. This reference allele was
Glu-Alc (null allele), Glu-Bld (bands 6 - 8 ) and GIu-DIa (bands
2-12) according to the Payne and Lawrence (1983) nomenclature.
Axk was the difference between the maximal and minimal
means. The mean effect X.i~ was calculated as the mean of the
four effects Xk~j . The coefficient of quality Yij attributed to the
allele i from the locus j was expressed as Yij = bR.ij + aj where
b is a coefficient and aj is a constant corresponding to the
quality value attributed to the reference allele. For Glu-Alc (null
allele) a~ = 0 and for Glu-Bld and Glu-Dla, a 2 = 2 and a 3 = 7 ,
respectively. Finally, the indice IQ is written as the sum of the
three Y~j coefficients:
3
IQ = 2 Yij
j=,
Comparison of the indices
The values of the indices IW~, IV~ and IQ calculated for the 125
cultivars allowed us to compare them by two approaches. First-
Table 2. Indices of selection for improving the genetic value of
dough strength (IW1, IW2, IW3) and loaf volume (IV1, IV2,
IV3). The units and abbreviations of the parameters are given in
Table 1
IW 1 =
IW 2 =
0.05 Pro + 0.25Pel
0.07 P r o + 0.31Pel
IW 3 =
1.65
IV1 = - 0.09
IVz = - 0.12
IV3 =
0.88
+ 0.39Zym
- 0.08MTM+0.33MH7
+ 0.31 MT7
Pro- 2.86MHM+I0.41MH7 +4.67MT7
Pro + 0.14 Pel
+ 0.98 Zym
Pro + 0.36 Pel
+ 2.94 M H M - 4.87 MH7
+ 0.43 MT7
Pro-27.15MHM+45.05MH7
-5.19MT7
ly, linear correlations were calculated for each pair of indices.
Secondly, the indices were compared to the technological tests
by computing their relative efficiency RI/Rt (Baker 1986); RI
was the expected response to selection based on index I, and Rt
the expected response to selection based on the test t alone, from
which the index I was built. On the assumption that the two
types of selection (with the index or with test t alone) used the
same selection intensity it has been demonstrated that the relative efficiency can be calculated as follows:
R!
Rt
r (Gt, I)
ht
(Baker 1986)
where r(Gt, I) is the correlation between the genotypic values
G t of the cultivars evaluated by the test t and the values of the
indice I. The divider ht is the square root of the heritability h 2
of test t.
Criteria of selection
Thirty F4 lines were observed using either the individual parameters or each of the indices IWi, IVi or IQ. The lines having a value
higher than M + SE were considered to be selected. M and SE
are the mean and standard error of the 30 lines, respectively.
Results
Indices from technological traits
T h e coefficients X m j , flj a n d h~ used to build the indices
are s h o w n in Table 1. T h e m a x i m a l value o f each t e c h n o logical p a r a m e t e r was n o t always f r o m the s a m e cultivars. As expected, the heritability o f P r o was l o w ; those
o f Pel, Z y m a n d M i n were higher a n d similar to one
a n o t h e r . M u l t i p l e regression gave a higher R 2 coefficient
for the p r e d i c t i o n o f the W v a l u e o f d o u g h t h a n for b r e a d
l o a f v o l u m e LV. T h e lowest R 2 coefficient o f p r e d i c t i o n
o f l o a f v o l u m e was o b t a i n e d for V1, i.e. w h e n the three
tests Pro, Pel a n d Z y m were c o m b i n e d .
S o m e p a r a m e t e r s o f the m i x o g r a p h p e r m i t t e d a significant increase in the p r e d i c t i o n coefficient for l o a f volume. T h e use o f the m i x o g r a p h , t o g e t h e r w i t h the tests
P r o and Pel gave a high coefficient o f p r e d i c t i o n for
strength ( R 2 = 0 . 8 1 ; n = 1 2 5 ) . T h e c o m b i n a t i o n s o f
m i x o g r a p h p a r a m e t e r s were n o t the s a m e for the prediction o f W (Table 1), but p a r a m e t e r s M H 7 and M T 7 were
regularly retained by the step-wise regression p r o c e d u r e
in the p r e d i c t i o n o f W and LV.
T h e six selection indices established f r o m these different coefficients are p r e s e n t e d in Table 2. F o r these indices
Table 3. Means and standard deviations of the selection indices value observed for five wheats, ranked from the very good (Magdalena) to the very bad (Clement), over 3 years in France
IW~
Magdalena
Hardi
Capitole
Talent
Clement
62.6
37.3
41.3
20.6
13.0
IW~
_+ 3.2
_+ 3.2
_+ 3.0
__ 1.1
_+ t.0
60.0
29.0
36.6
15.0
8.0
Iw~
_+ 5.3
_+ 5.0
_+ 3.2
_+ 1.0
_+ 0.2
76.0
70.0
63.6
61.3
47.6
IV~
_ 7.0
_ 5.5
_+ 4.6
_+ 3.0
+ 2.0
68.0
50.3
47.7
30.7
20.0
IV~
4- 2.6
_+ 3.8
_+ 2.5
_+ 2.0
_ 2.0
55.0
19.7
30.0
5.3
1.7
IV3
___6.0
_+ 5.5
_+ 4.3
+_ 0.5
_+ 0.29
92.7
92.3
82.3
77.0
50.0
_+ 6.5
_+ 5.8
_ 5.1
• 2.0
_ 1.7
60
the negative signs correspond to t h e / / j signs and do not
mean an unfavourable effect on quality for the parameters. As the variates introduced are the true parameters
without any transformation, the use o f these indices is
very simple. F o r five different wheats ranked from very
poor quality (Clement) to very strong gluten (Magdalena)
the magnitudes of the values for the six selection indices
were different (Table 3). The magnitude o f the index
value range was higher when the indices were constructed
from tests Pro, Pel and Mixo (e.g. for I W z and IVz) than
they were for the other combinations. I W 3 and IV 3 had
higher values with a lower range between the bad and the
good quality wheats than the other indices. F o r a given
variety, the higher the index values, the higher their variations from year to year.
The efficiency o f the indices were calculated relative
to the parameters used. This relative efficiency corre-
Table 4. Relative efficiency RI/Rt values obtained when the expected response RI to selection using the index (IWi or IVi) is
compared to the direct selection Rt based on one of the parameters introduced in the index
Pro
Pel
Zym
MTM
MHM
MH7
MT7
W
LV
IW~
IW2
IW3
61.3
124.7
93.3
54.3
125.7
88.9
81.8
90.6
87.8
-
103.7
79.9
116.6
111.8
.
.
.
118.1
129.8
106.4
106.0
82.5
-
92.9
-
I~
I~
51.5
125.5
.
51.5
76.0
86.6
60.5
sponds to the comparison between the expected response
to selection based on the index and the direct response
when only one parameter is used. F o r each of the six
indices, at least one parameter was found to be advantageously introduced as their expected response was superior
when combined in an index to the response if it would
have been used for a direct selection (Table 4). Selection
based on IW 1 or I W 2 would be expected to result in a
24% or 25 % greater increase in the mean genotypic value
of the strength than would direct selection for strength
using the Pelshenke test alone at the same selection intensity. Selection based on the index I W 3 = 1.65 P r o - 2 . 8 6
M H M + I 0 . 4 1 M H 7 + 4 . 6 7 M T 7 would be expected to
give a mean genotypic strength value 3 - 2 9 % greater
than would result from the direct use of the individual
parameters. As the protein content is partly related to
strength and to loaf volume and its coefficient attributed
in the indice is generally low, the expected response o f
this parameter seems to be better when used alone.
Nevertheless, the introduction o f protein content with
some mixograph parameters in the indices led to a better
prediction o f the genotypic values o f the criteria W or LV
to be improved.
I~
Quality index from H M W - G S
51.0
-
F r o m the 195 wheat cultivars the mean value of the
genotypes having the same allele was calculated for each
of the three alveograph parameters (strength, tenacity,
swelling) and for the Pelshenke test. The comparison of
these means was carried out for the main alleles at the
loci Glu-A1, Glu-B1 and Glu-D1 (Table 5). F o r each parameter the effect xkij of the alleles was calculated and
their means X i~ are presented. The coefficients Y~j pro-
78.2
112.6
103.5
104.0
For abbreviations, see Table 1
Table 5. Comparison of the means calculated on four quality parameters for the different HMW-GS alleles encountered on the 195
cultivars. Means with the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.95
Glu-A1
Glu-B1
Glu-D1
Tenacity
(mm H20)
2*
75
a
1
69
b
Null
64
b
17-18
77
a
7-9
71
b
7-8
70
b
6-8
68.5
b
13-16
66
bc
7
65
c
21
53.4
d
5-10 3-12 4-12 2-12
74
68
64
63
a
b
bc
c
Swelling
(cm 3)
1
21.5
a
2*
21.4
a
Null
20.1
b
13-16
20.9
a
7-8
20.7
a
7
20.7
a
7-9
20.6
a
21
20.2
b
17-18
19.3
c
6-8
19.1
c
4 12 3-12 2-12 5 10
20.9 2 0 . 8 2 0 . 8 20.6
a
a
a
a
Strength
(10-* J)
2*
210
a
1
167
b
Null
163
b
13-16
240
a
17-18
179
b
7-9
170
bc
7-8
165
bc
7
155
bcd
6-8
144
cd
21
127
d
5-10 3-12 2-12 4-12
197
160
152
150
a
b
b
b
Pelshenke
(min)
2*
145
a
1
111
b
Null
100
b
13-16
135
a
21
129
b
17-18
116
bc
7-9
110
bcd
7-8
104
bcd
6-8
90
cd
7
72
d
5-10 2 12 3-12 4-12
144
82
70
67
a
b
b
b
HMW-GS Effect
(%) X.ij
2*
48.7
1
24.0
Null
-
13-16
49.6
7-9
29.8
17-18
26.3
7-8
26.8
7
9.5
21
4.2
6-8
-
5-10 3-12 2-12 4-12
38.0 3.1
-3.0
61
p o r t i o n a l to the allelic effects are shown in Table 6. They
allowed us to calculate the index IQ o f any genotype
having 3 of the 16 alleles. F o r example, a genotype having
the following H M W subunits o f glutenins 1 - 2 7 - 8 - 1 2
would have an index IQ = 40.
The index IQ is similar to the gluten score (GS) proposed by Payne et al. (1987) from several sets o f offsprings and varieties assessed both by SDS-Page and by
the SDS sedimentation test. Coefficients were established
for the gluten score from the 14 alleles (i.e. 3 o f G l u - A l ,
7 o f Glu-B1 and 4 o f Glu-D1), and 84 genotypes differing
by their H M W allelic combination could be created. A
highly significant correlation (r=0.881, n = 8 4 ) was
found between IQ and GS. The index IQ calculated from
the three parameters o f rheology (strength, tenacity and
swelling) and the Pelshenke test was c o m p a r e d to both
the six selection indices and to the technological test.
Comparison o f the indices
The indices were applied to F 4 offspring of 30 lines displaying a wide variation for their technological values
(Table 7). The correlations calculated from the phenotypic values showed strong relationships between the
four indices IW1, I W / , IV a and IV 2 . The index IQ was
not so well related to the technological indices and was
not significantly correlated to I W 3 . The correlations were
even lower when GS was used (data not shown). The
potentialities o f quality from the index IQ do not correspond to the entire variability o f the quality estimated by
the indices I W i or IVi .
C o m p l e m e n t a r y results arose when we analysed the
number of c o m m o n lines selected both by direct selection
using one p a r a m e t e r and by the technological indices:
1) when grain protein content was used alone for
direct breeding, no more than 60% o f the lines selected
by the indices were retained (Table 8);
2) all lines selected by the indices which included the
Pelshenke test were also retained when this test was used
alone;
3) the mixograph parameters should have selected no
more than 80% o f the lines obtained from the indices;
4) the index IQ globally selected 50% of the total
lines retained by the indices.
The values of the technological parameters were normally distributed, except for the Pelshenke test, which
revealed more low quality lines than the other tests. Con-
Table 6. Value of coefficient Yij attributed to 16 alleles of the
HMW-GS used in the quality index IQ
Locus
Alleles
Glu-A 1
a
1*
15
b
c
2*
Null
30
0
Glu-B1
Glu-D1
"
HMW-GS
Quality
coefficient
a
7
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
7-8
7-9
6-8
20
13-16
13-19
14-15
17-18
21
18
20
2
2
32
18
5
8
a
b
c
d
e
2-t2
3-12
4-12
5-10
2-11
7
9
5
30
7
J
Table 7. Statistical values of the technological parameters used to assess the quality of the 30 F4 lines and to calculate the indices and
linear correlations between the seven indices (n = 30)
Minima
Maxima
Mean (m)
m + SE
Pro
Pel
Zym
MTM
MHM
MH7
MT7
MIN
12.95
16.85
14.54
14.71
18
200
69.9
78.2
25
53
39.1
40.3
1
4.3
2.3
2.4
6
9.4
7.7
7.9
5.5
7.8
6.6
6.7
1
1.9
1.3
1.3
19.3
44.0
29.2
30.2
IWl
iw~
1.ooo
IW2
IW3
IV1
IV2
IV3
IQ
0.993"*
0.739 **
0.972 **
0.992"*
0.701 **
0.571 **
IW2
IW3
IV1
1.000
0.720 **
0.936 **
0.998"*
0.728 **
0.559"*
1.000
0.757 **
0.698"*
0.618 **
0.329
0.937"*
0.622"*
0.567"*
*, ** Significantly correlated at 5% and 1%, respectively
IV2
IV3
IQ
1.000
0.686"*
0.557"*
1.000
0.442"
1.000
1.000
62
GLU ( i w l )
IWl
GLU (iv1)
IVl
i77.5 -851
]
50
40
30
20
i
I
I0-20 [
,
I
10
0
---4
410
2r0
0
~I0
80
I0050
40
GLU (iw2)
IW2
i
30
20
10
0
0
20
40
~60
8'0 100
GLU (iv2)
IV2
65-75!
I
45-551
35-45 i
b
t
e
i
1
t
i
50403020
i
10
IW3
i
20
0
II
60
]
1'0
0
()
i
210
IV3
s
60
80100
GLU (iv3)
]
8~-87.5 t
]
]
82.8- 851
80- 82.51
]
]
8__00!
177.5g
+--
801004 ~50 4 0 3 0 2 0
GLU(iw3)
187.5-901
[]
4~0
75- 7 7 . 5 ~
!
1,7z5-7~1~
e
5~0 40
3'0 20
~70-72.5
t
~ m67.5-70L
- -
0
20
10
0
]
,
~0
, ---~] f
60 -- 80
10050
~
40
310 20
I0
0
0
20
40
60
80 100
Fig" 1 a-f. Distribution of the values of the six selection indices (leftside) observed from the 30 F 4 lines and the corresponding
frequency of the lines having their quality index IQ higher than m + S E (rightside), a IWt, b IWz, e IW3, d IVI, e IV2, f IV 3 .
* Limit value m + SE of the selection index
Table 8. Percentages of the lines selected using the index (IWi or IVi) that were also independently selected with only one parameter.
The m + SE limit values for selection indices and the parameters are given in Fig. I and Table 7, respectively
Indices
IW 1
IW e
IW 3
IV 1
IVz
IV3
Pro
41.6
41.6
60.0
45.5
41.6
33.3
Pel
lO0.O
100.0
70.0
100.0
100.0
66.6
Zym
83.3
83.3
80.0
90.9
83.3
58.3
Mixo
IQ
MTM
MHM
MH7
MT7
MIN
83.3
83.3
60.0
81.8
83.3
75.0
58.3
58.3
80.0
63.6
58.3
58.3
50.0
50.0
80.0
54.5
50.0
66s
58.3
58.3
70.0
63.6
58.3
66.6
75.0
75.0
60.0
81.8
75.0
66.6
50.0
50.0
50.0
54.5
50.0
50.0
63
sequently, the distributions of IW 1 , IW2, IV 1 and IV2
indices which included the Pelshenke test, were asymmetrical (Fig. I a, b, d and e respectively). Indices IW3 and
IV3 were normally distributed. The proportions of the
lines having IQ > m + SE in each quality class of the
indices IWi or IVi showed the following (Fig. 1).
(1) All lines having the highest IWi or IVi values also
had a high IQ.
(2) On the other hand, many lines selected with IQ
(IQ > m + S E ) would have been discarded through the
selection indices (IW~ or IV~ < mi + SE~). The proportions
of these lines expressed as percent of discarded lines is the
same for all the selection indices and is about 54%.
(3) The proportions of the lines selected by using the
selection indices, which then should have been discarded
by the index IQ (IQ < m + SE), were the following: IW 1 :
41.7%; IW2: 41.7%; IW3: 40%; IV1: 30%; IV2: 41.7%
and IV3: 50% (expressed in percent of the selected lines).
Although the index IQ was correlated with five indices,
the potentialities of quality it evaluated do not correspond to all of the variability measured by the different
parameters used in the selection indices.
Discussion
The quality indice IQ was strongly correlated with the
gluten score GS published by Payne et al. 1987; Payne
1987. The GS was essentially established from comparisons of SDS sedimentation values, whereas IQ was calculated from different parameters of rheology and from
dough swelling time of the Pelshenke test. The allelic
effects, which correspond to the average of the differences between the quality values of the genotypes having
a given allele and those having the reference allele, represent the true additive effects attributable to present-day
European bread wheats. These effects would have been
different if the genetic origin of the 195 wheats was less
diversified. The simple statistical method used for calculating the IQ coefficient can be used for developing other
IQs more adapted t o the cultivars and to the quality
objective of a given country.
Few cultivars had the alleles Glu-Ble (band 20) and
Glu-DIe (bands 2-11). Consequently, these alleles were
not introduced into the comparison of the means
(Table 5). Their effects were estimated by comparing the
quality values of the cultivars differing only by their
Glu-Bl or Glu-D1 alleles. Only two cultivars had the rye
secalins; consequently, the effect of the I B L / I R S translocation on dough stickiness and weakness (Dhaliwal
et al. 1988) was not reported. Using the same parameters
we have studied the effects of the 1BL/1 RS translocation
on another set of cultivars and calculated the coefficient
attributed to the indice IQ (unpublished).
Many studies have been conducted to evaluate the
efficiency of the index of selection in several crops for
improving different characters: grain yield in maize
(Robinson et al. 1951), wheat (Smith 1936), barley (England 1977) and oats (Eagles and Frey 1974), and for
many other genetic traits as well (see Baker 1986 for
review). In many cases it was demonstrated that introducing the character to be improved as a parameter of
the index increased the relative efficiency of the index. In
our case the strength W and loaf volume LV were not
introduced in the index. All of the parameters used in the
six indices contributed to a significant explanation of the
character W or LV to improve. Moreover, for the three
tests Pel, Zym and Mixo at least one of their parameters
had a greater expected response to increase in the mean
genotypic values of W or LV when combined in the index
than it should have if used alone. As the alveograph and
the baking test were not performed on the 30 lines, the
superiority of the genetic values for the W or the LV of
the selected lines was not confirmed. Nevertheless, for
IW 1 , IW 2 and IV1 or IV2, 75 100% of the selected lines
using these indices were also selected by the parameters
Pel, Zym and Min. These percentages dropped to 58 to
60% when the mixograph was combined with Pro. As the
index integrates several parameters, each corresponding
to different technological properties, the observed complementation of IWi or IVi with the index IQ seems to be
obvious. To determine the maximum efficiency for breeding, in using first the HMW-GS analysis, then the technological evaluations, more studies are needed. However, our results confirm what P. Kolster (personal communication) showed by selection with the HMW-GS
profile and the SDS sedimentation test: breeding on the
HMW-GS profile may lead to the elimination of many
lines that would not have been discarded using a technological test. Consequently, for minimizing the losses of
good quality lines when screening first from HMW-GS,
it seems advisable to retain genotypes of IQ values higher
than the mean m of the population rather than m + SE.
Several criteria may be more important than others in
choosing the most appropriate index from the six selection indices studied. From 10 to 25 g of grain are needed
for the technological tests used in our indices. For the
small-scale computerized mixograph, which helps wheat
breeders test earlier generations (Rath et al. 1990), these
amounts can be reduced. The mixograph initially developed for clarifying the dough characteristics in order to
produce an optimum loaf (Swanson and Working 1933;
Finney and Shogren 1972) also has parameters both correlated to strength and heritable (Branlard et al. 1991).
However, the mixograph is less capable of evaluating the
poor quality wheats than the Pelshenke test. Thus, there
are some advantages to using indices IW2 and IV2.
64
Conclusion
Each year breeders use several technological tests for
assessing quality without relating them in a selection index that would provide more information on the genetic
value of their material. F o r the first time breeding indices
are p r o p o s e d for the quality evaluation of bread wheats.
According to quality objectives, these indices can be used
in early generations in addition to H M W - G S determination. The indices I W and IV m a y be combined in a global
index I = p I W + qIV where p = ] - q is chosen according
to the priority of breeding. M a n y other selection indices
could be created for wheat quality; among these, the
introduction of the SDS sedimentation test as an alternative to the Zeleny, and grain hardness could be very
useful for the further improvements.
Acknowledgements. French private breeders belonging to Club 5,
for their active participation to that study, and Dr. T. S. Cox, for
reading the manuscript, are gratefully acknowledged.
References
Afnor Norme exp6rimentale V-03-713. Association Franqaise de
Normalisation, Tour Europe Cedex 7, 92049 Paris
Baker RJ (1986) Selection indices in plant breeding. CRC Press,
Boca Raton, Fla.
Baker RJ, Tipples KH, Campbell WP (1971) Heritabilities of
food and correlations among quality traits in wheat. Can J
Plant Sci 51:441-448
Bietz JA, Shepherd KW, Wall JS (1975) Single kernel analysis of
glutenin: use in wheat genetics and breeding. Cereal Chem
52:513 532
Branlard G, Dardevet M (1985 a) Diversity of grain proteins and
bread wheat quality. I. Correlation between gliadin bands
and flour quality characteristics. J Cereal Sci 3:329-343
Branlard G, Dardevet M (1985 b) Diversity of grain proteins and
bread wheat quality. II. Correlation between high molecular
weight subunits of glutenin and flour quality characteristics.
J Cereal Sci 3:345 354
Branlard G, Rousset M, Loisel W, Autran JC (1991) Comparison
of 46 technological parameters used in bread wheat quality
evaluation. J Genet Breed 45:263-280
Cox TS, Shogren MD, Sears RG, Martin TJ, Bolte LC (1989)
Genetic improvement in milling and baking quality of hard
red winter wheat cultivars, 1919 to 1988. Crop Sci 29:626631
Dhaliwal AS, Mares DJ, Marshall DR, Skerritt JH (1988) Protein composition and pentosan content in relation to dough
stickiness of 1B/1R translocation wheats. Cereal Chem 65:
143-149
Eagles HA, Frey KJ (1974) Expected and actual gains in economic value of oat lines from five selection methods. Crop
Sci 14:861-864
England F (1977) Response to family selection based on replicated trials. J Agric Sci 88:127-134
Finney KF, Shogren MD (1972) A ten gram mixograph for
determining and predicting functional properties of wheat
flour. Baker's Dig 46:32-42
Fowler DB, de la Roche IA (1975) Wheat quality evaluation 2.
Relationships among predicting tests. Can J Plant Sci 55:
251-262
Motto M, Perenzin M (1982) Index selection for grain yield and
protein improvement in an opaque - 2 synthetic maize population. Z Pflanzenziicht 89:47-54
Payne PI (1987) The genetical basis of breadmaking quality in
wheat. Aspects Appl Biol 15:79 90
Payne PI, Lawrence GJ (1983) Catalogue of alleles for the complex gene loci Glu-A1, Glu-B1 and Glu-D1 which code for
high-molecular-weight subunits of glutenin in hexaploid
wheat. Cereal Res Commun 11:29-35
Payne PI, Corfield KG, Holt LM, Blackman JA (1981) Correlation between the inheritance of certain high-molecularweight subunits of glutenin and breadmaking quality in progenies of six crosses of bread. J Sci Food Agric 32:51-60
Payne PI, Nightingale MA, Krattiger AF, Holt LM (1987) The
relationships between HMW glutenin subunit composition
and the bread-making quality of British-grown wheat varieties. J Sci Food Agric 40:51-65
Rath CR, Gras PW, Wrigley CW, Walker CE (1990) Evaluation
of dough properties from 2 g flour using the Mixograph principle. Cereal Foods World 35:572-574
Robinson HF, Comstock RE, Harvey PH (1951) Genotypic and
phenotypic correlations in corn and their implications in
selection. Agron J 43:282-287
Smith HR (1936) A discriminant function for plant selection.
Ann Eugen 7:240-250
Sozinov AA, Poperelya FA (1980) Genetic classification of prolamines and its use for plant breeding. Ann Technol Agric
29:229 -245
Swanson CO, Working EB (1933) Testing the quality of flour by
the recording dough mixer. Cereal Chem 10:1 29