Breeding for improved blanchability in peanut: phenotyping, genotype × environment interaction and selection
G. C. Wright A B F , M. G. Borgognone C , D. J. O Connor A B , R. C. N. Rachaputi B , R. J. Henry B , A. Furtado B , N. L. Anglin D and D. B. Freischfresser EA Peanut Company Australia, Kingaroy, Qld 4610, Australia.
B Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia.
C Crop and Food Science, Agri-Science Queensland, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Toowoomba, Qld 4350, Australia.
D USDA ARS Plant Genetic Resources Conservation Unit, Griffin, GA 30223, USA.
E AgriSciences Queensland, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Kingaroy, Qld 4610, Australia.
F Corresponding author. Email: graeme.wright@bega.com.au
Crop and Pasture Science 69(12) 1237-1250 https://doi.org/10.1071/CP18156
Submitted: 15 April 2018 Accepted: 16 October 2018 Published: 6 December 2018
Abstract
Breeding for improved blanchability—the propensity of the testa (skin) to be removed from the kernel following rapid heat treatment—is a priority for improvement in the Australian Peanut Breeding Program (APBP). Easy removal of the testa by blanching is required for processing of peanuts into peanut butter and various other confectionary products. Thus, blanchability is an economically important trait in any newly released cultivar in Australia. A better understanding of the range of genetic variation, nature of inheritance and genotype × environment (G×E) interactions, and the development of a low-cost method to phenotype in early generations, could speed up breeding for this trait. Studies were conducted to develop a low-cost, rapid method utilising minimal amounts of seed to phenotype in early generations, along with an assessment of G×E interactions over a range of years and environments to derive optimal selection protocols. Use of a smaller kernel sample size than standard (50 vs 200 g) was effective for accurately assessing blanchability in breeding lines and could allow selection in early generations (e.g. in seed produced from a single F2 plant where seed supply is adequate). G×E interaction for blanchability was shown to be very low. Genotypic variance explained 62–100% of the total variance for blanchability, assessed in two diverse germplasm pools including 107 accessions in the USA mini-core over three environments and multiple APBP breeding lines grown over nine different years–environments. Genotypic correlations between all environments were very high (~0.60–0.96), with heritability for the blanchability trait estimated to be very high (0.74–0.97) across the 13 trials. The results clearly demonstrate that effective selection for improved blanchability can be conducted in early generations and in a limited number of contrasting environments to ensure consistency of results.
Additional keywords: Arachis hypogaea, G × E, groundnut, quality.
References
Anon. (2000) Release of ‘Jupiter’ peanut. Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma Agricultural Experimental Station, USA.Balota M, Isleib TG, Oakes JAD, Anco D(2016) Peanut variety and quality evaluation results 2016. Quality data. VCE Publications, AREC-208. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Suffolk, VA, USA. Available at: https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/content/dam/pubs_ext_vt_edu/AREC/AREC-208/AREC-208.pdf
Baring MR, Lopez Y, Simpson CE, Cason JM, Ayers J, Burow MD (2006) Registration of ‘Tamnut OL06’ Peanut. Crop Science 46, 2720
Baring MR, Simpson CE, Burow MD, Cason JM (2013) Registration of ‘Tamrun OL11’ peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 7, 154
Branch WD (2007) Registration of ‘Georgia-06G’ peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 1,
| Registration of ‘Georgia-06G’ peanut.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Butler D, Cullis B, Gilmour A, Gogel B (2009) ASReml-R reference manual: mixed models for S language environments. The State of Queensland, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Brisbane, Qld.
Chen CY, Barkley NA, Wang ML, Holbrook CC, Dang PM (2014) Registration of purified accessions for the US peanut mini-core germplasm collection. Journal of Plant Registrations 8, 77–85.
| Registration of purified accessions for the US peanut mini-core germplasm collection.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cruickshank A, Tonks J, Kelly A (2003) Blanchability of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) kernels: early generation selection and genotype stability over three environments. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 54, 885–888.
| Blanchability of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) kernels: early generation selection and genotype stability over three environments.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Culbreath A, Gorbet D, Martinez-Ochoa N, Holbrook C, Todd J, Isleib T, Tillman B (2005) High levels of field resistance to tomato spotted wilt virus in peanut breeding lines derived from hypogaea and hirsuta botanical varieties. Peanut Science 32, 20–24.
| High levels of field resistance to tomato spotted wilt virus in peanut breeding lines derived from hypogaea and hirsuta botanical varieties.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cullis BR, Smith AB, Coombes NE (2006) On the design of early generation variety trials with correlated data. Journal of Agricultural Biological & Environmental Statistics 11, 381
| On the design of early generation variety trials with correlated data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Farouk S, Brusewitz G, Paulsen M (1977) Blanching of peanut kernels as affected by repeated rewetting–drying cycles. Peanut Science 4, 63–66.
| Blanching of peanut kernels as affected by repeated rewetting–drying cycles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gilmour AR, Cullis BR, Verbyla AP (1997) Accounting for natural and extraneous variation in the analysis of field experiments. Journal of Agricultural Biological & Environmental Statistics 2, 269–293.
| Accounting for natural and extraneous variation in the analysis of field experiments.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gorbet DW, Tillman BL (2009) Registration of ‘Florida-07’ peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 3, 14–18.
| Registration of ‘Florida-07’ peanut.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Holbrook CC, Dong W (2005) Development and evaluation of a mini core collection for the US peanut germplasm collection. Crop Science 45, 1540–1544.
| Development and evaluation of a mini core collection for the US peanut germplasm collection.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Holbrook CC, Timper P, Culbreath AK, Kvien CK (2008) Registration of ‘Tifguard’ Peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 2, 92–94.
Hsi DC, Finkner RE (1972) Registration of New Mexico Valencia A peanut. Crop Science 12, 256
| Registration of New Mexico Valencia A peanut.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Isleib TG, Milla-Lewis SR, Pattee HE, Chapin JW (2011) Registration of ‘Bailey’ peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 5,
| Registration of ‘Bailey’ peanut.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Janila P, Aruna R, Jagadish Kumar E, Nigam S (2012) Variation in blanchability in Virginia groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Oilseeds Research 29, 116–120.
Jørgensen E, Pedersen AR (1998) How to obtain those nasty standard errors from transformed data and why they should not be used. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University, Det Jordbrugsvidenskabelige Fakultet. Internal Report 7. Available at: http://gbi.agrsci.dk/∼ejo/publications/dinapig/intrep7.pdf
Melouk HA, Chamberlin K, Godsey CB, Damicone J, Burow MD, Baring MR, Simpson CE, Dashiell KE, Payton M (2012) Registration of ‘Red River Runner’ peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 7, 22–25.
Mozingo R (1979) ‘Effects of genotype, digging date and grade on the blanchability of Virginia type peanuts. In ‘Proceedings American Peanut Research and Education Society’. Tulsa, Oklahoma. (American Peanut Research and Education Society: Tifton, GA, USA)
Piepho H-P, Möhring J (2007) Computing heritability and selection response from unbalanced plant breeding trials. Genetics 177, 1881–1888.
| Computing heritability and selection response from unbalanced plant breeding trials.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Puppala N, Tallury SP (2014) Registration of ‘NuMex 01’ High Oleic Valencia Peanut. Journal of Plant Registration 8, 127
Sanders T, Adelsberg G, Hendrix K, McMichael R (1999) Effect of blanching on peanut shelf-life. Peanut Science 26, 8–13.
| Effect of blanching on peanut shelf-life.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schirack A, Sanders T, Sandeep K (2007) Effect of processing parameters on the temperature and moisture content of microwave-blanched peanuts. Journal of Food Process Engineering 30, 225–240.
| Effect of processing parameters on the temperature and moisture content of microwave-blanched peanuts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shokraii EH, Esen A, Mozingo RW (1985) Relation of a 36,000-dalton arachin subunit to blanchability in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 33, 1114–1116.
| Relation of a 36,000-dalton arachin subunit to blanchability in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Simpson C, Baring M, Schubert A, Melouk H, Lopez A, Kirby J (2003) Registration of ‘Olin’ peanut. Crop Science 43, 1880–1881.
Singh U, Sridhar R, Dwivedi S, Nigam S, Jambunathan R (1996) Evaluation of blanching quality in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Food Science and Technology 33, 211–214.
Smith A, Cullis B, Thompson R (2001) Analyzing variety by environment data using multiplicative mixed models and adjustments for spatial field trend. Biometrics 57, 1138–1147.
| Analyzing variety by environment data using multiplicative mixed models and adjustments for spatial field trend.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tillman BL, Gorbet DW (2015) Registration of ‘FloRun ‘107’ ’ Peanut. Journal of Plant Registrations 9, 162–167.
| Registration of ‘FloRun ‘107’ ’ Peanut.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tseng Y-C, Tillman BL, Peng Z, Wang J (2016) Identification of major QTLs underlying tomato spotted wilt virus resistance in peanut cultivar Florida-EP TM ‘113’. BMC Genetics 17, 128
| Identification of major QTLs underlying tomato spotted wilt virus resistance in peanut cultivar Florida-EP TM ‘113’.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Whitaker TB, Dorner JW, Lamb M, Slate AB (2005) The effect of sorting farmers’ stock peanuts by size and color on partitioning aflatoxin into various shelled peanut grade sizes. Peanut Science 32, 103–118.
| The effect of sorting farmers’ stock peanuts by size and color on partitioning aflatoxin into various shelled peanut grade sizes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wright F, Mozingo R (1975) Laboratory device for peanut skin removal. Peanut Science 2, 11–15.
| Laboratory device for peanut skin removal.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wright GC, O’Connor DJ, Fleischfresser DB (2013) ‘Breeding for high blanchability in peanuts.’ (American Peanut Research and Education Society: Tifton, GA, USA)
