Salmon, D. F., Helm, J. H., Graf, R. J., Albers, S., Aljarrah, M., Xi, K., Oro, M., Lohr, S. and Bergen, C. 2015. Pintail general purpose winter wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 95: 1271–1276. Pintail is an awnless hard red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivar that was registered in 2012 and is eligible for grades of Canada Western General Purpose (CWGP) wheat. It was developed using wheat × maize-pollen doubled haploid techniques. Evaluated across western Canada from 2008 to 2010 relative to CDC Harrier, CDC Falcon and CDC Ptarmigan, Pintail expressed grain yield ranging from 98.6 to 105.8% of these CWGP wheat checks. Its area of greatest adaptation was in the parkland and semi-arid prairie regions of Alberta and western Saskatchewan, where cold tolerance is a primary concern. Pintail exhibited excellent winter survival, intermediate maturity, medium height and strong straw. Test weight was within the range of the checks, and kernel weight was lower than all of the checks. Pintail displayed moderate resistance to stripe rust, moderate susceptibility to stem and leaf rust, and susceptibility to common bunt and Fusarium head blight. The high yield and awnless spike of Pintail should make it particularly attractive in various livestock feed and forage applications.

Triticale (× Triticosecale Wittmack) is a minor cereal crop in Alberta which has recently garnered interest as a biofuel feedstock. Basic agronomic information is lacking for triticale cultivars released since 1990. Field experiments were initiated in 2010 and conducted for 2 yr at four sites in central and southern Alberta to compare the impact of cultivar selection, seeding date, and seeding rate on grain yield, grain quality, and other agronomic traits. Six triticale cultivars released between 1996 and 2011, and one Soft White Spring wheat cultivar (Triticum aestivum L.) were evaluated over two seeding dates; one before and one after 15% of the total seasonal growing degree days (GDD; base = 0°C) had elapsed. The cultivars were evaluated at seeding rates of 250, 375, and 500 seeds m−2. Older triticale cultivars had higher grain yields but lower grain quality than cultivars released after 2000. The triticale cultivars produced more grain than Soft White Spring wheat in five of seven environments; however, Soft White Spring wheat exhibited better grain quality than the triticales. Yield generally increased linearly with seeding rate but the highest return on investment was observed at 375 seeds m−2. Provided there was not an early frost, triticale seeded after 15% of the seasonal GDD had elapsed could produce grain yield similar to the earlier‐seeded triticale. A sustainable management system for triticale includes modern cultivars, a seeding date that can accumulate 1750 GDD’s before frost, and a sowing density of at least 375 seeds m−2.

Cereal grain ethanol production may need to supplement biomass ethanol production to meet the increasing long‐term demand for ethanol. A study was initiated to benchmark the relative performance of triticale ( × Triticosecale ssp.) to wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) classes utilized for ethanol production. Ten cultivars: three triticale, two Canada prairie spring (CPS) wheat, three Canada western soft white spring (CWSWS) wheat, one Canada western red spring (CWRS) wheat, and one Canada western general purpose (CWGP) wheat cultivars were grown at 45 locations across Canada from 2006 to 2009. The locations were subgrouped by agroecological zone for western Canada, by province for Ontario and Quebec, and Charlottetown, PEI, for the Maritimes. The greatest grain yield was usually observed for Hoffman (red spring wheat) followed by triticale cultivars and CWSWS cultivars. Ethanol yield varied by region as a reflection of grain yield, and differences among cultivars generally were: triticale (excluding Tyndal) = Hoffman = CWSWS > CPS > CWRS. Ethanol concentration was least for Tyndal triticale and AC Superb CWRS. Stability assessments indicated that Pronghorn and AC Ultima triticales and Bhishaj CWSWS wheat provide consistent and high ethanol yields. The other CWSWS cultivars, AC Sadash and AC Andrew, had similarly high ethanol yields but were variable, indicating that utilization outside the Parkland and Western Prairies agroecological zones could pose greater risk for ethanol plants over Pronghorn and AC Ultima. Ethanol fermentation plants could therefore increase efficiency by replacing CPS wheat feedstocks with select triticales and potentially improve the consistency of production by using select triticales in regions where CWSWS wheats are less stable.

A need has been identified for alternative crop(s) with high grain yield, low grain protein concentration, and high starch for the ethanol industry. The objective of this study was to benchmark the relative performance of triticale (× Triticosecale ssp.) to wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) classes currently utilized for ethanol production. Sixteen cultivars—three triticale, four Canada prairie spring (CPS) wheat, three Canada western soft white spring wheat (CWSWS), two Canada western red spring (CWRS) wheat, and four Canada western general purpose (CWGP) candidate cultivars—were grown at 36 locations across western Canada from 2006 to 2009. The performance of these cereal classes can generally be summarized as triticale = Hoffman (CWGP) = CWSWS > CPS white > CPS red > CWRS for most variables. The triticale and white wheats produced 12 and 13% more grain, respectively, than the hard red spring wheats. Among the triticales, AC Ultima’s and Pronghorn’s yield potential were most notable because they exceeded the CWRS cultivars AC Barrie and AC Superb by an average of 32% and the CPS red cultivars 5700PR and AC Crystal by 18%. The triticales and Hoffman matured later than most other cultivars. Pronghorn consistently displayed low levels of fusarium head blight (FHB), Septoria nodorum blotch, and powdery mildew, but elevated ergot levels were observed for all triticales. We conclude that triticale would be superior to CPS and CWRS wheat and similar to CWSWS in many agronomic traits desired by ethanol fermentation plants and is superior for biomass production.

Grazing swathed, small‐grain crops can reduce costs of overwintering beef cows (Bos taurus) by 40%. However, the late planting required to target mid‐September harvest may be associated with low yield and carrying capacity. The objective was to compare whole‐plant yield, nutritive value, and potential carrying capacity in relation to beef cow requirements for spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), oat (Avena sativa L.), and triticale (X Triticosecale Wittmack) when planted on seven weekly intervals (10 May–23 June) over 3 yr at Lacombe, AB; whole‐plant material was harvested at soft dough (barley and triticale) or milk stages (oat). Data were analyzed relative to planting date delay as an independent variable. Barley matured more rapidly than oat and triticale, with the latest planting date harvested on 27 August for barley, 8 September for oat and 25 September for triticale. Nutritive value for barley and triticale was unaffected by planting date, but neutral (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) concentrations increased quadratically with delay in planting for oat. In vitro true digestibility (IVTD) was lower for oat than barley and triticale. Yield declined linearly with planting delay for barley (35–39%), but increased (quadratically) as planting was delayed from late May to early June for oat (8%) and triticale (10%). Consequently, the potential carrying capacity for triticale was 1.6 and 1.8 times greater than barley and oat, respectively when planted for swathing in late August or early September.

‘Gadsby’ (Reg. No. CV‐347, PI 659700; Canadian Food Inspection Agency Reg. No. 6831; Canadian PBR Appl. No. 10‐6980) is a two‐rowed, hulled, spring, general‐purpose barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) developed at the Field Crop Development Centre (FCDC), Lacombe, AB, Canada. Gadsby was tested in FCDC trials as H96043002 from 2002 to 2007 and in Prairie Recommending Committee for Oat and Barley trials as TR08684 during 2008 and 2009. It was registered for production in western Canada because of its good combination of yield, agronomic performance, grain quality traits, and disease resistance. Gadsby is resistant to scald [caused by Rhynchosporium secalis (Oudem.) J.J. Davis] and the surfaceborne and loose smuts (caused by Ustilago spp.) and is moderately resistant to the spot form of net blotch (caused by Drechslera teres f. maculata Smedeg). Gadsby has shown resistance to scald similar to that of the two‐rowed cultivar ‘Seebe’, which has proven to have durable resistance in Alberta, Canada.

Goyal A., Beres, B. L., Randhawa, H. S., Navabi, A., Salmon, D. F. and Eudes, F. 2011. Yield stability analysis of broadly adaptive triticale germplasm in southern and central Alberta, Canada for industrial end-use suitability. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 125–135. Triticale (×Triticosecale Wittmack) is a cereal crop with high grain yield and biomass potential, which are traits desired in biorefinery processes that currently utilize wheat (Triticum aestivum). This study was conducted to evaluate the performance of introduced germplasm for its adaptability to selected Canadian prairie agroecosystems, and to benchmark both introduced and registered triticale lines against hard red spring wheat. To investigate the genotype×environment interaction effects on the performance of triticale genotypes, 30 genotypes (27 triticale; 3 hard red spring wheat) were grown in three environments for 3 yr (2005–2007) in southern and central Alberta, Canada. Variance due to genotypes, years, locations, and their interactions were studied by employing several stability analysis models. Site Regression Model (SREG) and GGE biplot analysis were conducted to rank the relative yield performance of cultivars and to identify stable genotypes. Triticale consistently produced higher grain and biomass than hard red spring wheat, but some lines were high in pentosan content, produced low test weight, and possessed unacceptable growing degree day requirements. However, several of the introduction lines displayed superior trait performance and high stability. Five advanced to “C” level registration testing with one subsequently recommended for registration. The results provide evidence that some of the global triticale germplasm are well-suited to the production environments of the Canadian prairies, and that triticale has potential to be the ideal cereal platform for future technological and biorefinery end-use applications.

In recent years there has been a rapid growth in the fuel ethanol industry, increasing the need for a consistent supply of feedstock. This study was conducted to evaluate the potential of small grains in western Canada to supply feedstock to the ethanol industry. Thirty-one lines and cultivars of Canadian small grains were evaluated: eleven cultivars comprising five classes spring wheat, six cultivars of two and six row barley of feed, malting and hulless classes, eight cultivars of spring triticale and six cultivars of oat were grown at seven locations in western Canada and evaluated as feedstock for ethanol production. Starch concentrations and, for certain grains, β-glucan and pentosans were determined and used to estimate ethanol yields in L t-1 and L ha-1. On average, ethanol yield in L t-1 was wheat > triticale > barley > oat; however, for yield in L ha-1, only oat was inferior. This ranking was consistent across all locations tested. Estimates of ethanol yields indicated that certain cultivars within classes of grains were superior, such as CDC Buck, SWS 109, HY 617 and Pronghorn in the hulless barley, CWSWS, CPS-R and Triticale classes, respectively. Locations that produced the highest level of ethanol in one species tended to produce grain with the highest ethanol yields in the other species. Selection of cultivars with greater starch content, different starch quality and reduced pentosans as well as the advancements in and adoption of new fermentation technologies may lead to greater estimates of ethanol yields of small grain cereals in the future.Key words: Cereal grains, starch, pentosans, β-glucans, ethanol yield

Triticale (X Triticosecale), a Man-made cereal grass crop obtained from hybridization of wheat (Triticum spp) with rye (Secale cereale). The hope was that triticale would combine the high yield potential and good grain quality of wheat, and the resistance/tolerance to the biotic and abiotic stresses of rye. Triticale grains can be used for human food and livestock feed. Since the last century, triticale has received significant attention as a potential energy crop. Today, research is currently being conducted includes the use of this crop biomass in bio-energy production. The aim of a triticale breeding programs mainly focuses on the improvement of economic traits such as grain yield, biomass, nutritional factors, plant height, as well as traits such as early maturity and high grain volume weight. Intense breeding and selection have made very rapid genetic improvements in triticale seed quality. The agronomic advantages and improved end-use properties of the triticale grains over wheat achieved by research and development efforts make triticale an attractive option for increasing global food production particularly, for marginal and stress-prone growing conditions. Details of the different breeding approaches utilized to enhance modern triticale cultivars for various uses are discussed in this chapter.

Competition with weeds decreases crop yields globally. Breeding for competitive ability against elevated weed pressure can be difficult because the selection for specific traits which contribute to competitive ability may result in yield losses. The widely studied International Triticeae Mapping Initiative (ITMI) population was used to study the genetics of traits associated with competitive ability in a high latitude (52-53ºN) wheat-growing environment in central Alberta, Canada. Grain yield without weed competition and under experimentally sown cultivated oat competition exhibited similar heritability. Grain yield was positively correlated with early season vigour, and negatively correlated with days to maturity in the competitive treatment only. In this study, similar heritability estimates between competition treatments suggest that selection in a weed free environment can lead to improvements in a weedy environment, but some high-yielding lines under competition would be eliminated during selection.Key words: Wheat, weed competition, competitive ability, International Triticeae Mapping Initiative, genetic correlation

‘Busby’ (Reg. No. CV‐343, PI 656596; CFIA Reg. No. 6540; Canadian PBR Appl. No. 08‐6470) is a two‐rowed, hulled, spring feed barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) developed at the Field Crop Development Centre (FCDC), Lacombe, AB, Canada. Busby was tested in FCDC trials as H94034003 from 2001 to 2005 and in Prairie Recommending Committee for Oat and Barley trials as TR06673 during 2006 and 2007. It was registered for production in western Canada due to its good combination of yield, agronomic performance, grain quality traits, and disease resistance. Busby is resistant to the surface‐borne smuts (caused by Ustilago spp.) and moderately resistant to the spot form of net blotch (caused by Pyrenophora teres forma maculate Smedge). Busby has shown reactions to scald [caused by Rhynchosporium secalis (Oudem.) J.J. Davis] similar to the two‐rowed cultivar Seebe that has proven to have durable resistance in Alberta, Canada.

The nutritional value of triticale for weaned pigs is poorly characterized. Six mash diets containing either 66.5% one of two wheat samples or one of four winter or spring triticale cultivars were fed to 72 pens of weaned pigs for 28 d. Average daily feed intake and gain did not differ between pigs fed wheat and triticale diets (P > 0.05). Replacing wheat with triticale increased feed efficiency by 0.02 for spring triticale and 0.03 for winter triticale (P < 0.001). Apparent total tract digestibility of dry matter, crude protein, and gross energy was 1.2, 2.5, and 1.0% higher, respectively, for the triticale diets than the wheat diets (P < 0.05). The nutritional value of the four triticale samples was 1.5% higher for energy than the two wheat samples included in western Canada diets for weaned pigs. Key words: Digestibility, growth, triticale, weaned pig, wheat

Fusarium head blight (FHB), caused by the fungus Fusarium graminearum (Schwabe), is one of the most destructive diseases in cereals worldwide. It may severely reduce both grain yield and quality, with potential contamination from trichothecene mycotoxins such as deoxynivalenol (DON). Spring and winter triticales (X Triticosecale Wittmack) were evaluated in a multi site and year field study to determine their susceptibility to FHB and DON accumulation. Fusarium-damaged kernels (FDK) and DON levels were affected significantly by both cultivar and site-year. Triticales were generally more susceptible to FHB compared with winter and spring wheat checks, as indicated by the higher levels of FDK and DON levels. A significantly positive linear relationship was observed between FDK and DON levels in winter triticales. This relationship in spring triticales was not significant on the combined data, but at each site-year, the regression was strong. FDK can be a good predictor of DON levels when environmental conditions are similar. The Atlantic region would appear to be a very good location in Canada for screening for fusarium head blight resistance. Key words: Winter triticale, spring triticale, cultivar; fusarium head blight, fusarium head blight, fusarium-damaged kernels, deoxynivalenol

Journal of Plant RegistrationsVolume 1, Issue 1 p. 35-36 Cultivar Registration of ‘Sundre’ Barley J.M. Nyachiro, Corresponding Author J.M. Nyachiro [email protected] Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Corresponding author ([email protected]).Search for more papers by this authorJ.H. Helm, J.H. Helm Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this authorM. Oro, M. Oro Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this authorP.E. Juskiw, P.E. Juskiw Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this authorD.F. Salmon, D.F. Salmon Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this author J.M. Nyachiro, Corresponding Author J.M. Nyachiro [email protected] Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Corresponding author ([email protected]).Search for more papers by this authorJ.H. Helm, J.H. Helm Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this authorM. Oro, M. Oro Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this authorP.E. Juskiw, P.E. Juskiw Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this authorD.F. Salmon, D.F. Salmon Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Field Crop Development Centre, 5030-50 St., Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W8 Canada Registration by CSSA.Search for more papers by this author First published: 01 May 2007 https://doi.org/10.3198/jpr2006.09.0567crcCitations: 2 All rights reserved. No part of this periodical may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Permission for printing and for reprinting the material contained herein has been obtained by the publisher. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. References Eslick, R.F., and Hockett, E.A. Unitan barley. Crop Sci. 1965 5: 284. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1965.0011183X000500030037x Harder, D.E., and Legge, W.G. Effectiveness of different sources of stem rust resistance in barley. Crop Sci. 2000 40: 826–833. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.403826x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=000089410400039&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Helm, H.J., Cortez, M.J., Salmon, D.F., Juskiw, P.E., and Stewart, W.M. Registration of ‘Tukwa’ barley. Crop Sci. 1996 36: 809. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1996.0011183X003600030056x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A1996UL40300056&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Helm, H.J., Cortez, M.J., Salmon, D.F., Juskiw, P.E., and Nyachiro, J.M. Registration of ‘Vivar’ barley. Crop Sci. 2003 43: 1129–1130. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2003.1129, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=000182540300059&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Kaufmann, M.L., and Kibite, S. Diamond barley. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1985 65: 215–217. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjps85-030, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A1985ADZ8600030&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Kibite, S. Registration of AC Lacombe barley. Crop Sci. 1994 34: 1128. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1994.0011183X003400040063x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A1994NV51600062&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Lambert, J.W. Registration of barley varieties, XIV. Agron. J. 1958 50: 708. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1958.00021962005000110023x Martin, J.M., Blake, T.K., and Hockett, E.A. Diversity among North American spring barley cultivars based on coefficients of parentage. Crop Sci. 1991 31: 1131–1137. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100050009x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A1991GH12300009&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Peterson, G.A., Foster, A.E., and Banasik, O.J. Registration of Dickson barley. Crop Sci. 1968 8: 397. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1968.0011183X000800030047x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A1968B451900048&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Therrien, M.C. Registration of ‘AC Rosser’ barley. Crop Sci. 1998 38: 1401–1402. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1998.0011183X003800050052x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=000075671000046&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Wells, S.A. Registration of Galt barley. Crop Sci. 1967 7: 165. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1967.0011183X000700020027x, http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=agrocropsoil&KeyUT=A19679238900024&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPL&UsrCustomerID=523bbf5d2a868de7bbaeea0bc70ec0e4 Citing Literature Volume1, Issue1May 2007Pages 35-36 ReferencesRelatedInformation

In 2001–2003, cooperative testing Snowhite475 hard white spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) yielded grain in the range of the checks and was 3.4 and 3.3 d earlier maturing than AC Vista and AC Crystal, respectively. Snowhite475 had heavier test weight than AC Vista and larger seed size than AC Crystal and AC2000. Snowhite475 had higher protein content than the checks except 5701PR. It yielded more flour and had higher Agtron flour colour values than AC Crystal and AC Vista. Snowhite475 had intermediate kernel hardness, combined with yellow alkaline and white salted noodle colour and textural attributes better than AC Crystal, AC2000 and Snowbird. Key words: Triticum aestivum L., cultivar description, grain yield, maturity, milling properties, noodles

High grain yield and grain protein content, and early maturity are important traits in global bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)-breeding programmes. Improving these three traits simultaneously is difficult due to the negative association between grain yield and grain protein content and the positive association between maturity and grain yield. We investigated the genetic relationship between maturity, grain yield and grain protein content in a population of 130 early maturing spring wheat lines in a high latitude (52-53 degrees N) wheat-growing region of Canada. Grain protein content exhibited negative genetic correlation with maturity (-0.87), grain fill duration (-0.78), grain fill rate (-0.49), grain yield (-0.93) and harvest index (-0.71). Grain yield exhibited positive genetic correlation with maturity (0.69), rate (0.78) and duration (0.49) of grain fill, and harvest index (0.55). Despite the positive association between maturity and grain yield, and negative association between grain yield and grain protein content, higher yielding lines with medium maturity and higher grain protein content were identified. Broad-sense heritabilities were low (< 0.40) for rate and duration of grain fill, grain protein content, spike per m(2), grains per spike, harvest index and grain yield, and medium to high (> 0.40) for grain weight, days to anthesis and maturity, and plant height. Selection for longer preanthesis and shorter grain fill periods may help circumvent the negative association between grain yield and grain protein content. Selection for shorter grain fill periods and higher grain fill rate may be a useful strategy for developing early maturing cultivars with acceptable grain yields in northern wheat-growing regions.