Plant Soil Environ., 2020, 66(12):658-663 | DOI: 10.17221/430/2020-PSE

Evaluation of Czech hop cultivars since 2010 till 2019Original Paper

Vladimír Nesvadba*,1, Jitka Charvátová1, Josef Vostřel2, Markéta Werschallová2,3
1 Department of Hop Breeding, Hop Research Institute Co., Ltd., Saaz, Czech Republic
2 Department of Hop Protection, Hop Research Institute Co., Ltd., Saaz, Czech Republic
3 Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

Czech hop cultivars were evaluated from 2010 to 2019. A total of 13 cultivars were assessed. The highest yield per plant was found out in cv. Kazbek (3.66 kg/plant), whereas the lowest in cv. Saazer (2.02 kg/plant). Rubín and Boomerang are the cultivars with the lowest variability of the yield per plant. On the contrary, the highest variability was shown by cv. Kazbek. Conclusively the highest content of alpha acids was recorded in cv. Gaia (13.81%), whereas Saazer is the cultivar with the lowest content (2.87%). Significantly highest content of beta acids were recorded in cvs. Gaia, Vital, Boomerang and Bohemie. On the contrary, the lowest content of beta acids was found in cvs. Saazer, Rubín and Bor (below 4%). Kazbek is the cultivar with the highest ratio of cohumulone (36.67% rel.). Cvs. Premiant and Harmonie show the lowest ratio of cohumulone (19.63% rel.). The lowest ratio of myrcene (18.91% rel.) and caryophyllene (8.26% rel.) was recorded in cv. Saazer. The highest ratio of farnesene was found in cv. Saazer (13.34% rel.) and cv. Saaz Late (10.22% rel.). A wide range was found in the ratio of humulene: from 2.15% rel. (cv. Vital) to 35.76% rel. (cv. Bor). Cv. Gaia has the highest ratio of selinene (19.77% rel.).

Keywords: Humulus lupulus L.; hop resins; hop oils; productivity; aroma and bitter cultivars

Published: December 31, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Nesvadba V, Charvátová J, Vostřel J, Werschallová M. Evaluation of Czech hop cultivars since 2010 till 2019. Plant Soil Environ. 2020;66(12):658-663. doi: 10.17221/430/2020-PSE.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Henning J.A., Gent D.H., Twomey M.C., Townsend M.S., Pitra N.J., Matthews P.D. (2015): Precision QTL mapping of downy mildew resistance in hop (Humulus lupulus L.). Euphytica, 202: 487-498. Go to original source...
    2. IHGC hop variety list (2018): Available at: http://www.hmelj-giz.si/ihgc/obj.htm
    3. Klabzuba J., Koznarova V., Vobornikova J. (1999): The evaluation of Weather in Agriculture. 1st Edition. Prague, Czech University of Life Sciences. ISBN 80-213-0584-3 (In Czech)
    4. Krofta K., Patzak J. (2011): Investigation of Czech hop varieties authenticity by means of chemical and genetic analyses. Kvasný Průmysl, 57: 296-304. Go to original source...
    5. Krofta K. (2003): Comparison of quality parameters of Czech and foreign hop varieties. Plant, Soil and Environment, 49: 261-268. Go to original source...
    6. Meloun M., Militký J. (1994): Statistical Processing of Experimental Data. 1st Edition. Prague, Plus. ISBN 80-85297-56-6 (In Czech)
    7. Nesvadba V., Brynda M., Henychová A., Ježek J., Kořen J., Krofta K., Malirová I., Patzak J., Polonciková Z., Svoboda P., Vales V., Vostřel J. (2013): Development and tradition of Czech hop varieties. 1st Edition. Žatec, Hop Research Institute, Co., Ltd.
    8. Nesvadba V., Černý J., Krofta K. (2003): Transfer of the hop (Humulus lupulus L.) alpha-bitter acid content to progenies of F1 and I1 generations in selected parental. Plant, Soil and Environment, 49: 269-276. Go to original source...
    9. Nesvadba V., Charvátová J. (2020): Performance stability of hop varieties with tolerance to Verticillium nonalfalfae. Plant Protection Magazine, 3: 13-16.
    10. Nesvadba V., Krofta K., Svoboda P. (1999): The efficiency of virusfree Saaz semi-early red-bine hop. Rostlinná Výroba, 45: 251- 254.
    11. Nesvadba V., Vejl P., Skupinová S. (1999): Transfer of hop agricultural traits on F1 generation posterity. Rostlinná Výroba, 45: 245-249.
    12. Neve R.A. (1991): Hops. 1st Edition. London, Chapman and Hall. ISBN 978-94-011-3106-3 Go to original source...
    13. Patzak J., Henychová A. (2018): Evaluation of genetic variability within actual hop (Humulus lupulus L.) cultivars by an enlarged set of molecular markers. Czech Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding, 54: 86-91. Go to original source...
    14. Rigr A., Beránek F., Nesvadba V. (1997): Phenotype variability of the main characteristics of hop varieties as a source for hop hybridisation process. Rostlinná Výroba, 43: 315-318.
    15. Svoboda P., Kopecký J. (1996): Production of meristem culture and its efficiency in practical conditions. Rostlinná Výroba, 42: 333-336.
    16. Vollmer D.M., Shellhammer T.H. (2016): Influence of hop oil content and composition on hop aroma intensity in dry-hopped beer. Journal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists, 74: 242-249. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content