Genetics and breeding of sugar beet

391 Pages·2005·16.48 MB·English

by  Enrico Biancardi

Genetics and Breeding of Sugar Beet

Genetics and Breeding of
Sugar Beet
ERRATA
In the title page the sequence of editors of the book should read as:
Editors
Enrico Biancardi
lstituto Sperimentale per le Colture lndustriali
Rovigo, Italy
Larry G. Campbell
USDA Agricultural Research Station
Fargo, ND
USA
George N. Skaracis
Hellenic Sugar Industries
Thessaloniki
Greece
Marco De Biaggi
lstituto Sperimentale per le Colture lndustriali
Rovigo, ltalv

The mistake is sincerely regretted.
Science Publishers, Inc.
Enfield (NH), USA Plymouth, UK
SCIENCE PUBLISHERS, INC.
Post Office Box 699
Enfield, New Hampshire 03748
United States of America
Internet site: http://www.scipub.net
[email protected]( marketing department)
[email protected] (editorial department)
[email protected] (for all other enquiries)
Libraryof Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Genetics and breeding of sugar beet/editors, Enrico Biancardi . . . [et al.] .
p.m.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 1-57808-366-4
1. Sugar beet-Breeding. 2. Sugar beet4enetics. I. ~iancardi,E nrico.
SB221.G365 2004
632.6'32-dc22
2004057821
ISBN 1-57808-366-4
O 2005, Copyright Reserved

All rights reserved. IVo part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form.or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying recording or otherwise, without the prior written
permission.
This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or
otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired put, or otherwise circulated without the
publisher's prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in
which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition
being imposed on the subsequent purchaser.
Published by Science Publishers Inc., Enfield, NH, USA
Printed in India
Foreword
It was a great honour to be asked by the editors to write a foreword to their
substantial book. Comprehensive publications on the improvement and
genetics of sugar beet are few indeed. The most recent is the chapter by
Professor Bosemark in "The Sugar Beet Crop" edited by Cooke and Scott
in 1993. This field is developing quickly and this update is well timed.
Sugar beet is one of the most recent plants cultivated on a large scale.
Cultivation of beet species is ancient but its industrial use is recent. It was
first used as a source of sucrose at the beginning of the nineteenth century,
after the German Achard built the first sugar factory in Cunern in Silesia,
with the help of the King of Prussia (1802). Because of the continental
blockade, Napoleon gave the sugar beet industry the resources necessary
for its early development.
Given its recent origin, it is quite easy to follow the evolution of the sugar
beet compared to most cultivated plants that were domesticated before the
discovery of writing and recording of history. From the beginning of its
industrial development, sugar beet has benefited from an impressive
improvement effort, for three reasons:
- First: its fodder origin. The "Weisse schlesische Rube" used by

Achard had a sugar content of only 7%. The nineteenth century was
devoted to increasing sugar content and hence the breeders were
often called "chemists".
- Second: sugar beet is a biennial which requires specific conditions
for reproduction, in contrast to cereals, legumes, and crucifers for
which farmers can readily reproduce the seed.
- Third: industrial customers were not able initially to easily control
the sugar content, of prime necessity for the profitability of their
production. So they entrusted the task of good and stable sugar
content to specialized breeders.
Sugar beet is the first scientifically bred crop and breeders, confident of
their sales, have invested considerable resources in its improvement.
Thanks to the initial improvement efforts, techniques and breeding
vi Foreword
-- -
methods have continually improved during the nineteenth and twentieth
century. Therefore, sugar beet can be considered a model in plant
breeding.
Among other subjects, this book gives considerable emphasis to
selection for resistance to pests and diseases in relation to employment of
new technologies. Host plant resistance research became essential in
plant breeding in response to decreasing agricultural prices and a
corresponding reduction in inputs in order to decrease costs. A reduction in
pesticide use also became absolutely necessary for environmental
protection.
My congratulations to the several authors for their contributions
covering numerous breeding objectives of considerable scientific interest.
Michel Desprez
Templeuve, December 1,2003
Preface
The incentive for this book was the realization that, unlike other important
crops, a monograph entirely dedicated to sugar beet genetics and breeding
was not published. Pertinent information is available only in chapters of
several books devoted either to the breeding of different crops or to various
aspects of sugar beet production. Contributions by E. Knapp (1958), K.H.
Barocka (1985), both in German, G.A. Smith (1987), R.J. Hecker and R.H.
Helmerick (1985), and L.G. Campell (2002) belorlg to the former group,
while those of J.S. McFarlane (19 71) and N.O. Bosemark (1 993) belong to
the latter. These basic publications have comprehensively documented the
current state of the art and proved beneficial to those engaged in the
theoretical and applied aspects of sugar beet genetic improvement.
The book comes at a time of rapid expansion in molecular lechnology-
based selection approaches destined to modify or supplement
conventional breeding methodology. These new technologies will allow
genetic and physiological factors influencing sugar yield and quality to be
assessed in great detail and then manipulated. These novel techniques are
also expected to facilitate reduction in reliance of the sugar beet crop on
chemical pesticides and fertilizers, by exploiting unique and improved
resistance mechanism s against the various abiotic stresses and diseases
and by producing varieties that use soil resources more efficiently. An entire
chapter is devoted to current information on the development of these new
techniques and their integration into sugar beet breeding.
As evidenced by the numerous references cited, it has been necessary
to synthesize an impressive volume of scientific information. For all the
subjects addressed, the authors attempted to maintain an appropriate
balance between relevant theoretical considerations and application to
sugar beet genetic improvement, albeit the latter is often complicated by
local considerations. The contents of this book have been updated with the
most recent information on breeding activities. Several researchers at
public institutes, universities and private seed companies with vast
experience in the numerous subjects have collaborated in this work. Some
authors, directly involved in sugar beet breeding, have released lines and
viii Preface
varieties of notable importance from both a commercial and historical
perspective. Their experience is partially acknowledged in the respective
sections.
The editors are grateful to the essential contributions that collaborators
provided in the preparation of this volume. The critical review of some
chapters by John Macefield was particularly appreciated.
The Editors
About the Cover Illusmtration
Reproduction of the first known illustration of a beet dates back to the
manuscript Materia Medica, written by Pedanius Dioscurides. The author
was a physician living in Rome during the reign of Emperor Tiberius
Claudius Nero (around 60 AD). During the Middle Ages, the book was
thought to be one of the most important manuals of medicine in the ancient
world. This color miniature was found at the Biblioteca Marciana of Venice,
in the codex named Diuscurides Neapolitanus. The Herbarium included in
the manuscript, probably reproduced in Constantinople or Ravenna, is the
earliest illustrated source of botanical knowledge and natural therapeutic
practises. Some historians speculated that the Herbarium could date back
to Crateuas, physician of Mithridates VI king of Pontus (120-63 BC). At
least the white form of the plants described in the original caption seems to
refer to the sea beet (Beta vulgarisssp. maritima), used at that time for food
and often as a drug.
PCDMAIOI RITA CIAPATIKA.
41TTON. TO M8N M8AAN CTMTlKCDTBf'ON KOlAlAC CYN @AKH BYH-
BBN, KAI MAAAON H PI& TO A8 ABYKON ~YKOIAION. AM@OTBPA 4 6
KAKOXYAA AlA T O BN AYTOIC NITPCDABC, 086N 0 XYAOC AYTON
KABAlP8I KBQAAHN PBINB~'xYTOYM~NOCM 8TA M8AlTOC KAI
CDTAArIAC OQBh8l. T O 4e TON PIZaN K(AI) TQ)N C~YAAONA Q8-
YHMA nlTYPCDN KAI KONIA(DN CMHKTIKON KAI XBMBeACDN nPA-
Y~TIKON KATANTAOYMBNON. OMOI(DC Ae TOlC QYMOIC KATA-
nAATT8 1N AhQOYC llP08K'~lTPC DB~NTAC KAI AAcbneKlAC KATA-
KNIC~BICAC KAI TA NBMOMGNA BAKH. 89eH A 6 ~LAN~HMATKAAI
TIYPIKAYTA KAI BPYCtrIBAATA 'I'CDNTAI : 1))
Translation of the Greek caption (translated by Prof. George Gialouris,
Panorama High School, Thessalonica, Greece): Wild black beet.
According to Romans: Sylbatica (wild beet of the forest). The beet is of two
kinds: one is black, systolic for the abdomen when cooked (especially the
root) with lentils; the other kind is white and is a laxative. The gruel of both