Advertisement

Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 225–234 | Cite as

Malting Barley Grain Quality and Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilization in the Arsi Highlands of Ethiopia

  • Meharie KassieEmail author
  • Kindie Tesfaye
Research Article
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

The malting industry in Ethiopia is often challenged by the availability of barley that meets the quality and quantity requirements set by the industry. Field experiments were conducted to evaluate (i) the effects of nitrogen (N) fertilization rate, variety and growing season on grain yield and grain characteristics of malting barley, and (ii) to determine the N rate that optimize grain yield and quality of malting barley. The treatments studied were five N levels (0, 23, 46, 69, and 92 kg ha−1) and two malting barley varieties (Holker and Miscal-21) over three growing seasons (2012, 2013, and 2014). The results showed that as N rates increased, malting barley grain yield, grain and straw N concentration, grain protein content, 1000-kernel weight and kernel plumpness increased, but N rates had no effect on hectoliter weight. Grain yield, grain N concentration, grain protein content, kernel plumpness and 1000-kernel weight were greater in Miscal-21, whilst straw N concentration and hectoliter weight were greater in Holker. Grain yield and hectoliter weight were affected by seasonal conditions, but grain and straw N concentration, grain protein content, kernel plumpness, and 1000-kernel weight were not affected. Although both grain yield and protein content increased with increased N rates, based on the regression equation, application of 48 kg N ha−1 gave the highest net benefit and marginal rate of return with acceptable grain quality (protein content < 11.5% and kernel plumpness > 85 g kg−1). Application of N beyond 48 kg ha-1 did not increase net benefit, but instead increased cost of production. In conclusion, to improve the likelihood that barley will be acceptable for malting, growers should limit N application and select varieties with low protein content.

Key words

Grain protein content grain yield malting barley nitrogen fertilization marginal rate of return 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely and gratefully acknowledge: Arsi University for providing financial support; Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center for providing land, seed, fertilizer, and its staff for their friendly help; Asella Malt Factory for providing laboratory service for protein analysis, and its staff for their friendly help.

References

  1. Agegnehu G, Lakew B, Nelson PN. 2014. Cropping sequence and nitrogen fertilizer effects on the productivity and quality of malting barley and soil fertility in the Ethiopian highlands. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 60: 1261–1275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agegnehu G, Nelson PN, Bird MI. 2016. Crop yield, plant nutrient uptake and soil physicochemical properties under organic soil amendments and nitrogen fertilization on Nitisols. Soil Till. Res. 160: 1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atherton MJ. 1984. Quality requirements: malting barley, In: EJ Gallagher, Cereal Production. Butterworths in association with Royal Dublin Society, Dublin, pp 113–130Google Scholar
  4. Baethgen WE, Christianson CB, Lamothe AG. 1995. Nitrogen fertilizer effects on growth, grain yield and yield components of malting barley. Field Crops Res. 43: 87–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertholdsson NO. 1999. Characterization of malting barley cultivars with more or less stable grain protein content under varying environmental conditions. Eur. J. Agron. 10: 1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BMBRI (Brewing and Malting Barley Research Institute). 2014. Quality factors in malting barley. A Brewing and Malting Barley Research Institute Publication 1510. BMBRI, Winnipeg, MB. http://www.bmbri.ca/PDF/Quality Factors in Malting Barley. (Accessed 24 Oct. 2014)Google Scholar
  7. Canadian Grains Commission. 2017. Official grain grading guide-Barley, https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/oggg-gocg/ggg-gcg-eng.htm. (Accessed 17 August 2017)Google Scholar
  8. Carr PM, Horsley RD, Martin GB, Hochhalter MR. 2014. Malt barley cultivar ranking under long-term tillage systems in a semi-arid region. Agron. J. 106: 2067–2074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Castro A, Petrie S, Budde A, Corey A, Hayes P, Kling J, Rhinhart K. 2008. Variety and N management effects on grain yield and quality of winter barley. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 54: 1125–1131Google Scholar
  10. CSA (Central Statistical Authority). 2013. Report on area, production and yield of crops for private peasant holdings for main crop season 2012/13. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: CSAGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen JX, Kang FD, Zhang GP. 2006. Relationship between malt qualities and beta amylase activity and protein content as affected by timing of N fertilizer application. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. 7: 79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center). 1988. From agronomic data to farmer recommendations: An economic training manual. Revised Edition. Mexico, D.F.Google Scholar
  13. Edney MJ, O'Donovan JT, Turkington TK, Clayton GW, McKenzie R, et al. 2012. Effects of crop management on barley quality and endosperm modification during malting. J. Sci. Food Agric. 92: 2672–2678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Emebiri LC, Moody DB. 2004. Potential of low protein genotypes for nitrogen management in malting barley production. J. Agric. Sci. 142:319–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emebiri LC. 2015. Breeding malting barley for consistently low grain protein to sustain production against predicted changes from global warming. Mol. Breed. 35: 1–10 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2013. Faostat 2013. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). http://faostat.fao.org CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jankovic S, Glamoclija D, Maletic R Rakic S, Uristov N, Ikanovic J. 2011. Effects of nitrogen fertilization on yield and grain quality in malting barley. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 10: 19534–19541Google Scholar
  17. Kangor T, Sooväli P, Tamm Y, Tamm I, Koppel M. 2017. Malting barley diseases, yield and quality responses to using various agro-technology regimes. Proc. Latvian Acad. Sci. 71: 57–62Google Scholar
  18. Kilic H, Akar T, Enver K, Ismaul S. 2010. Evaluation of grain yield and quality of barley varieties under rainfed conditions. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 9: 7825–7830Google Scholar
  19. Lapitan NL, Hess A, Cooper B, Botha AM, Badillo D, Iyer H, Menert M, Close T, Wright L, Harming G. 2009. Differentially expressed genes during malting and correlation with malting quality phenotypes in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 118: 937–952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lauer JG, Partridge JR. 1990. Planting date and nitrogen rate effects on spring malting barley. Agron. J. 82: 1083–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McKenzie RH, Middleton AB, Bremer E. 2005. Fertilization, seeding date, and seeding rate for malting barley yield and quality in southern Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 85: 603–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Magliano PN, Prystupa P, Gutierrez-Boem FH. 2014. Protein content of grains of different size fractions in malting barley. J. Inst. Brew. 120: 347–352Google Scholar
  23. MBPM (Malting Barley Production in Michigan). 2014. Michigan State University, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  24. McLelland M, Panchuk K, Green B, Campbell D, Harvey B, Rossnagel B, Foster J, Kendall N. 2009. Malting barley. Government of Alberta, Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  25. O'Donovan JT, Anbessa Y, Grant CA, Macleod AL, Edney MJ et al. 2015. Relative responses of new malting barley cultivars to increasing nitrogen rates in western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 95:831–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O'Donovan JT, Grant CA, Blackshaw RE, Harker KN, Johnson EN et al. 2014. Rotational effects of legumes and non-legumes on hybrid canola and malting barley. Agron. J. 106: 1921–1932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. O'Donovan JT, Turkington TK, Edney MJ, Clayton GW, McKenzie RH et al. 2011. Seeding rate, nitrogen rate and cultivar effects on malting barley production. Agron. J. 103: 709–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sainju UM, Lenssen AW, Barsotti LJ. 2013. Dryland malt barley yield and quality affected by tillage, cropping sequence and nitrogen fertilization. Agron. J. 105: 329–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sainju UM, Stevens WB, Caesar-Ton T, Iversen WM. 2015. Malt barley yield and quality affected by irrigation, tillage, crop rotation, and nitrogen fertilization. Agron. J. 107: 2107–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. SAS Institute Inc. 2007. SAS/STAT User's Guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
  31. Sinebo W, Gretzmacher R, Edelbauer A. 2004. Genotypic variation for nitrogen use efficiency in Ethiopian barley. Field Crops Res. 85: 43–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith EG, O'Donovan JT, Henderson WJ, Turkington TK, McKenzie RH et al. 2012. Return and risk of malting barley production in western Canada. Agron. J. 104: 1374–1382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith EG, Turkington TK, O'Donovan JT, Edne MJ, Juskiw PE et al. 2016. Influence of production systems on return and risk from malting barley production in western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 96: 339–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Therrien MC, Carmichael CA, Noll JS, Grant CA. 1994. Effect of fertilizer management, genotype, and environmental factors on some malting quality characteristics in barley. Can J. Plant Sci. 74: 545–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thompson TL, Ottman MJ, Saxton ER 2004. Basal stem nitrate tests for irrigated malting barley. Agron. J. 96: 516–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Turkington TK, O'Donovan JT, Edney MJ, Juskiw PE, McKenzie RH et al. 2012. Effect of crop residue, nitrogen rate and fungicide application on malting barley productivity, quality and foliar disease severity. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92: 577–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vahamidis P, Stefopoulou A, Kotoulas V, Lyra D, Dercas D, Economou G. 2017. Yield, grain size, protein content and water use efficiency of null-LOX malt barley in a semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystem. Field Crops Res. 206: 115–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wade A, Froment MA. 2003. Barley quality and grain size homogeneity for malting. Vol. I. Agronomic effects on varieties. Project Report #320. Home Grown Cereals Authority, Stoneleigh Park, Kenilworth, Warwickshire, UKGoogle Scholar
  39. Walter EB, Bruce CC, Lamonthe AG. 1995. Nitrogen fertilizer effects on growth, grain yield and yield components of malt barley. Field Crop Res. 43: 87–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Weston DT, Horsley RD, Schwarz PB, Goos RJ. 1993. Nitrogen and planting effects on low-protein spring barley. Agron. J. 85: 1170–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wu XJ, Chen X, Zeng FR, Zhang GP. 2015. The genotypic difference in the effect of water stress after anthesis on the malt quality parameters in barley. J. Cereal Sci. 65: 209–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Crop Science and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Agriculture and Environmental SciencesArsi UniversityAsellaEthiopia
  2. 2.International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT)Addis AababaEthiopia

Personalised recommendations