The Experts below are selected from a list of 6405 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Thomas D Warkentin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
CDC Pluto small green Field Pea
Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2020Co-Authors: Thomas D Warkentin, Albert Vandenberg, Sabine Banniza, Bunyamin Tar’an, Kirstin E. Bett, Brent Barlow, Jaret Horner, Devini De Silva, M. ThompsonAbstract:Warkentin, T. D., Vandenberg, A., Tar'an, B., Banniza, S., Bett, K. E., Barlow, B., Ife, S., Horner, J., de Silva, D., Thompson, M., Parada, M., Wagenhoffer, S. and Prado, T. 2012. CDC Pluto small green Field Pea. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92: 215–216. CDC Pluto, a green cotyledon Field Pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivar, was released in 2010 by the Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan, for distribution to Select seed growers in Saskatchewan and Alberta through the Variety Release Committee of the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers. CDC Pluto has a semileafless leaf type, fair lodging resistance, powdery mildew resistance, small seeds with round shape, good cotyledon bleaching resistance and good yielding ability. CDC Pluto is adapted to the Field Pea growing regions of western Canada.
-
CDC Canary yellow Field Pea
Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2017Co-Authors: Thomas D Warkentin, Albert Vandenberg, Sabine Banniza, Bunyamin Tar’an, Kirstin E. Bett, Brent Barlow, Gene Arganosa, Jaret Horner, Devini DesilvaAbstract:CDC Canary, a yellow cotyledon Field Pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivar, was released in 2017 by the Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan for distribution to select seed growers through the Variety Release Committee of the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers. CDC Canary has good lodging resistance, medium-sized round seeds, early maturity, and good yielding ability. CDC Canary is adapted to the Field Pea growing regions of western Canada.
-
CDC Forest green Field Pea
Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2017Co-Authors: Thomas D Warkentin, Albert Vandenberg, Sabine Banniza, Bunyamin Tar’an, Kirstin E. Bett, Brent Barlow, Gene Arganosa, Jaret Horner, Devini DesilvaAbstract:CDC Forest, a green cotyledon Field Pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivar, was released in 2017 by the Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan for distribution to select seed growers through the Variety Release Committee of the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers. CDC Forest has good lodging resistance, medium-sized round seeds, and good yielding ability. CDC Forest is adapted to the Field Pea growing regions of western Canada.
-
CDC Spruce green Field Pea
Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2017Co-Authors: Thomas D Warkentin, Albert Vandenberg, Sabine Banniza, Bunyamin Tar’an, Kirstin E. Bett, Brent Barlow, Gene Arganosa, Jaret Horner, Devini De SilvaAbstract:CDC Spruce, a green cotyledon Field Pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivar, was released in 2016 by the Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan for distribution to select seed growers through the Variety Release Committee of the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers. CDC Spruce has good lodging resistance, medium-sized round seeds, and good yielding ability. CDC Spruce is adapted to the Field Pea growing regions of western Canada.
-
CDC Inca yellow Field Pea
Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2017Co-Authors: Thomas D Warkentin, Albert Vandenberg, Sabine Banniza, Bunyamin Tar’an, Kirstin E. Bett, Brent Barlow, Gene Arganosa, Jaret Horner, Devini DesilvaAbstract:CDC Inca, a yellow cotyledon Field Pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivar, was released in 2015 by the Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan for distribution to select seed growers through the Variety Release Committee of the Saskatchewan Pulse Growers. CDC Inca has good lodging resistance, medium-sized round seeds, and good yielding ability. CDC Inca is adapted to the Field Pea growing regions of western Canada.
Martin J Barbetti - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
didymella pinodes and its management in Field Pea challenges and opportunities
Field Crops Research, 2013Co-Authors: Tanveer Khan, Thomas D Warkentin, Gail M Timmermanvaughan, Diego Rubiales, Kadambot H M Siddique, William Erskine, Martin J BarbettiAbstract:Didymella pinodes is the major pathogen of the ascochyta blight disease complex of Field Pea. The disease is endemic in all major Field Pea producing countries, frequently causing heavy losses in yield and quality. It is the most challenging of Field Pea diseases to manage, with most fungicides only partially effective and/or not cost-effective. In the absence of effective levels of host resistance, historically, the best management option has been delayed sowing and/or crop rotation to avoid major ascospore showers, but delayed sowing generally incurs a concurrent heavy yield penalty. This review evaluates world-wide progress in understanding critical components of black spot in terms of its management and evaluates opportunities both for new research and for development of more effective and sustainable management of this disease, using improved host resistance as a foundation to build and deploy more effective integrated disease management strategies. In the past decade, research has provided considerable new insights into potential ascochyta blight management strategies, including new insights into inheritance of host resistance, response to selection, and use of molecular technology, that together have demonstrated the potential to improve the level of host resistance. Significant improvements have been reported in the level of partial resistance of Field Pea with improved agronomic traits. Consequently, while the effect of this level of resistance in reducing D. pinodes infection remains to be quantified, for the first time such novel germplasm offers the prospect of revising and reintegrating the different disease management options at the farm level, based on deployment of such resistance. Combining this improved host resistance with both cultural management options and fungicidal application offers new opportunities. It is likely that previously restrictive cultural management and ineffective fungicidal control measures will re-emerge as effective and profitable practices when used in conjunction with partially-resistant germplasm. While this approach is an effective first stage to better manage ascochyta blight, future ‘stacking’ of broad antifungal genes on current moderately resistant varieties using genomic tools and/or GM technologies offers an avenue for even more effective control of D. pinodes.
-
first report of phoma herbarum on Field Pea pisum sativum in australia
Plant Disease, 2011Co-Authors: Yu Pin Li, Tanveer Khan, Patrick M Finnegan, Martin J BarbettiAbstract:Black spot disease on Field Pea (Pisum sativum) in Australia is generally caused by one or more of the four fungi: Mycosphaerella pinodes (anamorph Ascochyta pinodes), Phoma medicaginis var. pinodella (synonym Phoma pinodella), Ascochyta pisi, and Phoma koolunga (1,2,4). However, in 2010 from a Field Pea blackspot disease screening nursery at Medina, Western Australia, approximately 25% of isolates were a Phoma sp. that was morphologically different to Phoma spp. previously reported on Field Pea in Western Australia, while the remaining 75% of isolates were either M. pinodes or P. medicaginis var. pinodella. Single-spore isolations of 23 isolates of this Phoma sp. were made onto potato dextrose agar. A PCR-based assay with the TW81 and AB28 primers was used to amplify from the 3′ end of 16S rDNA, across ITS1, 5.8S rDNA, and ITS2 to the 5′ end of the 28S rDNA. The DNA products were sequenced and BLAST analyses were used to compare sequences with those in GenBank. In each case, the sequence had ≥99% nucleot...
J A Paterson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effects of increasing Field Pea pisum sativum level in high concentrate diets on growth performance and carcass traits in finishing steers and heifers
Journal of Animal Science, 2009Co-Authors: G P Lardy, V L Anderson, D M Larson, B R Ilse, R J Maddock, B A Loken, K R Maddockcarlin, J L Leupp, R Clark, J A PatersonAbstract:Three experiments were conducted to determine the effect of increasing Field Pea level in high-concentrate finishing cattle diets on ADG, DMI, G:F, and carcass traits, and to estimate the NE of Field Pea. In Exp. 1, 118 yearling heifers (417.9 ± 2.4 kg initial BW) were blocked by initial BW and assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 10, 20, or 30% dry-rolled Field Pea, DM basis; 4 pens/treatment). In Exp. 2, 143 beef steers (433 ± 19 kg initial BW) were blocked by BW and assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 10, 20, or 30% dry-rolled Field Pea, DM basis; 6 pens/treatment). In Exp. 3, 80 beef steers (372.4 ± 0.4 kg initial BW) were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 18, 27, or 36% cracked Field Pea, DM basis; 4 pens/treatment). Field Pea replaced a portion of the grain (dry-rolled and high moisture corn, dry-rolled corn, and barley and barley sprouts; Exp. 1, 2, and 3, respectively) and protein supplement. In Exp. 1, Field Pea inclusion decreased DMI linearly (P = 0.03), whereas ADG and G:F were not affected by treatment (P greater-than-or-equal 0.17); however, dietary NEg increased quadratically with increasing Field Pea level (P = 0.04). Fat thickness responded quadratically (P = 0.008) where heifers fed 20% Field Pea had greatest fat thickness and 30% Field Pea inclusion the least. Marbling tended (P [less-than or equal to] 0.09) to respond quadratically as Field Pea increased. No differences (P greater-than-or-equal 0.17) were observed for HCW, LM area, or KPH. In Exp. 2, DMI, ADG, G:F, dietary NEg, HCW, marbling, LM area, 12th-rib fat, and USDA yield grade (YG) were unaffected by dietary Field Pea inclusion (P greater-than-or-equal 0.12). In Exp. 3, marbling score increased linearly (P = 0.05), fat thickness increased quadratically (P = 0.01), and YG tended to increase (P = 0.07) quadratically as Field Pea increased. Field Pea inclusion did not affect (P greater-than-or-equal 0.38) DMI, ADG, G:F, dietary NEg, HCW, or LM area. These results indicate that Field Pea can be included successfully into rations at levels up to 36% of DM without negatively affecting growth performance and most carcass characteristics of finishing beef cattle; however, effects on marbling score were variable. These data also indicate the energy content of Field Peas is similar to cereal grains, such as corn and barley, when included in high-concentrate finishing diets.
G P Lardy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effects of increasing Field Pea pisum sativum level in high concentrate diets on meat tenderness and sensory taste panel attributes in finishing steers and heifers
The Professional Animal Scientist, 2013Co-Authors: K Maddock R Carlin, V L Anderson, D M Larson, B R Ilse, R J Maddock, M L Bauer, G P LardyAbstract:ABSTRACT Two experiments were conducted to determine the effect of increasing Field Pea level in high-concentrate finishing cattle diets on beef palatability including Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF), sensory panel tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and off-flavor. In Exp. 1, 118 yearling heifers (417 ± 2.4 kg of initial BW) were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 10, 20, or 30% dry-rolled Field Pea, DM basis; 4 pens/treatment), where Field Pea replaced dry-rolled and high-moisture corn. In Exp. 2, 143 beef steers (433 ± 19.1 kg of initial BW) were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 10, 20, or 30% dry-rolled Field Pea, DM basis; 6 pens/treatment) where Field Pea replaced dry-rolled corn. In Exp. 1, Field Pea inclusion linearly decreased WBSF (P = 0.001) and linearly increased sensory taste panel tenderness (P = 0.002) and juiciness (P = 0.04) scores, whereas cook loss, flavor, and off-flavor scores were not affected by treatment (P ≥ 0.16). In Exp. 2, Field Pea inclusion did not affect WBSF, cook loss, or sensory taste panel scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavor, or off-flavor (P ≥ 0.19); however, there was a tendency for a decrease in calpastatin activity (P = 0.10) and a tendency for an increase in troponin-T degradation (P = 0.08) with increasing dietary Field Pea inclusion. These results indicate that dietary Field Pea does not negatively affect beef palatability traits. Additional research should focus on understanding the potential mechanism by which Field Pea inclusion may influence beef tenderness.
-
effects of increasing Field Pea pisum sativum level in high concentrate diets on growth performance and carcass traits in finishing steers and heifers
Journal of Animal Science, 2009Co-Authors: G P Lardy, V L Anderson, D M Larson, B R Ilse, R J Maddock, B A Loken, K R Maddockcarlin, J L Leupp, R Clark, J A PatersonAbstract:Three experiments were conducted to determine the effect of increasing Field Pea level in high-concentrate finishing cattle diets on ADG, DMI, G:F, and carcass traits, and to estimate the NE of Field Pea. In Exp. 1, 118 yearling heifers (417.9 ± 2.4 kg initial BW) were blocked by initial BW and assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 10, 20, or 30% dry-rolled Field Pea, DM basis; 4 pens/treatment). In Exp. 2, 143 beef steers (433 ± 19 kg initial BW) were blocked by BW and assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 10, 20, or 30% dry-rolled Field Pea, DM basis; 6 pens/treatment). In Exp. 3, 80 beef steers (372.4 ± 0.4 kg initial BW) were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 treatments (0, 18, 27, or 36% cracked Field Pea, DM basis; 4 pens/treatment). Field Pea replaced a portion of the grain (dry-rolled and high moisture corn, dry-rolled corn, and barley and barley sprouts; Exp. 1, 2, and 3, respectively) and protein supplement. In Exp. 1, Field Pea inclusion decreased DMI linearly (P = 0.03), whereas ADG and G:F were not affected by treatment (P greater-than-or-equal 0.17); however, dietary NEg increased quadratically with increasing Field Pea level (P = 0.04). Fat thickness responded quadratically (P = 0.008) where heifers fed 20% Field Pea had greatest fat thickness and 30% Field Pea inclusion the least. Marbling tended (P [less-than or equal to] 0.09) to respond quadratically as Field Pea increased. No differences (P greater-than-or-equal 0.17) were observed for HCW, LM area, or KPH. In Exp. 2, DMI, ADG, G:F, dietary NEg, HCW, marbling, LM area, 12th-rib fat, and USDA yield grade (YG) were unaffected by dietary Field Pea inclusion (P greater-than-or-equal 0.12). In Exp. 3, marbling score increased linearly (P = 0.05), fat thickness increased quadratically (P = 0.01), and YG tended to increase (P = 0.07) quadratically as Field Pea increased. Field Pea inclusion did not affect (P greater-than-or-equal 0.38) DMI, ADG, G:F, dietary NEg, HCW, or LM area. These results indicate that Field Pea can be included successfully into rations at levels up to 36% of DM without negatively affecting growth performance and most carcass characteristics of finishing beef cattle; however, effects on marbling score were variable. These data also indicate the energy content of Field Peas is similar to cereal grains, such as corn and barley, when included in high-concentrate finishing diets.
-
REVIEW: Field Pea Grain for Beef Cattle
The Professional Animal Scientist, 2007Co-Authors: V L Anderson, G P Lardy, B R IlseAbstract:ABSTRACT Field Pea (Pisum sativum) grain is a nutrient-dense grain legume that is a palatable source of CP (25.3%), energy (1.48 NE g Mcal/kg), and other nutrients for beef cattle. Field Pea grain is highly digestible, but the starch fermentation and ruminal protein degradation rates are slower than for several other common feeds. Increased DMI has been observed in some studies with the inclusion of Field Pea grain in the ration. Apparently Field Pea grain does not need to be processed for beef cows. In backgrounding and finishing rations, processing Field Pea grain has produced mixed results, but dry-rolling may contribute to improved animal performance. In creep feeds, 30 to 40% Field Pea grain (DM basis) may be optimum for animal performance. The inclusion of Field Pea grain in postweaning receiving rations has resulted in increased DMI. As a protein supplement for feeder cattle, Field Pea grain can be included at 15 to 30% of the ration (DM basis); however, growing and finishing cattle can utilize Field Pea grain as both a protein and energy source. Inclusion of Field Pea grain at a minimum of 10% of the finishing diet improved the tenderness and juiciness of beef without affecting carcass traits. Field Pea grain is an excellent pellet binder. Beef cattle producers with access to Field Pea grain at competitive prices should consider using this grain legume in their ration formulations.
-
Field Pea pisum sativum inclusion in corn based lamb finishing diets
Small Ruminant Research, 2004Co-Authors: M L Bauer, G P Lardy, J S Caton, P T BergAbstract:Two hundred crossbred lambs were used to determine energy value and optimum inclusion level of Field Pea ( Pisum sativum) in corn-based diets. In experiment one (Exp. 1), 100 crossbred lambs (33.9 ± 1.3 kg initial BW) were blocked by weight and sex (two blocks of ewe lambs per treatment; three blocks of ram lambs per treatment) and fed for 89 days. In experiment two (Exp. 2), 100 crossbred ram lambs (39.1 ± 0.2 kg initial BW) were blocked by weight (five pens per treatment) and fed for 63 days. Treatments for each experiment were similar; Field Pea replaced corn at 0, 150, 300, or 450 g/kg of the diet (DM basis). Diets contained 750 g/kg corn and/or Field Pea, 100 g/kg alfalfa hay, 50 g/kg concentrated separator byproduct (CSB), 60 g/kg soybean meal (SBM), and 40 g/kg supplement. In Exp. 2, a fifth treatment was added to evaluate if Field Pea can replace corn and SBM in high-grain diets (450 − SBM); this diet consisted of 450 g/kg Field Pea, 350 g/kg corn, 100 g/kg alfalfa, 50 g/kg CSB, and 50 g/kg supplement. Diets contained 28 mg/kg lasalocid and a minimum 149.6 g/kg CP, 7.6 g/kg Ca, 4.4 g/kg P, and 12.2 g/kg K. Only carcass data from ram lambs were recorded. Data for each experiment were analyzed separately with GLM procedure of SAS and linear, quadratic, and cubic effects of Field Pea were determined. In Exp. 1, a cubic ( P = 0.02) response for DMI occurred, greater intake of 150 g/kg than 300 g/kg diet. No other performance measurements were affected by treatment. In Exp. 2, lambs fed 450 − SBM tended to be more efficient ( P = 0.10) than lambs fed 450 + SBM. Carcass characteristics were not affected by treatment ( P> 0.10). Based on lamb performance (Exp. 1) there was a tendency for a linear (P = 0.10) increase in dietary net energy. In Exp. 2, no difference in dietary net energy occurred with increasing level of Field Pea. Dietary net energy was greater for 450 − SBM compared with 450 + SBM. Average calculated NEm and NEg for Field Pea were 2.75 and 2.02 Mcal/kg, which was 14% greater than corn. Field Pea is a suitable replacement for corn in lamb finishing diets and is at least equal in energy density to corn. © 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Tanveer Khan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
didymella pinodes and its management in Field Pea challenges and opportunities
Field Crops Research, 2013Co-Authors: Tanveer Khan, Thomas D Warkentin, Gail M Timmermanvaughan, Diego Rubiales, Kadambot H M Siddique, William Erskine, Martin J BarbettiAbstract:Didymella pinodes is the major pathogen of the ascochyta blight disease complex of Field Pea. The disease is endemic in all major Field Pea producing countries, frequently causing heavy losses in yield and quality. It is the most challenging of Field Pea diseases to manage, with most fungicides only partially effective and/or not cost-effective. In the absence of effective levels of host resistance, historically, the best management option has been delayed sowing and/or crop rotation to avoid major ascospore showers, but delayed sowing generally incurs a concurrent heavy yield penalty. This review evaluates world-wide progress in understanding critical components of black spot in terms of its management and evaluates opportunities both for new research and for development of more effective and sustainable management of this disease, using improved host resistance as a foundation to build and deploy more effective integrated disease management strategies. In the past decade, research has provided considerable new insights into potential ascochyta blight management strategies, including new insights into inheritance of host resistance, response to selection, and use of molecular technology, that together have demonstrated the potential to improve the level of host resistance. Significant improvements have been reported in the level of partial resistance of Field Pea with improved agronomic traits. Consequently, while the effect of this level of resistance in reducing D. pinodes infection remains to be quantified, for the first time such novel germplasm offers the prospect of revising and reintegrating the different disease management options at the farm level, based on deployment of such resistance. Combining this improved host resistance with both cultural management options and fungicidal application offers new opportunities. It is likely that previously restrictive cultural management and ineffective fungicidal control measures will re-emerge as effective and profitable practices when used in conjunction with partially-resistant germplasm. While this approach is an effective first stage to better manage ascochyta blight, future ‘stacking’ of broad antifungal genes on current moderately resistant varieties using genomic tools and/or GM technologies offers an avenue for even more effective control of D. pinodes.
-
first report of phoma herbarum on Field Pea pisum sativum in australia
Plant Disease, 2011Co-Authors: Yu Pin Li, Tanveer Khan, Patrick M Finnegan, Martin J BarbettiAbstract:Black spot disease on Field Pea (Pisum sativum) in Australia is generally caused by one or more of the four fungi: Mycosphaerella pinodes (anamorph Ascochyta pinodes), Phoma medicaginis var. pinodella (synonym Phoma pinodella), Ascochyta pisi, and Phoma koolunga (1,2,4). However, in 2010 from a Field Pea blackspot disease screening nursery at Medina, Western Australia, approximately 25% of isolates were a Phoma sp. that was morphologically different to Phoma spp. previously reported on Field Pea in Western Australia, while the remaining 75% of isolates were either M. pinodes or P. medicaginis var. pinodella. Single-spore isolations of 23 isolates of this Phoma sp. were made onto potato dextrose agar. A PCR-based assay with the TW81 and AB28 primers was used to amplify from the 3′ end of 16S rDNA, across ITS1, 5.8S rDNA, and ITS2 to the 5′ end of the 28S rDNA. The DNA products were sequenced and BLAST analyses were used to compare sequences with those in GenBank. In each case, the sequence had ≥99% nucleot...