B-1087 August 1969 mmmmmmmm in Texas TEXAS A8¢M UNIVERSITY TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION H. O. Kunkel, Acting Director, College Station, Texas mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmml Summary Barley is grown in Texas 0n a less extensive scale than wheat or oats, but it has unique characteristics as a feed and winter pasture crop. The acreage is widely distributed, but the majority is grown in North and Northwest Texas. All barley grown for grain is used for livestock feed, but large acreages are grown exclusively for winter forage. Most barley is fall sown, although when spring moisture conditions are favorable, small acreages may be spring sown in northwest Texas. Because of the wide range of climatic conditions in Texas, winter, intermediate-winter and spring types are needed to provide adapted varieties for all areas. Cold tolerant, winter-type varieties, such as Will, Harrison and Kearney are adapted to the High Plains, Texas Exten- sion Districts l and 2. Less cold tolerant, intermediate- winter type varieties, such as Cordova, Era, Wintex, Zora and Rogers are adapted to central, north central and the Rolling Plains areas. Spring-type varieties are adapted to fall seeding in the southern one-third of Texas. Barley performance trials are grown at from 8 to 12 locations each season and provide information on the best adapted varieties for each growing area. Diseases are important in barley production in the eastern half of the state and are frequently limit- ADAPTED BARLEY VARIETIES FOR GROWING AREAS Area Extension districts Fall seeding I 1, 2 Will, Harrison, Kearney, Chase, Rogers II 3, 6, 7 Cordova, Rogers, Zora, Era, Will IH 4, 5, Cordova, Zora, Era, Rogers IV 8, 9, ll Cordova, Zora, Rogers, Era V l0, 12 Goliad, Arivat, Florida 102 2 ing factors in production in southem leaf diseases caused by several Helmin species cause the greatest losses, and no means of control is known. Leaf rust V‘ cause damage in some seasons, but resist“; are available. The greenbug (a species of aphid) is, insect attacking barley. Several other spec attack the crop but are less damaging. g as well as some other aphid species, may barley yellow dwarf virus disease. Three i barley, Will, Kearney and Era, are resis, greenbug but not to other aphids. Ins available for control of aphids and mites _ is practical. Other insects and mites whi attack barley are winter grain mites, br mites, chinch bugs, annyworms and cut Work to improve barley is in progress. of this research include the development; yielding varieties for each growing area, t" ment of forage production and charact the breeding of disease and insect resist varieties. Hybrid barley research is in no adapted hybrid seed is yet available‘ growers. a Spring ~- » w. Arivat, Cordova, '1 Cordova, Era, R f,‘ none recommen - none recommend i none recommen - lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllIlIllIllllIllIlllllllllllllllIIIllllIllllIlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllIllllllllllllll‘lllllllllllllllllllllllIHillIlllllIllllllllllllllIlllllllllllllllllllIllllllllIlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllIllllllllllllllHillIllllllllllllll!l!IllIllllilllllIllllHIHlllllIllllllllllllllllllllil E in Texas I. M. ATKINS, j. H. GARDENHIRE M. E. MCDANIEL AND K. B. PORTER Contents Page Summary .................................................................................................. ._ 2 Introduction ............................................................................................ .. 3 Areas of Adaptation ............................................................................. .. 3 Uses of Barley ....................................................................................... .. 4 Culture .................................................................................................... .. 6 Varieties ................................................................................................... .. 8 Performance Trials ............................................................................... ..l2 Diseases .................................................................................................... ..l6 Insects ...................................................................................................... ..20 Barley ' Improvement ............................................................................ ..2l Acknowledgments .................................................................................. ..22 Literature Cited ............................ ...................................................... .23 BARLEY RANKS WELL BELOW WHEAT AND OATS in acre- age, production and value in Texas but deserves furthe.r consideration by growers in certain areas because of its dual value as a feed grain and winter pasture crop. Expansion of livestock feeding in Texas and the recent development of cold tolerant varieties adapted to northwest Texas now provide a better market for the crop and more stable production. During the 10-year period, 1959-68, barley was seeded on an average of 367,700 acres. The average harvested acreage, 219,900 acres, was much smaller because large acreages are seeded exclusively for live- stock pasture and some acreage is lost to drouth or winterkilling each year. The largest acreage of barley in Texas was in 1961 when 582,000 acres were seeded, producing 10,104,000 bushels of grain. The smallest harvested crop since 1952 was in 1967 when only 75,000 acres were harvested. Annual acreages and production figures for 1959-68 are given in Table 1. The distri- bution of barley in Texas is shown in Figure 1. AREAS OF ADAPTATION Barley is grown over a wide range of climatic conditions and on many soil types in Texas. It does best on well-drained soils of moderate to high fertility and is not well adapted to areas having high rainfall, high humidity or poorly drained soils. Barley is more tolerant of high salt concentrations in irrigated areas than are the other small grains. Climatic conditions, especially low winter tem- peratures, amount and distribution of rainfall and humidity are important in establishing the limitations of barley varieties. The crop thrives best in a cool ‘Respectively, agronomist in charge of small grains and flax research, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and formerly research agronomist, Crops Research Division, Agricultural Re- search Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, College Station; agronomist in charge, Texas A8cM University Agricultural Re- search Station at Denton; assistant professor, Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Sta- tion; and professor-in-charge, USDA Southwestern Great Plains Research Center at Bushland. 3 HARLEY ACRES PIANTED 1968 1 not = 1,006 Acres Figure 1. Seeded acreage of barley, Texas, 1968. climate; hence, nearly all Texas barley is fall sown and grown during the winter and spring months. Harvest of the crop begins in May in central Texas and is completed in early June in northwest Texas. When favorable spring moisture conditions prevail, some barley is seeded in early spring (February or March) in northwest Texas. Barley is rather widely distributed throughout the state, but the largest acreages are in north and northwest Texas. It is usually grown on the “tighter” soils of these areas and is less frequently sown on sandy soils. Winterkilling in varying degrees and extent occurs in some years. Only very cold tolerant, winter- type varieties should be fall sown in the High Plains area. When the crop is winterkilled, a spring-sown TABLE l. STATISTICAL DATA ON BARLEY ACREAGE AND PRODUCTION IN TEXAS, 1959-68‘ Produc- Yield Farm Acreage tion . , per acre, price per Year Seeded Harvested bushels bushel bushel 1959 481,000 300,000 6,300,000 21.0 $0.80 1960 524 ,000 405 ,000 9,518,000 23.5 0.79 1961 582,000 421,000 10,104,000 24.0 0.87 1962 454,000 227,000 3,859,000 17 .0 0.94 1963 450,000 180,000 3,780,000 21.0 0.92 1964 360,000 200,000 4,400,000 22.0 0.87 1965 248,000 142,000 2,698,000 19.0 0.90 1966 21 1,000 125,000 2,750,000 22.0 0.98 1967 175,000 75,000 1,350,000 18.0 1.00 1968 192,000 124,000 3,348,000 27 .0 0.89 Average 367,700 219,900 4,810,700 21.9 0.90 ‘Data furnished by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Statis- tical Reporting Service, Austin, Texas. 4 crop may be substituted, but. this lower yields. Fall seeding is almost ticed in other parts of the state. For research purposes, to determine adaptation of varieties and for easy v ing recommendations, the state has been five research areas, Figure 2. These include Extension Districts‘, as designated, fairly similar climatic conditions. H only guidelines as conditions may nated areas. Data on elevation, soil type characteristics are given for the represen in the research areas in Table 2. duction of barley by Extension Districts areas are given in Table 3. USES OF BARLEY Grain All.barley grain produced in Texas livestock feed. Barley is an excellent ing cattle, lambs, goats or hogs. Also, it _ for chickens (l) . It is approximately value to corn and grain sorghum, but crude fiber and slightly higher values of and digestible nutrients. 1t is lower in extract and productive energy per 100 feed, Table 4. Winter pasture Barley is an excellent winter While the total seasonal production for greatly\different from that of oats or Research area l ll Ill . Perryton I14. Benton a l o 2. Etter 015. Sherman I 3. Bushland I16. Overton a 4. Wellington I17. McGregor o 5. Plainview I18. Temple I 6. Lubbock I19. College Station I 7. Chillicothe I20. Prairie View I 8. Iowa Park I21. Beaunont I 9. Spur I22. Beeville 010. Abilene 023. Robstwn Ill. Pecos ' I24. Crystal City I12. E1 Paso I25. Heslaco I13. San Angelo I Field Units Texas Agricultural Experiment Station o Cooperative Farm Research Sites Figure 2. Small grains and flax research stations. VATION AND SELECTED CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA FOR RESEARCH STATIONS IN TEXAS . ipidly in the fall and will furnish pasture y than the other small grains. Forage Pied from clipping experiments, for barley {small grains were summarized by Holt d Atkins (7). Data for local conditions V“ be obtained at the nearest research center Precipitation, Length Number long-time mean Mean temperatures of Average date of p Eleva- years Growing Maxi- Mini- growing First fall Last spring tion record Annual season‘ mum mum Mean season frost frost 2930 20.4 12.0 70.7 42.1 57.0 185 October 22 April 20 3825 26 18.3 11.0 72.0 42.0 57.0 192 October 28 April 18 3370 36 19.0 11.9 73.7 45.7 59.7 206 November 2 April 10 2320 23.1 15.7 74.0 978 43 29.2 21.4 78.0 51.7 64.5 211 November 4 March 30 1406 63 24.4 17.0 76.6 50.2 63.4 217 November April 3 1750 83 24.3 13.6 76.0 53.0 64.5 229 November 13 March 23 3641 19 6.9 3.7 79.0 44.8 61.9 238 ‘November 31 April 3 621 44 ' 32.3 24.9 77.5 52.6 64.2 237 November 15 March 24 1466 27 26.9 23.8 77.1 53.3 65.2 239 November 13 March 21 520 63 43.9 28.7 76.3 55.3 65.8 249 November 17 March 12 713 34 31.6 27.6 740 56 34.0 27.3 78.9 55.6 67.3 252 November 22 March 15 308 78 39.8 30.1 79.1 57.1 68.2 263 November 27 March 8 250 18 39.3 30.6 76.0 57.0 67.0 263 November 30 March 5 26 55 54.1 39.5 78.3 58.5 68.5 276 November 28 February 26 240 78 29.8 22.2 82.1 60.0 70.9 291 December 6 February 20 100 25 27.3 19.9 311 December 23 February 15 rough May. or field unit, Cook (9), Baltensperger (8) and Mc- Lean and Norris (13) . Under many conditions, barley produces a greater amount of forage during the fall season but may produce less than oats or wheat in the spring months. However, because barley is earlier in maturity, it may be injured more severely by late iACREAGES AND PRODUCTION OF BARLEY BY EXTENSION DISTRICTS AND RESEARCH AREAS, 1968 Number acres Percent of state 192,000 - g Percent Production, ‘ Land use area Seeded Harvested harvested Seeded Harvested bushels Northern High Plains 38,650 32,150 83 20.1 25.9 820,700 Southern High Plains 8,990 6,200 69 4.6 5.0 180,500 Low Rolling Plains 53,450 34,080 65 27.8 27.4 1,046,200 Trans-Pecos 10,750 6,450 60 5 .6 5 .2 139,750 Rolling Plains and Edwards Plateau 28,950 18,750 68 15.1 15.1 453,400 North Central Blacklands, Prairies and Cross Timbers 16,170 9,600 59 8.4 7.7 282,100 Northeast Timberlands 0 0 Central Blacklands, Prairies and Cross Timbers 29,430 15,380 54 15.3 < 12.4 417,050 Central Blacklands, Prairies and Timberlands 2,260 200 9 1.4 0.1 Upper Coast ‘and Southeast Timberlands 0 South Central Blacklands, Prairies and Coastal Bend 2,750 200 7 1.4 0.1 2,900 Rio Grande Plain and South Texas 600 300 50 0.3 0.2 3,000 124,000 65 3,348,000 TABLE 4. ANALYSIS OF SOME TEXAS-GROWN GRAINSI Nitrogen Crude free Digestible Crop Protein fiber extract Water Ash nutrients Barley 12.0 6.3 67.5 9.3 2.8 9.6 Corn 10.4 4.4 72.5 9.1 1.3 6.4 Grain sorghum 11.1 2.9 70.9 10.7 1.9 ‘ 8.1 Oats 11.4 12.8 58.6 8.6 8.7 . .1 8.9 Wheat 14.0 1.7 69.4 10.0 1.9 A 11.3 ‘Taken from “The composition and utilization of Texas feeding stuffs.” Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 461. spring grazing than other crops if it is to be left to mature a grain crop. For the same reasons, it does not provide“ livesto-ck pasture as late in the spring as oats or wheat where it is used exclusively for forage. Methods of clipping to evaluate varieties for forage production are- shown in Figure 4. Grain yields may be damaged by mechanical clipp-ing of forage. For example, barley clip-ped for forage evaluation at College Station from 1960 to 1964 yielded only 27.5 bushels per acre compared to 40.1 fo-r unclipped plots. Top dressing with nitrogen at time of livestock “take- off” will greatly increase grain yields if moisture is available. Grazing by livestock can be equally as detrimental to grain production if the crop is grazed too close or too- late in the season. If the crop is to be left to mature grain, livestock should be removed by March l in areas I and II and by February 15 in areas III, IV and V. » Other uses Barley is an excellent winter cover crop for re- ducing or preventing wind and water erosion of soils. Plants emerge quickly and soon cover the ground to protect the soil. Barley grown on such soils may be left to develop a good green manure crop. While the crop can be made into a good quality hay if cut at early dough stage and before the awns become hard, it is not used extensively for hay. Barley grain grown in Texas is no-t use-d for malting. Only varieties de- veloped for this special purpose are acceptable to the Figure 3. Supplementing grain rations with barley winter pas- ture in steer feeding operations, Blackland Research Center, Temple. 6 Figure 4. Clipping procedures to determine fora of barley varieties: spring-type, erect seedling winter-type, postrate growth (right). i malting trade. Furthermore, the environ ditions are usually not suitable for the pr‘ grain of malting quality. CULTURE 8 The cultural operations for barley f to those required for other small grain crops; adapted to the area should be selected, an be grown on fertile, we'll-drained soil W‘; attention given to seedbed preparation, wt, and adequate fertilization. research are-a I, the High Plains. Fall-sf usually produces higher yields and bett: grain than spring-sown barley in all 11m of Texas. Table 5 gives comparative yiel sown and spring-sown Cordova barley in 5 years when no- winterkilling occurred (4).; barley also provides "additional income fro Barley may be either fall or spring? TABLE 5. COMPARATIVE YIELDS OF coRDo“ FROM FALL AND SPRING SEEDING r 1., Location Fall sown Spri — — Bushels per acre Denton, 1935-45 41.7 ‘__. Denton, 1953-58 33.9 Bushland, 1939-44 37.7 gh low temperatures may damage the LEseasons, the risk has been reduced by t of more cold tolerant varieties. When op is winterkilled, spring-type varieties for reseeding but usually yield less, der irrigation, barley may follow in 0f the adapted crop-s of the area, but ages of sorghum stubble are plowed a barley crop, fertilizing with nitrogen ecaying this residue is desirable. On l-soils, barley will be most successful when _er-fallowed ground. A field of irrigated i near Bushland is shown in Figure 5. recently become of increased impo-r- insion District 6, the Trans-Pecos area easons- for increased interest in barley ce to salt concentrations which damage 2| crops and for its value in livestock three-crop, 2-year rotations of cotton- ‘rghum. Since winter temperatures are this area than in area I, intermediate- ring-type varieties have been grown to- ‘ii-winter pasture and a grain crop. ing of barley is the predominant prac- n-olling Plains of research area II. Small pring sown, and the spring-sown propor- if ed when low temperatures kill the fall- nly limited areas are irrigate-d, and little is used for barley. On non-irrigated fproduces yields and total income com- - l; her crops. Fertilizer response in forage frequently greater than that in grain ing is almost universal in the northeast- Titland southern parts of Texas, research and V. As temperatures at seeding time high in these areas, barley germinates, pends and provides forage more quickly all grain crops. Barley may follow any d crops if proper attention is given to eeds o-r volunteer grain. The acreage south Texas is small, and the crop is ‘amaged by leaf diseases. Spring-type, i’ varieties should be grown in this area. TES AND DATES FOR SEEDING BARLEY 2-‘- Figure 5. Field of Rogers barley near Bushland. Seedbeds should be firm and level. If the ground is to be plowed, this should be done sufficiently early to firm the seedbed before planting time. Relatively shallow tillage with one-way, disc plo-ws or tandem discs may be desirable on row-crop land where the time between crops is Short. Seeding should be done with a drill to» insure uniform rate and depth of seeding. Rates and dates of seeding vary greatly in Texas because of the wide range of climatic conditions and use of the crop. Suggested rates and dates are given in Table 6. Earlier seeding dates are suggested if the crop is seeded primarily for forage. However, early seeding may increase the problems o-f diseases and of greenbugs or other insects. Direct combine harvesting of barley grain is the predominant practice throughout the state, Figure 6. Windrow harvesting, followed by threshing later with a pickup attachment, may be desirable where weeds are a problem, where there is danger of lodging or where there is difficulty in getting seed sufficiently dry for storage. Most varieties stand well for direct harvesting, but some may lodge or shatter if allowed to become overripe or grow excessively tall. The grain should be- fully mature and have ap-proximately l3 percent moisture for safe storage. Grain of high mois- ture may heat in storage, reducing its value for feed Seeding date Fall Spring Extension Rates’ pounds per acre Grain and Grazing districts Dryland Irrigated pasture only 1, 2 48 '72 October 1 September 1 February 15 3, 6, 7 48 72 October 15 October l Febnuary 15 4, 5 72 October l5 October l February l 8, f), 11 '72 November l October 15 1 l0, l2 72 72 November l October 15 1 not recommended. of phosphorus component with the seed»; shown by Spence and Dudley (17) to in y growth and yield. Numerous tests in the soils of North Central Texas gave average; 38.0 bushels of wheat per acre when phosg banded with the seed and 33.3 bushels w not banded with the seed. Growers shoul. their nearest county agricultural agent for? tails. Fertilizer recommendations are found s sion Service Fact Sheets. VARIETIES Most barley varieties of commercial i) in Texas are the common, six-row head exception is Tokak, a two-row winter barley in New Mexico. The six-row head type, F1 has three fertile florets in each spikelet wh in six rows of seed around the sp-ike. Th type develops seed only in the center flor‘ types grown in other states are the hoode» Figure 6. Field Cordova barley near Dallas. and destroying its ability to germinate. Rough-awned $110" awned and COTTIPZICI 01” Club head varieties, Figure 7, to be used for livestock feed should may 0'1" ma)’ not b6) awflffd- The HWHS may be threshed sufficiently close to break off and remove (as in Rogers). partially barbed or smooth awn segments as these can cause damage to the mouths in COFdOVH, Figure 7- 0f livestock‘ The commercial varieties are dividedi Barley and other small grains respond well to three growth habit types based on juveni fertilizers (15). A soil analysis will provide the best response to low temperature and day-lengt basis for fertilizer recommendations for any location. and leaf type. These are winter, interme‘ _; The amount and distribution of rainfall will influence and spring. Early growth habit is shown i the extent to which fertilizer applications will be profitable. Revenue from improved livestock gains due to increased forage growth is frequently greater than that due to increased grain yields. Table 7 shows the response in forage and grain yield from fertilizer applications at selected locations. Direct placement with representative varieties Goliad (spring TABLE 7. FERTILIZER RESPONSE OF SMALL GRAINS IN GRAIN, FORAGE AND SILAGE PRODUCTION Forage yield, pounds per acre of dry matter College Station (7) 400 pounds 400 pounds 5-10-10 No 5-10-10 at seeding plus Crop fertilizer at seeding 30 N in spring Barley, forage 871 1182 1143 Temple, 1962-68 (9) N0 fertilizer 15-30-0 30-30-0 60-60-0 Oats (5 clippings) 2697 2514 3959 4043 McGregor, 1963-67 (13) No fertilizer 20-40-0 40-40-0 60-60-0 Oats, forage 2002 3208 4146 4784 Oats, grain 38.3 49.1 60.7 59.0 Denton, 1950-53 (8) No fertilizer 30-0-0 30-60-0 60-60-0 Wheat, forage 55v 49s 1562 209s _ A i “ , Wheat, grain 28,3 32A 37.4 392 Figure 7. Smooth awn of Cordova, right and r’- awn (barbed) , center. 8 and Will (winter). The pedigree-s of ‘Y: varieties grown in Texas are given in characteristics of varieties in Table 9. , varieties of this group behave like winter wheats prostrate-growing, narrow-leaf seedlings _s do not produce spikes normally unless Figure 8. Head types of cultivated barley: A, Hooded; B, Awnless; C, Short awned; D, Compact six-row; E, Common six-row; F, Two-row. subjected to a period of cold or cool weather. Freezing temperatures are not necessary to induce nonnal head- ing, but some exposure to cool weather which causes the plant to become dormant or grow slowly is require-d. This vernalization, in combination with reaction to day length, initiates the heading p-rocess. Winter-type varieties usually will not head from spring seeding, Figure 10. In p-art because of the dormant lIGREE, STATE AND DATE OF RELEASE OF COMMERCIAL VARIETIES OF BARLEY GROWN IN TEXAS New Mexico 1965 North Carolina 1961 Kenbar x Davie Released by " State Year Parentagg Arizona 1948 Atlas x Vaughn Kentucky 1967 Azer x Dayton Nebraska 1961 Selection from C.I. 7404, a Korean barley Texas 1951 Wintex x Texan ‘ ' North Carolina 1952 Sunrise x Bolivia Indiana 1960 Comfort, Purdue 1101, Wisconsin barbless, Chevron, Bolivia, Kentucky 1, Purdue 400-17 Texas 1968 Texas x Ludwig Georgia 1960 [(Hooded 16 x Sunrise) x Tenwase] x Wong-Jet Texas 1950 juliaca x Peatland California 1964 Selection from composite Cross II, C.I. 5461 Florida 1967 Manchuria ms x Rabat Indiana 1963 “Comfort-Purdue 21) x (Bolivia-Chevron) x Kentucky 1-Purdue 400-17] x Wong New York 1951 Michigan Winter x Wong Indiana 1967 Same as Harrison Nebraska 1952 Selection from Composite Cross III, C.I. 5530 Colorado p 1956 Selection from Korean barley Oklahoma " 1956 Selection from Composite Cross III, C.I. 5530 Tennessee l‘ 1930 Selection from introduced southern European barleys Texas 1941 Selection from Composite Cross III, C.I. 5530 Selection from barley introduced from Turkey Oklahoma 1963 Rogers x Kearney Texas 1938 Selection from farmers field Arkansas 1965 (Rogers x Kenbar) x (Kenbar x C.I. 6511) Figure 9. juvenile growth habit of barley varieties: prostrate winter-type (left) , intermediate winter-type (center) and spring- type erect (right). growth habit, the winter-type varieties are generally more cold tolerant than other types and better adapted to withstand low winter temperatures. The exact origin of the winter-type barleys is no-t known, but they are believed to» have originated in the Balkans-Caucasus region of Europe-Asia. They were brought to America by early colonists, and dis- tinct strains were developed by natural selection and by plant breeders in several states. Tennessee winter, Texas winter, Oklahoma winter, Wisconsin winter, Reno», Ward, Pueblo and other local strains were grown from 1915 to 1955. Recently, a number of strains of even greater hardiness have been developed by plant breeders, by hybridization followed by se-y lection. These include varieties such as Kearney, Dicktoo-, Chase, Meimi, Will, Hudson, Dayton, Har- rison and others which have extended the fall-sown barley area as far north as southern Nebraska. TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF CHARACTERISTICS OF SOME Figure l0. Failure of winter-type variety Will to spring seeding (center) compared with Cordova Intermediate-winter type varieties p. Varieties of this group are less cold tolx. most true-winter varieties. They also di winter-type varieties in that juvenile growt" upright, leaves are broader and growth periods of warm weather is quicker. The int, winter type commercial varieties, Cordova) Wintex, Rogers and Era, which are grown e in Texas, will head normally from either fall seeding. These varieties are widely they are sufficiently cold tolerant to withst winters in Texas and also to produce well _ , and east Texas. Wintex, for example, has aged by low temperatures in only three 1936. These varieties produce more early v, winter-type varieties and are more popul. as winter pasture crops. An unofficial estii in 1968 indicated that Cordova was gro‘; BARLEY VARIETIES UNDER TEXAS CONDITION Mildew it Growth Hardiness Plant Straw Test Variety Source habit‘ rating Maturity height strength weight Awns Arivat Arizona S low early tall good good rough Chase Nebraska W high midseason medium fair good rough Cordova Texas I-W medium mid-early medium good good smooth Dicktoo Nebraska W high midseason tall fair good rough Era Texas I-W medium early tall good good rough Goliad Texas S low early tall good good rough Grande California S low early tall good good rough Florida 102 Florida S low early tall good good rough Harrison Indiana W high mid-early medium good good rough Hudson New York W high late tall good fair rough y‘: Jefferson Indiana W high late short good good short 5"‘ Kearney Nebraska W high late tall good fair rough i. Meimi Kansas W high medium medium fair fair rough Rogers Oklahoma I-W med. high med. late tall fair good rough i Tennessee Winter Tennessee W high midseason medium fair fair rough Texan Texas I-W medium midseason medium good fair smooth Tokak N. Mexico W medium late medium good fair rough Wade N. Carolina W med. high midseason short good poor short Will Oklahoma W high late tall good good rough Wintex Texas I-W medium late medium fair fair rough Zora Arkansas I-W med. high mid-early tall good good rough ‘S : spring, I-W z: intermediate winter, W I Winter. 2S : susceptible, MS z moderately susceptible, R-S : resistant to susceptible, R : resistant. 1O é ’ 7REAGES AND PERCENT OF TOTAL FOR BARLEY VARIETIES GROWN IN TEXAS, 1968‘ ‘on district l’ 2 3’ 6’ 7 4’ 5 8’ 9’ u 1O’ l2 Percent ff 7h testing area I lI III 1V V Total of total 116 500 1,250 1,866 0.7 3,412 51,889 17,447 23,660 2,860 99,468 38.2 217 2,100 58 1,525 4,915 8,815 3.4 120 1,242 62 1,424 0.6 75 100 500 675 0.3 4,625 1,175 5,800 2.1 462 462 100 100 8,425 37,226 5,310 5,660 3,220 59,841 23.0 550 120 342 50 1,052 0.4 1,585 972 180 2,737 1.1 18,000 18,000 0.0 75 75 ' 16,310 26,585 4,650 2,600 50,145 19.3 2,087 1,333 389 3,809 1.5 5,504 1,575 250 5,210 2.0 105 1,018 1,125 0.4 ‘ates made by county agricultural agents. percent of the Texas acrage and Rogers in northwest Texas (4) . Because of their rapid seed- t, Tablg 10, ling growth and broad leaves they produce forage rather quickly. However, spring-type varieties may be iiilvarleues damaged more by livestock grazing than more pros- ‘i | - . - . 5 - 5 . l» ng type var1et1es may be fall sown 1n trate growing var1et1es. Goliad and Arivat have been (approximately Temple-Austin south- the varieties most extensively grown, but recent tests Tgpgonly infrequent damage by low tempera- have shown that Florida 102 is well adapted in south have also been use-d with considerable Texas. The danger from’ winter injury must be recog- x irrigated Trans-Pecos area of research nized and considered when growing these varieties. A a decent years. They may be spring sown Figure 1l shows Cebada Capa killed at McGregor by .' y. f 1 " _. _ interkilling of spring-type barley variety, Cebada Capa (right), McGregor, 1963, compared with reaction of more ' , Cordova (left) . 11 a temeperature of 7° F. in 1963 whereas Cordova, at left, was not injured. PERFORMANCE TRIALS Statewide performance trials are conducted at most of the field units of the Texas Experiment Station shown in Figure 2 and at a number of co- operative farrn locations as well. Data from such tests provide information on adaptation of commercial varieties available for the area and their range of adaptation. New experimental lines are tested in the same trials to detennine their value. Data on grain yield, grain quality and reaction to diseases, insects, low temperature and drouth are reported in mimeo- graphed form (5) and in published 5-year or 10-year summaries (6). Data for local areas are published by research units for local use. The acreages of barley varieties grown in research areas in 1968 are given in Table l0. Research Area I This area consists of the North and. South High Plains or Extension Districts l and 2. It ranges ap- proximately from 3000 to 4000 feet in altitude with average rainfall from‘ 18 to 22 inches, the majority being received during the summer months. Wheat and grain sorghum are the principal cash crops on the heavier soils in District 1, while cotton and grain sorghum are the principal cash crops in District 2. During the past 30 years, this area, which once was devoted to ranching and dry farming, has become- TABLE ll. COMPARABLE GRAIN YIELD AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN IRRIGATED BARLj GROWN AT BUSHLAND, 1959-68 largely an irrigated farming area. Moref wells are in operation, and an estimat acres of wheat were irrigatedl. A Barley is grown both under irrigatii dryland crop. Winter temperatures are temperature drops below 0° F. at one orf during the winter. The development of tolerant varieties, suchzas Will, Keame, Chase and others has reduced winterk' J area. Spring seeding of barley is practic temperatures kill the fall-sown crop, and s also may be sown when spring moisture are favorable. ‘ Comparable grain yields and agr for performance trials at Bushland are giv’ ll and for Etter and Plainview in Table _ tests were irrigated. The same varieties Q used for dryland production. The best vari _, area are Will, Harrison, Rogers, Kearney, because of their good yield record and col a Wade has. yielded well but lacks adequat; ance. Will, Kearney and Chase are resist i bug injury as well. Zora, Tokak, Era have performed well in 3 years of testi V tolerance to low temperatures has not tested. Cordova and Wintex produce a”. injured by low temperatures. lHigh Plains Irrigation Survey, 1968. Unpublishedl‘ by Leon New, area irrigation specialist, Texas g1 tension Service. " Comparable data‘ Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant years bushels pounds per first height, Lodging, Variety tested per acre bushels head inches percent Cordova’ 8 62.1 47 .3 5-3 33.6 22 Rogers’ 8 72.9 48.8 5-7 35.3 28 Tennessee Winter” 8 52.4 44.6 5-6 32.4 7 Average 62.5 46.9 5-5 33.7 19 Barsoy 2 40.4 48.5 4-28 28.1 0 Chase 2 86.7 48.6 5-7 37.1 39 Carstens 1 63.1 50.3 4-28 25.8 0 Dicktoo 1 65.6 45.4 5-3 32.4 29 Era 4 68.5 49.4 5 -3 36.2 23 Harbine 4 47 .0 46.2 5-4 33.2 9 Harrison 4 77 .6 48.9 5-7 33.7 11 Hudson 3 77.6 49.3 5-6 38.8 Kearney 7 67 .6 45 .7 5 -7 35 .9 29 Meimi 3 71.7 49.2 5-4 36.3 Penrad l 49.7 38.9 5-9 40.8 Pueblo 2 51.1 45.0 5-7 32.4 49 Tokak 3 73.4 47 .3 5-8 35.9 58 Wade 4 95.8 47 .2 5 -5 33.6 ll Ward 3 56.1 - 44.3 5-6 32.4 39 Will 5 86.3 48.9 5-8 36.6 31 Wintex 1 69.8 44.6 5 7 33.5 49 Zora 4 79.5 47 .8 5-2 34.4 ll ‘Calculated comparable average based on data for years grown. ’Check varieties used in computing comparable data. l2 givETTER AND PLAINVIEW. 1966-68 . f . ' ‘4- -OMPARABLE GRAIN YIELD AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN, IRRIGATED BARLEY VARIETIES Comparable data‘ Etter Plainview Test Number Grain yield Number Grain yield, weight, Plant Date years bushels years bushels pounds height, first tested per acre tested per acre per bushel inches head 3 62.5 2 62.8 48.0 28 5-3 ._ 3 67 .8 2 55 .4 46.6 29 5-7 _ ter’ 3 52.6 1 43.6 44.7 23 5-5 ~ i ‘ 61.0 47.1 46.4 1 35.8 l 51.7 43.8 22 2 67.3 1 44.7 49.0 5-6 1 65.3 50.3 1 80.5 2 57.5 46.3 ~ 27 5-6 1 88.9 ’ 47.3 l 5-7 2 65.6 1 72.1 48.4 30 3 74.6 1 79.4 46.6 24 5-4 3 78.6 2 67.1 47.3 30 5-5 3 72.5 1 35.9 45.8 27 5-1 parable average based on data for years grown. used in computing comparable data. liimited testing of spring-type varieties has '0 in recent years since more cold tolerant ‘eties became available. When spring seed- 1.. ry, the spring-type varieties Arivat, Flynn, [1 Goliad may be used. However, the inter- ter-type varieties Cordova, Rogers, Wintex (l. have produced equally well. Winter-type ‘ould not be sown in the spring as they may onnally, Figure l0. a II ea consists of the Rolling Plains, the upper teau and the Trans-Pecos land use areas. A considerable proportion of this area is non-culti- vated ranch land devoted to permanent pastures. Small grains are grown on the heavier soils while grain sorghum, cotton and feed crops are grown on the sandy soils. The area ranges from 1000 to 2300 feet elevation. The Rolling Plains receives 20 to 30 inches of rainfall. Winter temperatures are fairly severe, but minimum daily temperatures in winter usually are sufficiently low that plants remain dor- 'mant and well hardened so that little winterkilling occurs. The intermediate winter-type varieties are sufficiently hardy for this area and produce good winter forage and grain yields. COMPARABLE GRAIN YIELD AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN IRRIGATED BARLEY VARIETIES A IOWA PARK, 1956-63 Comparable data‘ Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date years bushels pounds first Survival, tested per acre per acre head 1963 8 48.2 44.0 4-14 20 8 49.9 45.0 4-18 79 :1 8 55.2 44.4 4-20 93 i inter’ s 45.1 42.3 4-18 91 - 8 51.5 43.3 4-20 24 50.0 43.8 4-18 1 57.0 44.8 4-15 100 3 48.4 42.1 1 73.1 44.8 4-12 85 2 55.6 45.1 4-19 97 3 44.4 45.3 4-17 98 .less 3 33.2 40.1 4-14 4 i; 44.9 41.3 4-19 8 65.6 46.9 4-20 89 1 58.3 43.8 4-15 91 5 45.0 42.7 4-23 2 71.9 46.3 4- 12 99 lies used in competing comparable data. bglcomparable averages based on data for years grown. l3 Performance trials were conducted at Chillicothe throughout the testing period and at Iowa Park until 1963. The Iowa Park test was irrigated sufficiently to insure fair production but not sufficiently to pro- duce maximum yields. Data at Iowa Park for 1956-63 are given in Table 13 and for Chillicothe, 1959-68 in Table 14. Rogers and Will have produced outstanding yields at Iowa Park and Chillicothe. Era, a relatively new, greenbug resistant variety, has performed well during recent years. Chase, Hudson and Wade have performed well in Iowa Park tests but produced much poorer yields under dry farming conditions at Chilli- cothe. Unfortunately, no facilities are available for yield trials in Extension District 7. Tests in earlier years at Comfort, Kerr County, showed that Cordova, Will and Rogers were well adapted, and these are grown extensively, Table 10. The Trans-Pecos area, Extension District 6, is largely devoted to ranching and receives only 5 to 15 inches of rainfall. Small areas along the Rio Grande, Pecos and other streams are irrigated. Salt accumula- tion has produced problems with some crops. Since barley is more tolerant of high salt concentrations than many other crops, it has become important as a feed and grazing crop in three-crop, 2-year rotations of cotton-barley-grain sorghum. Unfortunately, no barley trials have been conducted in this area. Grower experience has shown that, even though winter temperatures are severe, spring varieties such A TABLE 14. COMPARABLE GRAIN YIELD AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN BARLEY VARIETIES GROWN AT CHILLICOTHE, 1959-68 as Arivat have survived and provided g‘; pasture. For fall seeding, the intermediate f varieties Cordova, Zora, Era and Rogers si form well and provide abundant winter pyj cember and January seeding, following cott quicker maturity, and the spring varieties] into this program. Research Area III This area, Extension Districts 4 and up of the Blackland Prairie soils of no Texas, the somewhat lighter Grand Prairie the sandy east Texas and Cross Timbers - elevation ranges from about 300 feet in v 900 feet in the western part, and the from 28 to 42 inches of rainfall annually. 1 winters are relatively mild, temperatures, rapidly and widely. Periods of warm winter may cause plants to lose hardiness;- rapid growth. When rapid drops in w! occur, barley and other crops may suffer c damage and killing. Spring freezes may I", after jointing or heading has started. Barley is well adapted to this area, i low temperature and disease hazards, and; fits well into the farming systems. Returns n5, grazing in this area often approach the v“! . barley grain crop. Fall seeding is much I to spring seeding because of the value of _i and the higher yields produced. As shown‘ 5, fall-sown Cordova barley averaged 41;; Comparable data‘ Visual Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant estimate years bushels pounds’ first height, forage,“ Lodged, Variety tested per acre per bushel head inches percent percent Cordova’ l0 24.7 43.8 4-28 22.2 117 25 Rogers’ l0 28.3 46.1 4-29 22.6 107 18 Tennessee Winter? 10 16.8 39.7 4-28 21.4 100 60 Average 10 23.2 43.2 4-28 22.1 108 34 Barsoy 2 16.0 47.1 4-20 16.4 l0 Chase 4 19.1 42.4 4-31 19.8 Era 6 24.7 42.5 4-25 23.2 20 Harbine l0 25.9 43.9 4-27 21.7 110 40 Harrison 5 21.4 46.4 5-2 20.1 0 Hudson 4 ,17.3 43.8 5-6 20.7 16 Kearney 6 20.7 44.0 4-30 22.5 103 Meimi 4 17.4 41.6 4-28 22.6 . 119 Penrad 1 27.4 41.8 5-7 21.4 Pueblo 1 18.4 5-1 22.4 98 Tokak 3 23.2 44.3 5-5 21.6 50 Wade 3 22.0 43.7 4-30 15.4 Ward 2 14.6 42.4 4-30 20.4 89 16 Will 7 25.0 43.9 4-28 21.9 13 Wintex 5 14.4 41.1 5-2 21.5 100 26 Zora 6 27.2 42.9 4-26 20.9 ‘Calculated comparable averages based on data for years grown. ’Check varieties used in computing comparable data. “Based on Tennessee Winter as 100 percent. 14 to 29.5 bushels for spring-sown (in yields and agronomic character- iin Table 15. Will, Dayton, Rogers produced the best yields among i8 to l0 years. For shorter periods, arrison and Wade have produced ids. Chase, Kenbar, Rogers, Will and ore cold tolerant varieties. Diseases qble importance in this area, with st and net blotch being the most JV ilDistricts 8, 9 and 11 make up this hich, like area III, has a rather wide ‘I and soil type. Winter temperatures Qcre and low temperature injury occurs f al years. Higher temperatures and 2e better conditions for leaf diseases. '_ediate-winter type varieties should be districts. Cordova, Rogers and Zora . ‘1 are the principle varieties grown and these have given the best results in performance trials, Tables 16 and 17. True spring-type varieties may be used for winter pasture and while they will provide abundant forage, they may be injured by low temperatures. Research Area V Extension Districts l0 and 12 are included in this area, and data from College Station are used as representative of the northern part of this area. The area has a wide variation in rainfall ranging from 39 inches at College Station to 26 inches at Beeville and the distribution is very poor. A few small areas have supplemental irrigation. Winters are mild with only occasional problems from low temperatures. Leaf diseases, mildew, Helminthospor- ium species, scald and leaf rust are constant problems. True spring-type varieties may be fall sown for forage. Very little of the barley is harvested forgrain. The spring-type varieties Goliad, Florida 102, Grande and Arivat are the best grain and forage varieties for this area. Seed supplies are a constant ARABLE GRAIN YIELD AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN BARLEY VARIETIES GROWN AT Comparable data‘ Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant Winter Leaf Mildew years bushels pounds first height, survival, rust, re- Lodging, tested per acre per bushel head inches percent percent action percent l0 46.7 43.7 4-14 31.5 61 28 R-S 9 10 48.5 45.0 4-19 33.6 85 16 R 30 l0 37.2 42.5 4-17 29.5 66 21 VS 16 10 44.2 43.7 4-17 31.5 70 15 18 3 59.3 45.8 4-17 33.0 37 R l0 1 34.7 46.1 4-19 27.2 34 25 3 41.7 43.1 4-15 31.4 100 38 S 10 46.3 37.8 4-19 27.6 15 R 16 6 38.1 41.6 4-18 27.1 13 R 9 49.0 43.5 4-13 32.0 82 35 MR 11 4 41.9 40.8 4-14 32.3 29 R-S 8 50.6 44.4 4-12 32.5 29 R-S 18 5 37.8 39.2 4-13 27.2 25 R 2 36.6 44.6 4-19 32.5 13 8 5 47.9 46.7 4-19 30.6 7 R 5 38.6 43.1 4-21 32.4 23 R 2 31.2 44.6 4-21 29.2 7 R 5 2 28.9 40.8 4-21 30.0 20 6 45.7 44.1 4-15 32.7 90 21 R 20 3 39.1 43.3 4-21 29.8 33 R 5 34.8 38.3 4-17 31.6 16 R 10 1 41.0 39.6 4-13 30.2 19 2 43.7 44.3 4-16 33.0 19 3 44.2 42.9 4-16 31.5 26 R 2 38.6 42.9 4-21 32.7 2 41.7 43.8 4-14 31.0 17 2 40.4 40.6 4-19 31.7 57 60 4 46.4 38.7 4-17 26.2 84 21 R 3 8 51.6 44.8 4-18 33.0 82 29 R 28 5 31.6 42.2 4-21 29.8 63 23 VS 10 31.7 39.7 4-18 33.0 30 R 12 4 55.8 44.6 4-13 32.8 14 R-S 21 table average based on data for years grown. in computing comparable data. 15 TABLE 16. COMPARABLE GRAIN YIELDS AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN BARLEY VARIETIES McGREGOR, 1958-68 ‘ Comparable data‘ Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant Winter years bushels pounds first height, survival, Variety tested per acre per bushel head inches 1963 Cordova“ 1O 42.3 47.5 4-11 27.8 ._ 90 Rogers‘ l0 43.3 48.6 4-16 30.0 ' l; 100 Tennessee Winter“ 10 30.8 44.3 4-15 27.4 95 Average l0 38.8 46.8 4-14 28.4 Chase 1 29.5 45.8 4-12 29.1 Cebada Capa 3 15.2 45.8 4-7 28.7 Era 5 42.6 44.7 4-9 29.3 85 Florida 102 1 46.1 48.1 4-9 31.4 Goliad 5 37 .4 44.6 4-5 30.5 Harrison 3 30.5 47.8 4-13 26.9 Kenbar 3 40.7 45.8 4-15 28.6 Kenate 2 37 .4 46.5 4-18 30.3 Pace 5 37 .6 44.7 4-6 27 .8 80 Penrad 1 37.1 43.8 4-17 29.1 Texan 3 37.1 47.1 4-11 27.6 Wade 1 38.4 45.5 4-16 24.1 95 Will 6 42.3 46.6 4-14 29.3 100 Zora 5 44.6 48.4 4-9 30.1 100 ‘Check varieties used in computing comparable data. ‘Calculated comparable average based on data for years grown. ‘Percent of Cordova. problem because the crop is largely sown for forage. consideration in the use of of the crop _ Data for College Station and Beeville are given in grain or a combination of the two. In |»_‘__H Tables 18 and 19. areas 4 and 5, where humidity is high .- ' occur frequently, leaf diseases are very DISEASES winter forage production and may pr f‘ Diseases are a constant hazard in barley produc- production. Barley matures earlier than A: tion in many parts of the state and may be a major crops, an advantage under many conditio ;. TABLE 17. COMPARABLE GRAIN YIELDS AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN BARLEY VARIETIES TEMPLE, 1958-68 " Comparable data‘ Winter Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant survival, years bushels pounds first height, percent, Variety tested per acre per acre head inches 1962 Cordova“ 10 36.5 45 .6 4-11 28.1 100 Rogers‘ 10 35.9 48.8 4-13 29.9 100 Tennessee Winter’ l0 25.6 44.0 4-11 25.0 100 Average 10 32.7 46.1 4-12 27.7 Cebada Capa 3 17.3 43.1 4-11 28.2 0 Chase 2 24.8 45.6 4-5 29.1 Era 6 30.4 45.0 4-8 28.9 Flgrida 102 1 28.8 46.1 3-22 30.2 Goliad 4 29.9 46.3 4-8 30.8 Harrison 4 32.9 50.5 4-16 25.2 Kenbar 2 28.1 47.5 4-13 28.7 Pace 4 29.1 44.1 4-7 27.1 100 Penrad 1 25.4 44.1 4- 16 33.0 Texan 2 32.7 45 .5 4- 11 27 .7 100 Wade 2 29.3 45.5 4-10 25.2 Will 7 31.8 46.8 4-13 29.3 100 Zora 6 41.0 47.8 4-5 28.6 ‘Calculated comparable average based on data for years grown. ‘Percent of Cordova. ‘Check varieties used in computing comparable data. 16 ARABLE GRAIN YIELDS AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN BARLEY VARIETIES GROWN AT N, 1958-68 Comparable data‘ Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant Leaf years bushels pounds first height, rust, tested per acre per bushel head inches percent l0 29.4 43.7 3-31 28.1 27 10 29.0 43.8 3-21 31.6 13 l0 30.9 44.9 4-6 30.6 17 30.0 44.1 3-29 30.1 19 7 26.5 42.6 3-13 26.3 38 4 14.8 38.4 4-15 29.8 0 6 28.0 40.9 4-5 27.0 16 6 25.6 42.0 4-2 27.7 10 6 31.5 42.4 3-31 ‘ 29.7 y 44 2 28.8 46.1 3-5 25.1 0 3 33.1 40.5 3-29 30.2 22 3 28.8 40.4 4-3 27 .2 33 3 40.8 44.3 3-9 33.0 26 4 23.9 38.4 3-25 25.9 22 4 39.0 46.1 3-12 30.2 60 4 28.3 45.8 4-14 26.5 18 6 36.0 43.7 4-2 29.9 24 3 19.9 44.2 4-4 28.5 46 5 20.1 35.6 3-30 29.3 40 3 26.6 43.1 3-28 28.3 18 6 27.5 42.5 3-24 27 .5 14 2 21.0 35.1 4-8 29.6 46 3 23.3 42.2 4-2 26.9 14 6 31.2 41.7 4-6 30.4 25 6 25.2 42.6 3-30 30.2 19 7 35.2 44.2 3-30 30.3 18 table average based on data for years grown. Aimed in computing comparable data. the more important diseases and the Net Blotch ineasures available follows. More de- Net blotch, caused by Pyrenophora teres (Died) on may be found in TAES Bulletin Drechs, has been the most important disease of barley in recent years, causing an estimated 7.7 p-ercent loss l i) HMPA-RABLE GRAIN YIELDS AND AGRONOMIC DATA FOR FALL-SOWN BARLEY VARIETIES GROWN AT - 68 Comparable data‘ Number Grain yield, Test weight, Date Plant Leaf years bushels pounds first height, rust, tested per acre per bushel head inches percent 9 15.2 40.8 3-31 24.9 46 9 22.8 41.9 3-19 28.4 14 19.0 41.4 3-25 26.6 30 6 24.8 39.1 3-9 23.8 51 1 27.4 43.8 3-16 24.1 1 36.4 38.8 3-21 27.1 2 35.0 40.8 3-20 25.1 43 15.2 43.8 17.4 30 2 11.7 38.3 4-4 22.4 58 5 24.3 40.3 3-24 27.2 39 9 14.2 41.8 4-6 27.0 56 3 11.7 40.8 4-6 22.9 50 2 18.8 41.8 3-29 23.1 parable averages based on data for years grown. i used in computing comparable data. 17 in Texas in ‘I965. In some seasons, the foliage has been damage-d, both reducing the amount and making it unpalatable to» livestock. The disease is carried on the seed and straw and also is transmitted by airborne spore.s. Seedlings may b-e attacked as they emerge, young seedlings killed and stands reduced. Local lesions develop on the leaves, forming a brown re- ticulate pattern which later may coalesce into dark brown stripes. On the kernel a light brown discolor- ation with netted appearance is characteristic. In addition to- reduced stands and damage to foliage, many kernels will fail to develop or be shriveled. No» variety is highly resistant, although there are some differences in reaction. Seed treatment with organic mercury fungicides will reduce seedling in- fection, but there is no means of preventing the spread of air borne inoculum. Adequate and efficient control can be obtained only by breeding resistant varieties, but no adequate source of resistance is known. Leaves infected with net blotch are shown in Figure l2. Spot Blotch and Barley Stripe Spot blotch, caused by Helminthosporium sativum Pam., King et Bakske, and barley stripe, caused by Helminthosporittm gramineum Rab., are important leaf diseases in some areas. a Neither has caused serious losses in Texasin recent years. Barley stripe is seed and crop residue borne and attacks both seedlings and more mature plants. Seedlings infected with barley stripe develop yellow stripes which turn brown as tissues are killed; later the leaves fray and split length- wise. Plants may be seriously stunted and often develop an olive-gray color. Seedlings infected with spot blotch have dark brown lesions near the soil line or extending into the leaf blade. The spots have definite margins but coalesce to form large Figure l2. Barley leaffdiuseases. 18 blotches. The symptoms are hard to distin‘ net blotch. The o-lder leaves develop an cast and then dry up-. Lesions occurring on ._ may form a characteristic “black point” elf kernel. Seed treatment greatly reduces seed and damage. Rotation with non-suscepti is advised. Barley Stripe Mosaic Barley stripe mosaic virus is a seed disease. Under field conditions, the disea L mitted by contact of leaves from plant to insects have been identified which transmitg; As the virus is within the seed, see-d treat fungicides will not control the disease. on the leaves, Figure 12, are somewhat like , toms of barley stripe. Isolation of virus-fre foundation seed increase is the only means Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus . Yellow dwarf, caused by an insect tr’ virus, is present in Texas in varying degr every season. Although only recently d, probably has been present for a long time; may occur to single plants, small areas or much of certain fields. The plants are may be killed if infection occurs early in cycle. Plants infected later may produce a with small or sterile spikes and greatly red yields. Symptoms appear as irregular yello 1 blotches on the leaves, especially near the ti. areas may then take on a reddish. cast, but i ranges from yellow through brilliant scarlet? ally the entire leaf becomes discolored. ‘u stunted in varying degrees, mature early an few and light seed. rnd Houston (l4) were able t0 transmit sing yellow dwarf by five species of i aphids. Of these the corn leaf aphid, maidis Fitch., the English grain, avenae (Fab.), the apple-grain aphid, m fitchii Sand., and the greenbug, ‘aminis Rond., are co-mmon pests in Texas iinsects may or may not carry the virus. lican be controlled by sprays but may be fields from crop emergence to maturity; fraying simply for disease prevention is y. Varietal differences in response to yel- i. ur, but no resistant varieties adapted in vailable. A plant infected with barley is shown in Figure l3. y ldew __ mildew, caused by Erysiphe graminis occurs rather generally in the eastern half when humid, cloudy and cool conditions several weeks. The disease disappears eather becomes hot and dry. Powdery ‘lops as gray mycelium on the leaf sheaths The host tissues become yellow, then “gradually die as the fungus invades the er, tiny black dots, the spore-producing iéies of the fungus, may appear on the leaf. t ue is reduced, plant growth is retarded F losses in yield may result. . (ease is spread by air-borne spores. While ffcontrolled with fungicides, such control tical for commercial grain production. resistant varieties are- known, and the A i nbe transferred to other varieties. Physio- able to attack some varieties and not fyfltnown. The reaction of commercial va- lei-given in Table 9. Leaves infe-cted with shown in Figure l2. allow dwarf of barley (center) . Rusts Both leaf rust, caused by Puccinia hordei Otth., and stem rust, caused by Puccinia graminis Pers., at- tack barley. The species of stem rust found on barley is one which also attacks wheat, but leaf rust of barley does not attack wheat or oats. Stem rust is found on barley, but, because of the early maturity of barley, it seldom causes important losses. Goliad is the only adapted variety with resistance to stem rust. Leaf rust has been of considerable importance throughout the eastern part of the state in recent years. Data on leaf rust infection are given in Tables. l5, 18 and 19. Goliad, Harrison, Ro-gers and others have resistance to- some races, but Cebada Capa is the only variety tested which is resistant to all races. The development of resistant varieties is the only practical means of control. Other Foliage Diseases Several other foliage diseases occur occasionally and may become important in some seasons or areas. Scald, caused by Rhynchosporium secalis (Oud.), Davis, Figure l2, has been of so-me importance in experimental nurseries in south Texas. Large, water soaked areas develop», then turn brown to black, and spots may co-alesce to kill the entire leaf. Bacterial blight, caused by Xanthomovzas translucens, (L. R. Jones, A. G. Johnson and Reddy Dowson) has been observed a few times but has not become commercially important. ' Smut Three smuts occur on barley in Texas, but, with seed treatment fungicides now available, each can be easily controlled. Covered smut, caused by Ustilago hordei (Pers.) Lagerlr, Figure l4, produces a ma.ss of smut spo-res which are held together by the glumes. Spores are scattered to other grain in the threshing operation where they cling to the seed and glumes until the seed germinates. At that time the spore germinates and infects the young seedling. Control o-f this smut with a dust or slurry of organic mercury or other approved fungicides is easy and effective. (Note: all seed disinfectants are poisonous and may be irritating to the skin. Follow manufacturer’s re-com- mendations carefully and use masks if the fumes are encountered in treating seed). For latest seed treat- ment recommendations see the County Agent. Two types o-f loose smut occur, but neither has been an important factor in production. Both destroy the floral parts and entire head, Figure l4. Black, or semiloose smut, is caused by Ustilago nigra Tapke, and brown, loose smut, is caused by Ustilago nuda (Jens.) Rostr. The two smuts are similar in general appearance, but the spores of the nigra smut are carried within the husk covering or on the seed. This form can be controlled with the same fungicides used to- control covered smut. The ideal control for smuts is to grow 19 resistant varieties, and most Texas varieties have considerable field tolerance or escape mechanisms as natural infection has been very low. The brown loose smut infects the ovary at blooming time and is carried as mycelium within the seed. Since it is within the see-d, it canno-t be controlled with the usual dust or slurry funcigides. Recently a new fungicide, Vitavax2, has been perfected which effec- tively controls this internally borne smut. This prod- uct may be used on seed-increase fields but not on barley grown for commercial production. The long- soak method and ho-t water treatment for control of loose smut of barley and wheat are effective but difficult to -carry out (16). INSECTS A number of insects may cause serious damage to barley, if conditions for their development are favorable. A description of these insects, with control measures for each, was given by Daniels et al. (10). Prob-ably the mo-st destructive insect pest of barley is the greenbug (aphid), Schizaphis graminum (Ro-nd.). Several other aphids attack barley but cause less serious damage. Greenbugs cause a characteristic yellowing or reddening of the leaf tissue where they feed- Under favorable conditions for greenbug re- 2Use of a trademark name does not constitute a guarantee or warranty by the USDA or the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may be suitable. 20 Figure 14. Covered smut (left), normal head (cenY and loose smut (right). f‘; production, plants in large areas may leaving large yellow-green to dead areas”; If the infestation continues, the entire be destroyed. Greenbugs and corn leaf g~ shown on a leaf o-f barley in Figure 15.? Effective insecticidal sprays for contr, bugs and other aphids are now availableQ nomics of using these will have to be det‘ each grower in each situation. Greenbu varieties of barley were found in 1942 by Figure l5. Greenbugs on barley leaf (right) ; corn leaf aphids (left) . Several resistant varieties have been de- ill barley, adapted to Texas and Okla- __..Era, adapted to research areas II, III and available. i bugs, Blissus leucopterus (Say), the winter iPenthalezzs major (Duges), and the brown Petrobia latens (Muller) may become pests “nder some conditions. Effective sprays are ble, but their use will depend upon the {of the crop involved. Crop rotation is of ‘e aid in controlling mites. ‘ BARLEY IMPROVEMENT it of the small grain improvement program breeding work to improve barley is carried '; Station, Denton, Chillicothe and Ama- w varieties and many experimental strains ing states are tested in the Intra-state ormance tests at l0 to l5 locations. evelopment of a new variety of barley 1m l0» to l5 years and often involves a f." tment of research funds. However, if the y yields more, ‘has advantages of disease istance or has other desirable character- a the increased revenue in yield or the fin a growing hazard, when projected to y eage, will return large dividends o-n the penditure. i Figure 16. Barley florets showing flower parts. Barley is self fertile, and varieties must be cross- pollinated by hand to produce a hybrid. Figure 16 shows the floral parts of a barley flower. After the cross is made, selected progenies must be grown for 4 to 8 years before true breeding strains can be selected for testing. Several years are necessary for thoroughly testing the new lines and determining their adaptation. If a superior new strain is found, several additional years are necessary to get this new variety into commercial production. Varieties of many characteristics are needed to fit specific needs of the several areas because of the wide range of climatic conditions in Texas. Charac- teristics that must be considered include resistance Figure 17. Barley nursery at Denton where hundreds of ex- perimental strains are evaluated. 21 to cold, drouth, diseases, insects, lodging, shattering, test weight and value for winter pasture. All these may contribute in part t0 grain or forage production. Figure 17 shows the extensive barley nursery at the Denton station where hundreds of strains are tested. Figure 18 shows the more advanced plot tests of barley in the final stages of testing before distribution to growers. Hybrid Barley The widespread .use and increased financial re- turns from growing hybrid corn, sorghum and other crop-s have stimulatedresearch work to develop hybrid small grains for commercial production. Due to the fact that small grains are almost entirely self- p-ollinated, this task is difficult. Genetic male-sterile barley strains have been known for some time, but cross pollination on, this plant is not satisfactory under most conditions. Mechanisms for producing hybrid barley have been worked out under conditions in Arizona, and small quantities of hybrid seed have been made available to growers. No systems have 22 Figure 1 plots i of Denton. i; been found effective under Texas condit though production of hybrid barley is u‘; some time in the future, hybrid barley is available to Texas growers. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS These investigations were conducted _;_ s, ly by the Texas Agricultural Experiment St the Crops Research Division, Agricultural Service, USDA. ' Acknowledgment is made of the coopei all substation personnel who have conduct performance trials, disease or insect studies f tural tests which form the basis of these rec i tions. Special thanks are due K. A. Lahr, M. E. D. Coo-k, V. A. “loodfin, Lucas Reyes a S E. Smith. Robert Tolar and Francis Gough preparing the disease section. Norris Danie in preparing the insect section. ,. 11.]. Rose and J. E. Parker, 1959. Barley in hens. Oregon Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 944. and R. G. Dahms, 1945. Reaction of small to greenbug attack. U.S. Dept. Agr. Tech and M. C. Futrell, 1958. Diseases of small ‘ . Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 921. 968. Performance of spring-sown wheat, oats exas Agr. Expt. Sta. Progress Report 2545. t. al. 1968. Texas small grains and flax per- ‘ ‘s. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta., Soil and Crop Sci- ch. Rpt. 25 (Mimeographed) . ..et. al. 1969. Performance of small grains and 1959-68. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. (in al. 1969. Forage evaluation studies of small i Agr. Expt. Sta. Cons. Pro. Rpts. 2650-2656. ,-' A. A., C. O. Spence and D. I. Dudley. 1954. ‘fertilizer tests in North-Central Texas, 1952-53. , pt. Sta. Progress Report 1969. 968. Forage production of small grain, sudan rghum. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Progress Reports 10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. LITERATURE CITED Daniels, N. E., H. L. Chada, Donald Ashdown and E. A. Cleveland. 1956. Greenbugs and some other pests of small grains. Texas Agri. Expt. Sta. Bull. 845. Holt, E. C., 1959. Small grains for forage. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 944. Holt, E. C., 1969. Production and management of small grains for forage. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 1082. McLean, G. W. and M. J. Norris. 1968. Yields of cotton, grain sorghum and oat forage as influenced by fertilizers. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Consolidated Progress Reports. 2473- 2482. Oswald, G. W. and B. R. Houston. 1952. Barley yellow- dwarf, a virus disease of barley, wheat and oats readily transmitted by four species of aphids. Phytopathology 42:15 (abstract) . Pope, Alex. 1963. Fertilizing irrigated wheat on the High Plains of Texas. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. MP. 688. Smith, Harlan E., C. Wendell Horne and M. C. Futrell. Controlling loose smut of wheat. Texas Agr. Ext. Serv. Leaflet L-564. Spence, C. O. and D. I. Dudley. 1965. Effect of phosphorus placement and nitrogen timing on wheat. Texas Agr. Expt. Sta. Progress Report. 2354. 23 Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Tcxas A8cM University College Station, Texas 77843 H. O. Kunkel, Acting Director- Publication