||Triticale has created considerable discussion and controversy during the past few years. It has been promoted extensively in North America as a miracle crop, the answer tc growing protein deficits. Its failure to live up to the promotion has caused considerable disappointment among growers and commercial campaigns. Scientists and reporters who have made a more critical appraisal of the developments of this crop feel that what is wrong has more to do with promo· tion than with performance. Fitchie ( 1972), after an extensive survery of triticale in the United States, aptly commented in The Farm Quarte.rly that triticale deserves better than to be labeled merely a figment of promotion. He pointed out that the crop suffers from comparatively poor yields, inconsistent quality, winterkill, sterility, diseases (mostly ergot), lack of established markets and lack of proven management. Most of these problems are due to haste in moving it out of the laboratory and into farmers' fields. Lebsock ( 1972), summarizing the performance of triticales in the United States, estimated that triticale grain yields averaged about 78% of wheat yields over all tests. What is mo5~ significant, howeve_r, is that in areas where triticale improvement work is carried on, remarkable improvement in yield has been demonstrated. Most encouraging of all is the enthusiasm with which numerous scientists all over the world have undertaken the task of developing this crop so that it may make a significant contributi~n to the world food supply. This report deals with the research efforts of CIMMYT scientists and cooperators to improve triticales: A bril.'f history of triticale developmPnt and the CIMMYT research program o_bjectives and progress were reported in ClMMYT Research Bullet:n No. 17, February 1971.