Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:06:55.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Edge effects on yield, yield components and other traits in mechanized durum wheat and barley trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. Hadjichristodoulou
A. Hadjichristodoulou
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A series of trials were conducted during 1979–82 under semi-arid conditions in a Mediterranean-type environment to study the edge effects in mechanized durum wheat and barley variety trials when uncropped pathways are left between plots. Varietal differences in edge effects on grain yield were in most trials not significant. Thus, edge effects do not distort significantly the relative ranking of varieties.

Edge effects were significant for all traits studied and higher in grain and straw yields. These effects were also higher in drier seasons. The overestimation of grain yield from whole plots was 13–18% in relatively high rainfall seasons and 29% in a dry season. In two seasons the scores on the two outer rows were higher than on the two central rows by 89 and 117 % for grain yield, by 72 and 73% for straw yield, by 44 and 48% for numbers of tillers, by 6% for 1000-grain weight and by 14 and 40% for number of grains per tiller. The edge effect was not confined to the outer rows, but it extended to the inner rows of the plot; the magnitude of this effect varied with season and trait.

Rows adjacent to the pathway and unprotected from wind had a lower value for all traits than the opposite rows of the pathway, which were protected by the inner rows.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 101 , Issue 2 , October 1983 , pp. 383 - 387
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

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

Austin, R. B. & Blackwell, R. D.. (1980). Edge and neighbour effects in cereal yield trials. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 731–734.Google Scholar
Bhalli, M. A., Day, A. D., Tucker, N., Thompson, R. K. & Massey, G. D. (1964). End-border effects in irrigated barley yield trials. Agronomy Journal 56, 346–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. M. & Weibel, R. O. (1957). Border effect in winter wheat and spring oat tests. Agronomy Journal 49, 382–384.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. A. (1979). Are your results confounded by intergenotypic competition? Proceedings of the Vth International Wheat Genetics Symposium, New Delhi Vol. 2, pp. 767–777.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. A. (1981). Optimizing the use of water and nitrogen through breeding of crops. In Soil, Water and Nitrogen in Mediterranean-Type Environments (ed. Monteith, J. and Webb, C.), pp. 249–278. London: Nijhoff-Junk.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, N. F. & Federer, W. T. (1964). Adjacent row competition in wheat. Crop Science 4, 641–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, N. F. & Federer, W. T. (1965). Competing ability in wheat. Crop Science 5, 449–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rich, P. A. (1973). Influence of cultivar, row spacing and number of rows on yield of wheat plots. Agronomy Journal 65, 331–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar