Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:35:58.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determinants of spring barley yield in a high-yield potential environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2016

S. P. KENNEDY ,
I. J. BINGHAM  and
J. H. SPINK
S. P. KENNEDY
Affiliation:
TEAGASC, Oakpark Crops Research Centre, Carlow, Ireland SRUC, Crop & Soil Systems Research Group, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, UK
I. J. BINGHAM
Affiliation:
SRUC, Crop & Soil Systems Research Group, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, UK
J. H. SPINK*
Affiliation:
TEAGASC, Oakpark Crops Research Centre, Carlow, Ireland
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The literature suggests that grain number largely determines and as such limits yield in barley. Many of the reported studies were conducted in relatively low-yielding environments and it is unclear if grain number is also a limiting factor in high-yield potential climates. Nor is it known with certainty what physiological or morphological traits must be targeted in order to increase grain number. A detailed programme of assessments was carried out on replicated field plots of a two-row spring barley variety (Hordeum vulgare L. cvar Quench) at three sites (Carlow, Wexford and Cork) in Ireland from 2011 to 2013. Plots were managed for high yield potential as per current best farm practice. Destructive sampling and in-field assessments were carried out at approximately weekly intervals from emergence onwards to gather growth, development and yield component data. Across nine site/seasons, grand means of 8·52 t/ha for yield, 18 419 for grain number/m2 and 46·41 mg for mean grain weight were achieved. Grain number/m2 accounted for most of the variation in yield and ear number/m2 accounted for most of the variation in grain number/m2. Early-season maximum shoot number/m2 had little influence on harvest ear number/m2. The period over which final ear number was determined was more flexible than the literature suggests, where the phases of tiller production and senescence varied considerably. Significant post-anthesis re-tillering occurred following the initial phase of shoot mortality at two out of nine site/seasons, but this appeared to contribute little to yield. Yield was positively associated with the proportion of shoots surviving from an early season maximum to a mid-season minimum (R 2 = 0·62). Shoot size and weight at the beginning of stem extension had the largest influence on shoot survival, indicating that crop condition and hence growth and development pre-stem extension may be more important for shoot survival than growth and development during the stem extension period. Achieving high shoot numbers of adequate size and weight at the beginning of stem extension may be an appropriate target for establishing a high-yield potential crop.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 155 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 60 - 80
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abbate, P. E., Andrade, F. H., Culot, J. P. & Bindraban, P. S. (1997). Grain yield in wheat: effects of radiation during spike growth period. Field Crops Research 54, 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abeledo, L. G., Calderini, D. F. & Slafer, G. A. (2003). Genetic improvement of barley yield potential and its physiological determinants in Argentina (1944–1998). Euphytica 130, 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, S., Black, B., Boland, A., Burke, J., Carton, O. T., Coulter, B. S., Culleton, N., Dillon, P., Hackett, R., Humphreys, J., Keady, T., Lalor, S., McHoul, J., Merfield, C., Murphy, B., O'Kiely, P., O'Riordan, E., Orlovious, K., Plunkett, M., Schulte, R. & Tunney, H. (2008). Major and Micro Nutrient Advice for Productive Agricultural Crops. Johnstown Castle, Wexford: Teagasc Environment Research Centre.Google Scholar
Alexandratos, N. & Bruinsma, J. (2012). World Agriculture Towards 2030/2050: The 2012 Revision. ESA Working Paper No. 12–03. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Anon. (2009). Global Agriculture Towards 2050: How to Feed the World in 2050 . High-level Expert Forum. Rome: FAO. Available from: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/Issues_papers/HLEF2050_Global_Agriculture.pdf (verified 2 February 2016).Google Scholar
Anon. (2011 a). FAOSTAT Crop Production Statistics. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Anon. (2011 b). StatBank - Agriculture Area Used and Crop Production Statistics. Ireland: Central Statistics Office.Google Scholar
Anon. (2011 c). World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision. New York: Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat.Google Scholar
Anon. (2011 d). Publications and Information about Crop Variety Evaluation. Dublin, Ireland: Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.Google Scholar
Anon. (2012). StatBank - Agriculture Area Used and Crop Production Statistics. Ireland: Central Statistics Office.Google Scholar
Anon. (2014). StatBank - Agriculture Area Used and Crop Production Statistics. Ireland: Central Statistics Office.Google Scholar
Arisnabarreta, S. & Miralles, D. J. (2008 a). Critical period for grain number establishment of near isogenic lines of two- and six-rowed barley. Field Crops Research 107, 196–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arisnabarreta, S. & Miralles, D. J. (2008 b). Radiation effects on potential number of grains per spike and biomass partitioning in two- and six-rowed near isogenic barley lines. Field Crops Research 107, 203–210.Google Scholar
Baethgen, W. E., Christianson, C. B. & Lamothe, A. G. (1995). Nitrogen fertilizer effects on growth, grain yield, and yield components of malting barley. Field Crops Research 43, 87–99.Google Scholar
Beed, F. D., Paveley, N. D. & Sylvester-Bradley, R. (2007). Predictability of wheat growth and yield in light-limited conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 145, 63–79.Google Scholar
Bingham, I. J. & Topp, C. F. E. (2009). Potential contribution of selected canopy traits to the tolerance of foliar disease by spring barley. Plant Pathology 58, 1010–1020.Google Scholar
Bingham, I. J., Blake, J., Foulkes, M. J. & Spink, J. (2007 a). Is barley yield in the UK sink limited? I. Post-anthesis radiation interception, radiation-use efficiency and source-sink balance. Field Crops Research 101, 198–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham, I. J., Blake, J., Foulkes, M. J. & Spink, J. (2007 b). Is barley yield in the UK sink limited? II. Factors affecting potential grain size. Field Crops Research 101, 212–220.Google Scholar
Biscoe, P. V., Scott, R. K. & Monteith, J. L. (1975). Barley and its environment. III. Carbon budget of the stand. Journal of Applied Ecology 12, 269–293.Google Scholar
Blake, J., Bingham, I. J., Foulkes, J. & Spink, J. (2006). Describing and Understanding Barley Growth and Development through the Use of Benchmarks. London: Home Grown Cereals Authority.Google Scholar
Davis, M. H. & Simmons, S. R. (1994). Tillering response of barley to shifts in light quality caused by neighboring plants. Crop Science 34, 1604–1610.Google Scholar
del Moral, L. F. G., Ramos, J. M. & Recalde, L. (1984). Tillering dynamics of winter barley as influenced by cultivar and nitrogen fertilizer. Crop Science 24, 179–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
del Moral, M. B. G. & del Moral, L. F. G. (1995). Tiller production and survival in relation to grain yield in winter and spring barley. Field Crops Research 44, 85–93.Google Scholar
del Moral, L. F. G., del Moral, M. B. G., Molina-Cano, J. L. & Slafer, G. A. (2003). Yield stability and development in two- and six-rowed winter barleys under Mediterranean conditions. Field Crops Research 81, 109–119.Google Scholar
Estrada-Campuzano, G., Miralles, D. J. & Slafer, G. A. (2008). Yield determination in triticale as affected by radiation in different development phases. European Journal of Agronomy 28, 597–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabian, A., Jager, K., Rakszegi, M. & Barnabas, B. (2011). Embryo and endosperm development in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) kernels subjected to drought stress. Plant Cell Reports 30, 551–563.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. A. (1985). Number of kernels in wheat crops and the influence of solar radiation and temperature. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 108, 447–461.Google Scholar
Foulkes, M. J., Sylvester-Bradley, R., Weightman, R. & Snape, J. W. (2007). Identifying physiological traits associated with improved drought resistance in winter wheat. Field Crops Research 103, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, A. B. & Bauer, A. (1995). Phyllochron differences in wheat, barley, and forage grasses. Crop Science 35, 19–23.Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. N., Biscoe, P. V. & Dennis-Jones, R. (1983). Environmental influences on the development, growth and yield of barley. In Barley: Production and Marketing (Eds Wright, G. M. & Wynn-Williams, R. B.), pp. 21–50. Special Publication No. 2. Agronomy Society of New Zealand. Available from: http://www.agronomysociety.org.nz/uploads/94803/files/SP2_3._Environmental_influences_on_barley.pdf (verified 2 February 2016).Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. N., Biscoe, P. V. & Scott, R. K. (1975). Barley and its environment V. Stability of grain weight. Journal of Applied Ecology 12, 319–336.Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. N., Biscoe, P. V. & Scott, R. K. (1976). Barley and its environment: VI. Growth and development in relation to yield. Journal of Applied Ecology 13, 563–583.Google Scholar
Gambín, B. L. & Borrás, L. (2010). Resource distribution and the trade-off between seed number and seed weight: a comparison across crop species. Annals of Applied Biology 156, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grashoff, C. & dAntuono, L. F. (1997). Effect of shading and nitrogen application on yield, grain size distribution and concentrations of nitrogen and water soluble carbohydrates in malting spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L). European Journal of Agronomy 6, 275–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grausgruber, H., Bointner, H., Tumpold, R. & Ruckenbauer, P. (2002). Genetic improvement of agronomic and qualitative traits of spring barley. Plant Breeding 121, 411–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habgood, R. M. & Uddin, M. R. (1983). Some effects of artificial variation in light interception, number of grains and husk constriction on the development of grain weight in normal and high-lysine barley. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 101, 301–309.Google Scholar
Jamieson, P. D., Martin, R. J., Francis, G. S. & Wilson, D. R. (1995). Drought effects on biomass production and radiation-use efficiency in barley. Field Crops Research 43, 77–86.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1967). The effect of plant density upon the growth and yield of barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 68, 317–324.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1973). The control of leaf and ear size in barley. Journal of Experimental Botany 24, 567–578.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1977). The growth of the shoot apex and the apical dome of barley during ear initiation. Annals of Botany 41, 1297–1308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1995). Factors affecting rate of leaf emergence in barley and wheat. Crop Science 35, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Appleyard, M. (1984). Cereal Development Guide, 2nd edn, Stoneleigh, UK: Arable Unit, National Agricultural Centre.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Riggs, T. J. (1978). Developmental consequences of 2-row and 6-row ear type in spring barley. 2. Shoot apex, leaf and tiller development. Journal of Agricultural Science 91, 207–216.Google Scholar
Lauer, J. G. & Simmons, S. R. (1985). Photoassimilate partitioning of main shoot leaves in field-grown spring barley. Crop Science 25, 851–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauer, J. G. & Simmons, S. R. (1989). Canopy light and tiller mortality in spring barley. Crop Science 29, 420–424.Google Scholar
McCree, K. J. (1981). Photosynthetically active radiation. In Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology (Eds Lange, O. L., Nobel, P. S., Osmond, C. B. & Ziegler, H.), pp. 41–55. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
McMaster, G. S. & Wilhelm, W. W. (1997). Growing degree-days: one equation, two interpretations. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 87, 291–300.Google Scholar
McMaster, G. S., Wilhelm, W. W., Palic, D. B., Porter, J. R. & Jamieson, P. D. (2003). Spring wheat leaf appearance and temperature: extending the paradigm? Annals of Botany 91, 697–705.Google Scholar
Miralles, D. J. & Slafer, G. A. (2007). Sink limitations to yield in wheat: how could it be reduced? Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 145, 139–149.Google Scholar
Miralles, D. J., Ferro, B. C. & Slafer, G. A. (2001). Developmental responses to sowing date in wheat, barley and rapeseed. Field Crops Research 71, 211–223.Google Scholar
Newton, A. C., Flavell, A. J., George, T. S., Leat, P., Mullholland, B., Ramsay, L., Revoredo-Giha, C., Russell, J., Steffenson, B. J., Swanston, J. S., Thomas, W. T. B., Waugh, R., White, P. J. & Bingham, I. J. (2011). Crops that feed the world 4. Barley: a resilient crop? Strengths and weaknesses in the context of food security. Food Security 3, 141–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborne, L. E. & Stein, J. M. (2007). Epidemiology of Fusarium head blight on small-grain cereals. International Journal of Food Microbiology 119, 103–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paynter, B. H., Juskiw, P. E. & Helm, J. H. (2004). Leaf development in two-row spring barley under long-day and short-day field conditions. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 84, 477–486.Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P., Kangas, A., Salo, Y. & Jauhiainen, L. (2007). Grain number dominates grain weight in temperate cereal yield determination: evidence based on 30 years of multi-location trials. Field Crops Research 100, 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, M. P., van Ginkel, M. & Ribaut, J. (2000). Avenues for genetic modification of radiation use efficiency in wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany 51, 459–473.Google Scholar
Reynolds, M., Foulkes, M. J., Slafer, G. A., Berry, P., Parry, M. A. J., Snape, J. W. & Angus, W. J. (2009). Raising yield potential in wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany 60, 1899–1918.Google Scholar
Richards, R. A. (2000). Selectable traits to increase crop photosynthesis and yield of grain crops. Journal of Experimental Botany 51, 447–458.Google Scholar
Serrago, R. A., Alzueta, I., Savin, R. & Slafer, G. A. (2013). Understanding grain yield responses to source-sink ratios during grain filling in wheat and barley under contrasting environments. Field Crops Research 150, 42–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, S. R., Rasmussen, S. K. & Wiersma, J. V. (1982). Tillering in barley: genotype, row spacing, and seeding rate effects. Crop Science 22, 801–805.Google Scholar
Skinner, R. H. & Simmons, S. R. (1993). Modulation of leaf elongation, tiller appearance and tiller senescence in spring barley by far-red light. Plant Cell and Environment 16, 555–562.Google Scholar
Slafer, G. A., Kantolic, A. G., Appendino, M. L., Miralles, D. J. & Savin, R. (2009). Crop development: genetic control, environmental modulation and relevance for genetic improvement of crop yield. In Crop Physiology. Applications for Genetic Improvement and Agronomy (Eds Sadras, V. O. & Calderini, D. F.), pp. 277–308. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sparkes, D. L., Holme, S. J. & Gaju, O. (2006). Does light quality initiate tiller death in wheat? European Journal of Agronomy 24, 212–217.Google Scholar
Spink, J., Foulkes, M. J., Gay, A., Bryson, R. J., Berry, P., Sylvester-Bradley, R., Semere, T., Clare, R. W., Scott, R. K., Kettlewell, P. S. & Russell, G. (2000). Reducing Winter Wheat Production Costs through Crop Intelligence Information on Variety and Sowing Date, Rotational Position, and Canopy Management in Relation to Drought and Disease Control. London: Home Grown Cereals Authority.Google Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, R., Stokes, D. T. & Scott, R. K. (2001). Dynamics of nitrogen capture without fertilizer: the baseline for fertilizing winter wheat in the UK. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 136, 15–33.Google Scholar
Thorne, G. N. (1962). Survival of tillers and distribution of dry matter between ear and shoot of barley varieties. Annals of Botany 26, 37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorne, G. N. & Wood, D. W. (1988). Contributions of shoot categories to growth and yield of winter wheat. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 111, 285–294.Google Scholar
Tottman, D. R. (1987). The decimal code for the growth stages of cereals, with illustrations. Annals of Applied Biology 110, 441–454.Google Scholar
Waddington, S. R. & Cartwright, P. M. (1983). A quantitative scale of spike initial and pistil development in barley and wheat. Annals of Botany 51, 119–130.Google Scholar
Wade, A. & Froment, M. A. (2003). Barley Quality and Grain Size Homogeniety for Malting: Volume I: Agronomic Effects on Varieties. London: Home Grown Cereals Authority.Google Scholar
Wamser, A. F. & Mundstock, C. M. (2007). Shoot survival increment in barley by nitrogen supply in the shoots elongation stage. Ciência Rural 37, 1577–1585.Google Scholar
Willey, R. W. & Holliday, R. (1971). Plant population and shading studies in barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 77, 445–452.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S. (1972). Physiological aspects of yield. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 23, 437–464.Google Scholar