Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:01:47.014Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of the duration of the vegetative phase on crop growth, development and yield in two contrasting pearl millet hybrids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. Q. Craufurd  and
F. R. Bidinger
P. Q. Craufurd
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, P.O., Andhra Pradesh, 502 324, India
F. R. Bidinger
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, P.O., Andhra Pradesh, 502 324, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The phenotype of medium duration pearl millet varieties grown in West Africa differs from that of the shorter duration millets grown in India. African varieties are usually much taller, have longer panicles, fewer productive tillers, and a lower ratio of grain to above-ground dry-matter (harvest index). The effect of crop duration on plant phenotype was investigated in two hybrids using extended daylengths to increase the duration of the vegetative phase (GSl: sowing to panicle initiation). The two hybrids, 841A × J104 and 81A × Souna B, were considered to represent the Indian and African phenotype, respectively. Tiller production and survival, leaf area, and dry-matter accumulation and partition, were monitored over the season. Grain yield and its components were determined at maturity.

The two hybrids responded similarly to the short and long daylength treatments. The duration of GSl was increased from 20 to 30 days, resulting in increased number of leaves, leaf area, and stem and total dry-matter accumulation; there was no effect on tiller production and survival, or on panicle growth rate. Grain yield was, therefore, the same in both GSl treatments, and harvest index (HI) was much reduced in the long GSl treatment owing to the increased stem growth. One evident effect of a longer GSl was on dry-matter partitioning between shoots; partitioning to the main stem (MS) was increased, whereas partitioning to the tillers was reduced.

There was no difference in crop development, growth or yield between the two hybrids in either GSl treatment. The only significant differences were in the efficiency with which intercepted radiation was converted to dry matter, which was greater in 841A × J104 than in 81A × Souna B, and in the balance between MS and tillers; the grain yield of the MS was significantly greater in 81A x Souna B than in 841A × J104, but at the expense of number of productive tillers.

The results demonstrate that both African and Indian phenotypes are equally productive under good agronomic conditions. The lower HI in longer duration African millets is a consequence of a much extended stem growth phase and therefore increased competition between stem and panicle during grain filling. Possible ways to increase grain yield in the medium duration African millets are considered.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 110 , Issue 1 , February 1988 , pp. 71 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

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

Alagarswamy, G. & Bidinger, F. R. (1985). The influence of extended vegetative development and d2 dwarfing gene in increasing grain number per panicle and grain yield in pearl millet. Field Crops Research 11, 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begg, J. E. & Burton, G. W. (1971). Comparative study of five genotypes of pearl millet under a range of photoperiods and temperatures. Crop Science 11, 803–805.Google Scholar
Belliard, J. & Pernés, J. (1985). Pennisetum typhoides. In CRC Handbook of Flowering. Vol. 4. (ed. Halevy, A. H.), pp. 22–37. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Bilquez, A. F. (1963). Étude du mode d'héredité de la précocité chez le mil penicillaire (Pennisetum typhoides Stapf et Hubbard). I. Déterminisme génetiqué des differences de sensibilite a la longeur du jour existant entre les mils du groupe Sanio et ceux du groupe Souna. Agronomie Tropicale 18, 1249–1253.Google Scholar
Bilquez, J. & Clément, J. (1969). Étude du mode d'hérédité de la précocité chez le mil pénicillaire (Pennisetum typhoides Stapf et Hubb.). II. Déterminisme génétique des variations de précocité des mils du group ‘Souna’. Agronomie Tropicale 24, 258–262.Google Scholar
Carberry, P. S. & Campbell, L. C. (1985). The growth and development of pearl millet as affected by photoperiod. Field Crops Research 11, 207–217.Google Scholar
Carberry, P. S., Campbell, L. C. & Bidinoer, F. R. (1985). The growth and development of pearl millet as affected by plant population. Field Crops Research 11, 193–205.Google Scholar
Coaldrake, P. D. & Pearson, C. J. (1985). Panicle differentiation and spikelet number related to size of panicle in Pennisetum americanum. Journal of Experimental Botany 36, 833–840.Google Scholar
Curtis, D. L. (1968). The relation between yield and date of heading of Nigerian sorghums. Experimental Agriculture 4, 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egharevba, P. N. (1977). Tiller number and millet grain productivity. Cereal Research Communications 5, 235–247.Google Scholar
Egharevba, P. N., Ibrahim, A. A. & Okolo, A. A. (1983). Some morphological and physiological determinants of grain yield in pearl millet. Maydica 28, 15–24.Google Scholar
Fussell, L. K. & Pearson, C. J. (1978). Course of grain development and its relationship to black region appearance in Pennisetum americanum. Field Crops Research 1, 21–31.Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. N. & Biscoe, P. V. (1978). Radiation absorption, growth and yield of cereals. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 91, 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, P. J. & Squire, G. R. (1978). Field observations on the growth and physiology of pearl millet at ICRISAT. Occasional Report No. 1. Microelimatology in Tropical Agriculture, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Gupta, S. C. (1985). ISRA/ICRISAT cooperative program on pearl millet improvement in Senegal. In Record of the Regional Workshop on Pearl Millet Improvement, 31 Augusts September 1984, pp. 183–198. ICRISAT Sahelian Centre, Niamey, Niger.Google Scholar
Huda, A. K. S., Sivakumar, M. V. K., Alagarswamy, G., M., Virmani. S. & Vanderlip, R. L. (1984). Problems and prospects in modeling pearl millet growth and development; a suggested framework for a millet model. In Agroclimatology of Sorghum and Millet in the Semi-Arid Tropics. Proceedings of the International Symposium, 15–20 11 1982, ICRISAT Centre, India, pp. 297–306. Patancheru, A.P. 502 324, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (1982). Annual Report, 1981, pp. 80–82. Patancheru, A. P., India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Jacquinot, L. (1972). Résultats et perspectives des recherches effectuées au Sénégal sur la potentialité du mil céréalier (Pennisetum typhoides). Agronomie Tropicale 27, 815–821.Google Scholar
Kassam, A. H. & Andrews, D. J. (1975). Effects of sowing date on growth, development and yield of photosensitive sorghum at Samaru, Northern Nigeria. Experimental Agriculture 11, 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kassam, A. H. & Kowal, J. M. (1975). Water use, energy balance and growth of Gero millet at Samaru, Northern Nigeria. Agricultural Meteorology 15, 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1969). The effects of daylength upon the development and growth of wheat, barley and oats. Field Crop Abstracts 22, 1–7.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Appleyard, M. (1984). Cereal Development Guide (2nd edn.), 96 pp. England: National Agricultural Centre, Arable Unit.Google Scholar
Lambert, C. (1983a). Influence de la précocité sur le développement du mil (Pennisetum typhoides Stapf et Hubbard) en conditions naturelles. I. Elaboration de la touffe. Agronomie Tropicale 38, 7–15.Google Scholar
Lambert, C. (1983b). Influence de la précocité sur le développement du mil (Pennisetum typhoides Stapf et Hubbard) en conditions naturelles. II. Elaboration du rendement. Agronomie Tropicale 38, 16–26.Google Scholar
Lohani, S. N. (1985). Pearl millet production and improvement in Burkina Faso. In Record of the Regional Workshop on Pearl Millet Improvement, 31 08–4 09 1984, pp. 199–212. ICRISAT Sahelian Center, Niamey, Niger.Google Scholar
Mahalakshmi, V. & Bidinger, F. R. (1985). Water stress and time of floral initiation in pearl millet. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 105, 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, B. & Willey, R. W. (1983). Radiation interception and growth in an intercrop of pearl millet/ groundnut. Field Crops Research 7, 141–160.Google Scholar
Naino, J., Onendeba, B. & Gonda, J. (1985). Principaux resultants et orientations de la recherche sur le mil au Niger. In Record of the Regional Workshop on Pearl Millet Improvement, 31 August–4 September 1984, pp. 123–133. ICRISAT Sahelian Center, Niamey, Niger.Google Scholar
Ong, C. K. (1984). Response to temperature in a stand of pearl millet (Pennisetum typhoides S.& H.). V. Development and fate of tillers. Journal of Experimental Botany 35, 83–90.Google Scholar
Ong, C. K. & Everard, A. (1979). Short day induction of flowering in pearl millet (Pennisetum typhoides) and its effect on plant morphology. Experimental Agriculture 15, 401–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ong, C. K. & Monteith, J. L. (1985). Response of pearl millet to light and temperature. Field Crops Research 11 141–160.Google Scholar
Ong, C. K. & Squire, G. R. (1984). Response to temperature in a stand of pearl millet (Pennisetum typhoides S. &. H.). VII. Final number of spikelets and grains. Journal of Experimental Botany 35, 1233–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, C. J. (1984). Pearl millet. In The Physiology of Tropical Field Crops (ed. Goldsworthy, P. R. and Fisher, N. M.), pp. 281–304. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Sivakumar, M. V. K., Virmani, S. M. & Reddy, S. J. (1979). Rainfall climatology of West Africa: Niger. Information Bulletin No. 5. Patancheru, A.P., India, ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical Methods, 7th edn., 507 pp. Ames, Iowa, U.S.A.: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Squire, G. R., Marshall, B., Terry, A. C. & Monteith, J. L. (1984). Response to temperature in a stand of pearl millet. VI. Light interception and dry matter production. Journal of Experimental Botany 35, 599–610.Google Scholar
Virmani, S. M., Sivakumar, M. V. K. & Reddy, S. J. (1982). Rainfall probability estimates for selected locations of semi-arid India. Research Bulletin No. 1 2nd edn. Patancheru, A.P., India, ICRISAT.Google Scholar