1 농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원,
1 National Institute of Crop Science (NICS), RDA, Jeonju 55365, Korea
2 경상남도농업기술원,
2 Gyeongsangnam-do Agricultural Research & Extension Service, Jinju 52733, Korea
3 전라북도농업기술원,
3 Jeollabuk-do Agricultural Research & Extension Service, Iksan 54591, Korea
4 제주도농업기술원
4 Jeju Agricultural Research & Extension Service, Jeju 63556, Korea
© The Korean Society of Breeding Science
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
| Cultivar | Flowering date | Maturity date | Stem height (cm) | No. of nods | No.of branch | No. of pods per plant | Weight per 100 seeds (g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
| Hanol | July 25 | Sep. 14 | 39±5.2az | 11±1.2a | 2.1±0.89a | 23±7.3a | 26.4±2.31a |
| Keunolkong | July 22 | Sep. 9 | 34±4.7b | 10±0.9a | 2.0±0.71a | 22±7.8a | 27.9±2.46a |
| Cultivar | Lodging (0-9)z |
Water stress (0-9)z |
Shattering y |
Damaged seed for Pod borer (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excess water | Drought | Field(0-9) | Ratios by Oven test(%)xz | |||
|
|
||||||
| Hanol | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 9 | 0.7 |
| Keunolkong | 0 | 8 | 5 | 9 | 9 | 0.8 |
| Cultivar |
Bacterial pustule (0-9)z |
Root rota (%) |
Soybean Mosaic Virus |
Percentages of damaged seed(%)a |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Field | Inoculationy |
Inoculationx |
Field (0-9) | Purple seed stain | Seed spot | Phomopsis | ||||
| G7H | G6H | G5 | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| Hanol | 1 | 6 | 1.9 | -/M | L/- | L/- | 1 | 0.9 | 2.1 | 0.8 |
| Keunolkong | 2 | 4 | 0.9 | -/M | -/M | L/M | 0 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| Cultivar | Yield (%) | Bean Curd Residue (%) |
Color valuez |
Physical characteristics |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | a | b | ΔE | Elasticity | Gum | Cohesiveness | Hardness (g/3.14mm2) | |||
|
|
||||||||||
| Hanol | 191 | 145 | 86.4 | -0.01 | 12.5 | 3.1 | 0.89 | 381 | 0.64 | 599 |
| Keunolkong | 196 | 151 | 85.1 | 0.9 | 15.2 | 1.08 | 317 | 0.62 | 509 | |
| Cultivar |
Soybean malt |
Fermented soybean |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degree of fermentation(1-5)z | Yield(%) | Scent (1-5) | Degree of fermentation(1-5) | Yield(%) | Scent(1-5) | |
|
|
||||||
| Hanol | 4 | 80 | 4 | 3 | 204 | 4 |
| Keunolkong | 3 | 77 | 3 | 3 | 193 | 4 |
| Cultivar |
Yield (Ton/ha) |
Indexx | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PYTz('05) | AYTz('06) | Mean | ||
|
|
||||
| Hanol | 2.87 | 2.44 | 2.66 | 123 |
| Keunolkong | 2.47 | 1.84 | 2.16 | 100 |
| Location |
Hanol (Ton/ha) |
Keunolkong (Ton/ha) |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Mean | Indexz | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Mean | |
|
|
|||||||||
| Suwon | 1.51 | 2.18 | 1.97 | 1.89 | 99 | 1.83 | 1.97 | 1.92 | 1.91 |
| Daegu | 1.76 | 2.04 | - | 1.90 | 111 | 1.69 | 1.73 | - | 1.71 |
| Miryang | - | - | 2.33 | 2.33 | 119 | - | - | 1.95 | 1.95 |
| Iksan | 1.32 | 2.22 | 1.66 | 1.73 | 132 | 1.03 | 1.56 | 1.35 | 1.31 |
| Jinju | 2.07 | 3.04 | 2.60 | 2.57 | 113 | 1.81 | 2.77 | 2.26 | 2.28 |
| Jeju | - | - | 1.85 | 1.85 | 125 | - | - | 1.48 | 1.48 |
|
|
|||||||||
| Mean | 1.67 | 2.37 | 2.08 | 2.04 | 114 | 1.59 | 2.01 | 1.79 | 1.80 |
|
|
|||||||||
| t-value | 1.42ns | ||||||||
Qualitative characteristics of ‘Hanol’
| Cultivar | Growth habit | Leaflet shape | Flower color | Pubescence color | Seed coat color | Pod color | Hilum color | Seed shape |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hanol | Determinate | Oval | White | Gray | Yellow | Light brown | Yellow | Spherical |
| Keunolkong | Determinate | Oval | White | Gray | Yellow | Light brown | Yellow | Spherical |
Quantitative characteristics of ‘Hanol’ determined by regional yield trial from 2007 to 2009.
| Cultivar | Flowering date | Maturity date | Stem height (cm) | No. of nods | No.of branch | No. of pods per plant | Weight per 100 seeds (g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hanol | July 25 | Sep. 14 | 39±5.2a |
11±1.2a | 2.1±0.89a | 23±7.3a | 26.4±2.31a |
| Keunolkong | July 22 | Sep. 9 | 34±4.7b | 10±0.9a | 2.0±0.71a | 22±7.8a | 27.9±2.46a |
Value of characteristics ± Standard Error Same letters in the column are not significantly different by DMRT at 5%.
Maturing date and growing days of ‘Hanol’ on the regional yield trials carried out at six locations
| Location | Hanol (Month. Date) |
Keunolkong (Month. Date) |
||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Mean | Growing Period (days) | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Mean | Growing Period (days) | |
| Suwon | Sep.20 | Sep.15 | Sep.8 | Sep.14 | 99 | Sep.12 | Sep.1 | Sep.2 | Sep.5 | 90 |
| Daegu | Sep.26 | Sep.12 | - | Sep.19 | 99 | Sep.14 | Sep.12 | - | Sep.13 | 93 |
| Miryang | - | - | Sep.14 | Sep.14 | 94 | - | - | Sep.10 | Sep.10 | 90 |
| Iksan | - | Sep.22 | Sep.18 | Sep.20 | 86 | - | Sep.22 | Sep.22 | Sep.22 | 90 |
| Jinju | Sep.15 | Sep.13 | Sep.8 | Sep.12 | 90 | Sep.9 | Sep.8 | Sep.3 | Sep.6 | 85 |
| Jeju | - | - | Sep.5 | Sep.5 | 88 | - | - | Sep.1 | Sep.1 | 84 |
| Mean | Sep.20 | Sep.15 | Sep.14 | Sep.14 | 94 | Sep.11 | Sep.10 | Sep.7 | Sep.9 | 89 |
The response of ‘Hanol’ to abiotic stress and insect estimated from 2007 to 2009.
| Cultivar | Lodging (0-9) |
Water stress (0-9) |
Shattering |
Damaged seed for Pod borer (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excess water | Drought | Field(0-9) | Ratios by Oven test(%) |
|||
| Hanol | 0 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 9 | 0.7 |
| Keunolkong | 0 | 8 | 5 | 9 | 9 | 0.8 |
0: Tolerant, 9: Susceptible
0: No shattering, 1: difficult, 5: Medium, 9:Easy to shattering
Shattering after 48hr at 40°C dry oven
The response of ‘Hanol’ to the diseases of soybean estimated from 2007 to 2009.
| Cultivar | Bacterial pustule (0-9) |
Root rot |
Soybean Mosaic Virus |
Percentages of damaged seed(%) |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Field | Inoculation |
Inoculation |
Field (0-9) | Purple seed stain | Seed spot | Phomopsis | ||||
| G7H | G6H | G5 | ||||||||
| Hanol | 1 | 6 | 1.9 | -/M | L/- | L/- | 1 | 0.9 | 2.1 | 0.8 |
| Keunolkong | 2 | 4 | 0.9 | -/M | -/M | L/M | 0 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
Root rot and damaged seed that were naturally infected in the field were estimated.
0: Resistant, 9: Susceptible
8ra strain
Reaction of inoculated leaf/upper leaves, - : No symptom, L: Local reaction, M: Mosaic
Major component of Seed in ‘Hanol’ estimated in 2009.
| Cultivar | Crude protein (%) | Crude oil (%) | Fatty acids (%) |
Isoflavone (µg/g) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat | Unsat | Daidzein | Glycitein | Genistein | Total | |||
| Hanol | 43.0 | 16.3 | 15.8 | 84.2 | 218 | 213 | 375 | 806 |
| Keunolkong | 42.1 | 17.0 | 16.3 | 83.7 | 241 | 171 | 499 | 911 |
Characteristics of tofu of ‘Hanol’ estimated in 2009.
| Cultivar | Yield (%) | Bean Curd Residue (%) | Color value |
Physical characteristics |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | a | b | ΔE | Elasticity | Gum | Cohesiveness | Hardness (g/3.14mm2) | |||
| Hanol | 191 | 145 | 86.4 | -0.01 | 12.5 | 3.1 | 0.89 | 381 | 0.64 | 599 |
| Keunolkong | 196 | 151 | 85.1 | 0.9 | 15.2 | 1.08 | 317 | 0.62 | 509 | |
L : lightness, a : (-)Green~(+)Red, b : -(Blue)~(+)Yellow, ΔE : 3.0~6.0% (Appreciable difference)
Soybean malt and fermented soybean processability by ‘Hanol’.
| Cultivar | Soybean malt |
Fermented soybean |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degree of fermentation(1-5) |
Yield(%) | Scent (1-5) | Degree of fermentation(1-5) | Yield(%) | Scent(1-5) | |
| Hanol | 4 | 80 | 4 | 3 | 204 | 4 |
| Keunolkong | 3 | 77 | 3 | 3 | 193 | 4 |
1: worst, 2: bad, 3: fair, 4: good, 5: best
Yield of ‘Hanol’ on yield trials carried out at Daegu.
| Cultivar | Yield (Ton/ha) |
Index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PYT |
AYT |
Mean | ||
| Hanol | 2.87 | 2.44 | 2.66 | 123 |
| Keunolkong | 2.47 | 1.84 | 2.16 | 100 |
PYT : Preliminary yield trial, AYT: Advanced yield trial.
Index : Mean yield of cultivar/Mean yield of Keunolkong × 100
Yield of ‘Hanol’ on the regional yield trials carried out at 6 locations
| Location | Hanol (Ton/ha) |
Keunolkong (Ton/ha) |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Mean | Index |
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Mean | |
| Suwon | 1.51 | 2.18 | 1.97 | 1.89 | 99 | 1.83 | 1.97 | 1.92 | 1.91 |
| Daegu | 1.76 | 2.04 | - | 1.90 | 111 | 1.69 | 1.73 | - | 1.71 |
| Miryang | - | - | 2.33 | 2.33 | 119 | - | - | 1.95 | 1.95 |
| Iksan | 1.32 | 2.22 | 1.66 | 1.73 | 132 | 1.03 | 1.56 | 1.35 | 1.31 |
| Jinju | 2.07 | 3.04 | 2.60 | 2.57 | 113 | 1.81 | 2.77 | 2.26 | 2.28 |
| Jeju | - | - | 1.85 | 1.85 | 125 | - | - | 1.48 | 1.48 |
| Mean | 1.67 | 2.37 | 2.08 | 2.04 | 114 | 1.59 | 2.01 | 1.79 | 1.80 |
| t-value | 1.42 |
||||||||
Index = yield of Hanol / yield of Keunolkong × 100
Non significant.
Value of characteristics ± Standard Error Same letters in the column are not significantly different by DMRT at 5%.
0: Tolerant, 9: Susceptible
0: No shattering, 1: difficult, 5: Medium, 9:Easy to shattering
Shattering after 48hr at 40°C dry oven
Root rot and damaged seed that were naturally infected in the field were estimated.
0: Resistant, 9: Susceptible
8ra strain
Reaction of inoculated leaf/upper leaves, - : No symptom, L: Local reaction, M: Mosaic
L : lightness, a : (-)Green~(+)Red, b : -(Blue)~(+)Yellow, ΔE : 3.0~6.0% (Appreciable difference)
1: worst, 2: bad, 3: fair, 4: good, 5: best
PYT : Preliminary yield trial, AYT: Advanced yield trial.
Index : Mean yield of cultivar/Mean yield of Keunolkong × 100
Index = yield of Hanol / yield of Keunolkong × 100
Non significant.