Appendix A Scientists and Researchers Involved in Beta maritima The research and breeding activities involving sea beet began in Europe (Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary, etc.) at the beginning of the 1900s and reached the USA 25 around years later. Since the end of the First World War, a large part of the research in USA has been centered at the USDA-ARS stations in collaboration with seed com- panies and university scientists. Much of these early researches was published in the Proceedings of ASSBT, Journal of the ASSBT, and Journal of Sugar Beet Research. Breeding developments by the USDA-ARS were often officially released worldwide and documented in Crop Science and Journal of Plant Registrations (Doney 1995). It can be said that the collaborations on research in sugar beet in general and Beta maritima in particular have been quite rare in Europe, mainly due to the prevalence of private seed companies. There are only a few exceptions (SIGMEA, AKER, etc.). In the last two decades, several researches at the University of Lille, France have initiated major studies on the population genetics of Beta maritima. Other European researchers also have worked on the plant (University of Birmingham, Wageningen, Rovigo, Braunschweig, Brooms Barn, Kiel, etc.) often in collaboration with their American colleagues. Some seed companies located at Massa Lombarda, Einbeck, Rilland, and Landskrona, have sporadically collaborated as well. Sea beet localiza- tion and seed conservation activities are carried out by international organizations including the ECPGR Beta Working Group and the World Beta Network. Current activities are sponsored by Biodiversity International, the USDA-ARS National Plant Germplasm System, private seed companies, and sugar beet industries. Basic books and chapters have been edited with the collaboration of ISCI-CRA, Italy; USDA- ARS Stations; Okayama University, Japan; Heilongjiang University, China. Wilhelm Rimpau obtained hybrids between sea beet and differently colored sugar beets using systems of individual isolation. He classified Beta maritima as an annual plant and interpreted the early flowering (bolting) in the first year of cultivated vari- eties as a return to the ancestral behavior Rimpau (1891). After observation of several hybrid generations between the two species, he believed that “Beta maritima is rather similar to Beta vulgaris.” This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection 253 in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply 2020 E. Biancardi et al. (eds.), Beta maritima, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28748-1 254 Appendix A: Scientists and Researchers Involved in Beta maritima Franz Schindler began his research in 1890 by planting in pots and field plots the seed of Beta maritima collected at Montpellier, France (von Proskowetz 1892). In both cases, most plants flowered about 2 months after sowing and were crossed with cultivated varieties. Differences in the diameter of pollen and other features of the root (sugar content, fibrousness, etc.) were found between sea beet and the cultivated varieties. At the end of the experiment, Schindler (1891) emphasized the ability of the species belonging to the family Chenopodiaceae to vary the time and the physiology of flowering depending on environmental conditions. According to Rim- pau, Schindler expressed the opinion that there are not enough differences between the cultivated beet (Beta vulgaris) and Beta maritima to consider them as different species. Emanuel von Proskowetz continued experiments on Beta maritima with a small amount of seed received from Schindler. This work lasted two decades and should be considered the first authoritative report on morphology, physiology, and genet- ics of Beta maritima. Seed was sown under normal field conditions and the roots were harvested and analyzed over the following years. Morphological and chemical differences among sea beets grown under wild conditions and cultivated sea beet in two succeeding years were shown. The differences induced by the two environments were notable. von Proskowetz observed that the color of the roots was not uniform and ranged from deep red (30% of individuals) to white (4%). All plants flowered and produced seed the first year (von Proskowetz 1894). In the second generation, all plants bolted except for 19 plants that demonstrated biennial behavior. A small percentage of lines with yellow roots also was detected. The seed of annual plants continued to produce both annual and some biennial beets. Biennial lines retained that characteristic and produced roots were more and more similar (in shape, size, sugar content, etc.) to cultivated varieties. The author wrote that he was convinced that the Beta maritima and Beta vulgaris were actually a single species, even though there was great morphological variability mainly due to the environment, their natu- ral tendency to variation, and artificial selection. von Proskowetz (1895) also noted that sea beet was an excellent example of the theory of mutation. The equivalence between the two species was criticized by Coons (1975), who described the evident morphological and physiological differences. According to von Proskowetz (1895) and Waldstein and Kitaibel (1864), Beta trigyna was a cultivated beet returned to the wild. Ottavio Munerati established in 1913 the “Regia Stazione Sperimentale di Bieti- coltura” at Rovigo, Italy. He initiated experiments on Beta maritima with seed col- lected in 1909 at the mouth of the Po di Levante (Fig. A.1), about 20 km distance from sugar beet fields (Munerati et al. 1913). He increased several collections of sea beet under isolation and began making crosses with commercial varieties. In order to elim- inate the undesirable qualities of sea beet, the sugar beet x Beta maritima hybrids were backcrossed several times to sugar beet. Selected backcross lines tended to flower later, possessed higher sugar content, and displayed a more regular shape to the roots. More importantly, they were endowed with a high degree of resistance to CLS, to drought, and to root rot. After more than 20 years of recombination and Appendix A: Scientists and Researchers Involved in Beta maritima 255 Fig. A.1 Beta maritima at themouthofPodiLevante River, in the same site where Munerati sampled the seed for the first selections (picture made by Donà dalle Rose, July 1951) selection, the roots had become almost identical to their cultivated parents in shape, weight, and sugar content. In 1935, some improved lines, including RO581, were sent to the United States where, according to Coons (1954, 1975), they were instru- mental in the substantial progress made in sugar yield under severe CLS conditions. Munerati, probably, did not realize entirely just how important his discoveries and developments would be (Munerati 1946). Even today, the Munerati sources account for most of the known resistance to CLS. He investigated annualism, bolting, and car- ried out a number of experiments on the life cycle and other life history traits of Beta maritima. Translations to English of his work brought to attention the value of Beta maritima as a useful genetic and plant breeding resource (Coons 1975) (Fig. A.2). The Beta maritima of the Po Delta from which Munerati et al. (1913) isolated the resistance to CLS deserves to be briefly mentioned. When Beguinot (1910) explored this area, Beta maritima was localized close to the salty lagoons separating the mainland from the sea. In the terminal branches of the rivers, the lower parts of the banks are normally submerged by the tide, which may be very high during winter storms with wind blowing from South. In particular, sea beet was localized at the south bank of the most northern branch of the Po River, called “Po di Levante”. Here Munerati et al. (1913) gathered the seeds of Beta maritima growing close to the mouth of the river. During further explorations, sea beet was found neither on the northern banks, nor on beaches, nor on the sandy islands newly formed inside the lagoon (Biancardi and de Biaggi 1979). Some plants are present today on the terminal part of the south bank, although it is more common on the southern bank up to about 300 m from the mouth. Biancardi and de Biaggi (1979) confirmed the observations made by Beguinot (1910) and Munerati et al. (1913). Sea beet never grows directly on the sand, preferring instead sites near the salty water, but among the 256 Appendix A: Scientists and Researchers Involved in Beta maritima Fig. A.2 Stalk of sugar beet bearing male-sterile and monogerm flowers (Savitsky 1949) stones or concrete placed for protection from erosion by the waves. The preference for soils almost in contact with salt water is probably due to the sensitivity of Beta maritima to competition from weeds. But this advantage is costly. Developing under extremely difficult conditions, the life of the plants depends on the frequency of rains. In the case of long-lasting drought, the number of plants in the populations decreases rapidly (Bartsch et al. 2003; Marchesetti 1897; von Proskowetz 1910) (Fig. A.3). Jacques de Vilmorin recalled that at the Kew and Montpellier Herbaria he had seen specimens of Beta maritima coming from Malacca, Mexico, Uruguay, and from the Lido of Venice (see Aldrovandi and Zanichelli). At the Herbarium of Edinburgh, there were samples coming from China. This book can be considered the first organic description of genus Beta including wild and cultivated species. Dudok van Heel published some early observation on the inheritance in sugar beet and on its probable origin. A cross of Beta maritima by sugar beet was recorded, in which biennial forms of Beta maritima were chosen and the F2 generation selected to eliminate bolters, and then grouped into thick- and thin-leaved forms. The formers were more like Beta maritima in their major traits and the latter quite similar to sugar beet. Sugar content was then determined and the best beets were used to establish a series of individual strains in each of the two groups.