Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:35:29.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth of sugar-beet crops including the influence of synthetic plant growth regulators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. F. Green ,
L. V. Vaidyanathan  and
J. D. Ivins
C. F. Green
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE12 5RD
L. V. Vaidyanathan
Affiliation:
Agricultural Development and Advisory Service, Block C, Government Buildings, Brooklands Avenue, Cambridge, CB2 3DX
J. D. Ivins
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE12 5RD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Observations are presented from a crop of sugar beet grown in Cambridgeshire during 1978, and a field trial at Sutton Bonington during 1985 in which the influence of synthetic plant growth regulators (PGRs) daminozide, chlormequat, GA4+7 and ethephon were compared.

Several distinct patterns of growth were evident, being similar for both growing seasons and described by two intersecting straight lines. Early development was characterized by a slow rate of biomass accumulation, a dominance of foliage production with a constant but small root fraction (around 40%), a low specific leaf area and a slow but conservative rate of sucrose fractionation. Later in the season the rate of stand growth was both constant and maximal, the root fraction doubled, specific leaf area increased and the rate of sucrose accumulation rose markedly.

Transitions between developmental phases occurred at various times dependent on variate under consideration. The onset of the main growth period began at the end of June, followed by an increase in the rate of sucrose accumulation about 2 weeks later. Finally, near the end of July, partition of assimilate into the root assumed a faster rate. Changes in the partitioning into both roots and sucrose are discussed in relation to the development of the secondary cambium.

Generally there were no effects of PGRs on biomass accumulation, dry-matter partitioning, specific leaf area and sucrose accumulation. However, daminozide increased early canopy expansion and early dry-matter production but failed to influence biomass or sugar yield.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 107 , Issue 2 , October 1986 , pp. 285 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Artschwager, E. (1926). Anatomy of the vegetative organs of the sugar beet. Journal of Agricultural Research 33, 143–176.Google Scholar
Bellido, L. L. & Garcia, J. E. C. (1982). Crop establishment and autumn sown sugar beet growing: effect of sowing time and density of plants on growth and yield. In Proceedings of the 15th Winter Congress, Instilut International de Recherches Betteravières, pp. 69–83.Google Scholar
Biscoe, P. V., Butler, R. & Turner, R. (1985). Growing More Sugar. British Sugar/ICI Agricultural Division 1984 Sugar Beet Report, 24 pp.Google Scholar
Biscoe, P. V. & Messem, A. (1982). A record beet year and its weather. British Sugar Beet Review 50 (4), 41–43.Google Scholar
Bleach, K. & Blamowski, Z. K. (1978). Formowanie powierzehni jasymilacyjne i biomasy przez rosliny burakow cukrowych. Acta Agrobotanica 31, 31–32.Google Scholar
Boothroyd, D. & Clare, R. W. (1984). Growth regulator use in wheat and barley. In Recent Developments in Cereal Production, Proceedings of a Conference held at the University of Nottingham, 17 12, pp. 21–38.Google Scholar
Bray, W. E. & Thompson, K. J. (1985). Sugar Beeta Growers Guide. Sugar Beet Research and Education Committee, Broom's Barn Experimental Station, Higham, Suffolk. 81 pp.Google Scholar
Caldicott, J. J. & Lindley, C. D. (1964). The use of CCC to prevent lodging in wheat. In Proceedings of the 7th Weed Conference, pp. 49–56.Google Scholar
Cartwright, P. M. & Waddington, S. R. (1981). Growth regulators and grain yield of spring cereals. In Opportunities for Manipulation of Cereal Productivity (ed. Hawkins, A. F. and Jeffcoat, B.). British Plant Growth Regulator Group, Monograph No. 7, pp. 61–70.Google Scholar
Cary, J. W. (1977). Relations between CO2 exchange rate, CO2 compensation and mesophyll resistance from a simple field method. Crop Science 17, 450–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, R. D., Treharne, K. J. & Hoad, G. V. (1983). Growth regulator potential for improvement of cereal yield. In Factors Affecting the Accumulation of Exploitation Resources in the Cereal Plant. H.M.S.O. reference 222, pp. 14–26.Google Scholar
Cyanamid, (1966). Field and miscellaneous crops. In Cycocel, Plant Growth Regulant. Cyanamid International Technical Information, pp. 48–49.Google Scholar
Draycott, A. P., Last, P. J. & Messem, A. B. (1978). Experiments on sugar beet with nitrogen and irrigation. In Maximising Yields of Crops, ADAS, ARC Symposium, Harrogate 17–19 01, pp. 107–112. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Fick, G. W., Loomis, R. S. & Williams, W. A. (1975). Sugar beet. In Crop Physiology, Some Case Histories (ed. Evans, L. T.), pp. 259–295. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Follett, R. F., Schmehl, W. L. & Viets, F. G. Jr (1970). Seasonal leaf area dry weight, and sucrose accumulation by sugarbeets. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 16, 235–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginneken, P. J. H. van (1959). The development of the sugar content of sugar beet during the growth period. Mededeelingen van bet Instituut vour Suikerbeitenteelt 29, 119–260.Google Scholar
Green, C. F. & Deuchar, C. N. (1985). On improved tube solarimeter construction. Journal of Experimental Botany 36, 690–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, C. F. & Vaidyanathan, L. V. (1986). A reappraisal of biomass accumulation by temperate cereal crops. Speculations in Science and Technology (in the Press).Google Scholar
Greenwood, D. J., Cleever, T. J., Loquens, M. H. & Niendorf, K. B. (1977). Relationship between plant weight and growing period for vegetable crops in the United Kingdom. Annals of Botany 41, 987–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, D. K. D. (1972). Developmental physiology of sugar-beet. 4. Effects of growth substances and differential root and shoot temperatures on subsequent growth. Journal of Experimental Botany 23, 103–113.Google Scholar
Herold, A. (1980). Regulation of photosynthesis by sink activity – the missing link. New Phytologist 86, 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphries, E. C. & French, S. A. W. (1965). A growth study of sugar beet treated with gibberellio acid and (2-chloroethyl) trimethylammonium chloride (CCC). Annals of Applied Biology 55, 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphries, E. C. & Wheeler, A. W. (1962). Effects of gibberellic acid on the growth of potato and sugar beet. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Report for 1961, pp. 91–92.Google Scholar
Ivins, J. D. & Bremner, P. M. (1966). Growth studies with the sugar beet crop. Agricultural Progress 41, 77–83.Google Scholar
Jaggard, K. W., Lawrence, D. K. & Biscoe, P. V. (1982). An understanding of crop physiology in assessing a plant growth regulator on sugar beet. In Chemical Manipulation of Crop Growth and Development (ed. McLaren, J. S.), pp. 139–150. London: Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kursanov, A. L. (1974). Assimilattransport und Zuckerspeicherung in der Zuckerrube. Zeitschrift für die Zuckerindustrie 24, 478–487.Google Scholar
Le Docte, A. (1927). Commercial determination of sugar in the beetroot. International Sugar Journal 29, 488–492.Google Scholar
Lyashenko, O. M., Borysyuk, V. O. & Shyyan, P. M. (1980). Dependence of sugar content on the weight ratio of epigeal and hypogeal parts of sugar beet. Ukrayins'kyi Botanichnyi Zhurnal 37, 47–48.Google Scholar
Mahoney, M. D. (1983). Evaluation of chemicals for floral induction and stalk elongation in sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.). Dissertation Abstracts International B 43, p. 2762.Google Scholar
Milford, G. F. J. (1973). The growth and development of the storage root of sugar beet. Annals of Applied Biology 75, 427–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milford, G. F. J., Pocock, T. O. & Riley, J. (1985). An analysis of leaf growth in sugar beet. II. Leaf appearance in field crops. Annals of Applied Biology 106, 173–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moorby, J. & Milthorpe, F. L. (1975). Potato. In Crop Physiology – Some Case Histories (ed. Evans, L. T.), p. 245, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, N. T. & Wood, R. R. (1958). Studies of chemical treatments on sugar beets including gibberellic acid, 2,4-D and maleic hydrazide. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 16, 323–331.Google Scholar
Nobel, P. S. (1977). Internal leaf area and cellular CO2 resistance: photosynthetic implications of variations with growth conditions and plant species. Physiologia Plantarum 40, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. T., Duke, S. O. & Hoagland, R. E. (1978). Effects of irradiance during growth on adaptive photosynthetic characteristics of velvetleaf and cotton. Plant Physiology 61, 402–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, D. F. (1961). Effects of gibberollic acid on sucrose, purity, and weight of sugar beets. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 11, 320–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poostchi, I. & Schmehl, W. R. (1971). Effect of gibberellic acid, several growth retardants and nitrogen levels on yield and quality of sugarbeets. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 16, 323–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, D. J., Moore, T. C. & Anderson, J. D. (1965). A possible mode of action of the plant growth retardant B-995. Science 148, 1469–1471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ricardo, C. P. P. (1975). Algumas consideracoes sobre a fisiologia da beterraba-sacarina. Agronomia Lusitana 37, 77–93.Google Scholar
Ross, G. J. S. (1975). Simple non-linear modelling for the general user. Proceedings of the 40th session of the International Statistical Institute Warsaw, 2, 585–593.Google Scholar
Ross, G. J. S. (1980). Maximum Likelihood Program. Lawes Agricultural Trust, Rothamsted Experimental Station.Google Scholar
Saffell, R. A., Campbell, G. S. & Campbell, E. C. (1979). An improved micropower counting integrator. Agricultural Meteorology 20, 393–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, R. K. & Allen, E. J. (1978). Crop physiological aspects of importance to maximum yields – potatoes and sugar beet. In Maximising Yields of Crops ADAS, ARC Symposium, Harrogate 17–19 01, pp. 25–30. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Scott, R. K. & Jaggard, K. (1978 a). How the crop grows – from seed to sugar. British Sugar Beet Review 46 (4), 19–22.Google Scholar
Scott, R. K. & Jaggard, K. (1978 b). Theoretical criteria for maximum yield. In Proceedings of the 41st Winter Congress, Institut International de Becherches Betteravières, pp. 179–198.Google Scholar
Seale, R. S. (1986). Soils in Cambridgeshire, 4, Sheet No. TL34, Royston, Soil Survey Record 105.Google Scholar
Sibma, L. (1968). Growth of closed crop surfaces in the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 16, 211–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1967). Statistical Methods, 6th ed.Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Szirtes, V., Varga, S. & Kovacs, A. (1980). Etilen-es N-tartalmu komplex leveltragyak hatasa a cukorrepatermes mennyisegrere es cukortartalmava. Novenytermeles 29, 255–268.Google Scholar
Terry, N. (1968). Developmental physiology of sugar beets. The influence of light and temperature on growth. Journal of Experimental Botany 19, 795–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theurer, J. C. (1979). Growth patterns in sugarbeet production. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 20, 343–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomasson, A. J. (1971). Soils of the Melton Mowbray District. Memorandum of the Soil Survey of Great Britain.Google Scholar
Ulrich, A. (1952). The influence of temperature and light factors on the growth and development of sugar beets in controlled climatic environments. Agronomy Journal 44, 66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, A. (1955). Influence of night temperature and nutrition on the growth, sucrose accumulation and leaf minerals of sugar beet plants. Plant Physiology 30, 250–257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watson, D. J., Motomatsu, T., Loach, K. & Milford, G. F. J. (1972). Effects of shading and of seasonal differences in weather on the growth, sugar content and sugar yield of sugar beet crops. Annals of Applied Biology 71, 159–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. J. & Selman, I. W. (1938). A comparative physiological study of sugar-beet and mangold with respect to growth and sugar accumulation. II. Changes in sugar content. Annals of Botany 2, 827–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, H. (1954). Der Einfluss von Wirkstoffen, von Rontgen-und Elektronstrahlen auf die Cambiumtätigkeit von Beta vulgaris. Planta 44, 636–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyse, R. (1979). Parameters controlling sucrose content and yield of sugarbeet roots. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 20, 368–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar