Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:08:13.666Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Post-harvest changes in seed of Lolium species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. L. Stoddart
J. L. Stoddart
Affiliation:
Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Aberystwyth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The point at which continued development of a seed no longer depends upon attachment of the culm to the root system can be termed rootindependence.

2. Serially harvested inflorescences of Lolium temidentum L. were maintained in a glasshouse under the same environmental conditions as standing material. Samples for analysis were taken from harvests and standing material at 2 days intervals to compare chemical changes occurring in seed on standing and severed culms. Analyses for total soluble carbohydrate (T.S.C.) were performed on a single seed basis.

3. Harvests made before the seed T.S.C. maximum resulted in oscillating changes in endosperm free sugar content and these caryopses tended to stabilize at an excessively high value. All later harvests resulted in seed with a final T.S.C. level within 1% of that present in normally matured seed

4. 14C-Sucrose uptake studies showed that tho endosperm T.S.C. requirement was high prior to the seed T.S.C. maximum but that it was very low during the second half of the maturation sequence. It is considered that during this period sugar is only translocated to make good respiratory losses.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 65 , Issue 3 , December 1965 , pp. 365 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

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

Hyde, E. O. C, Mcleavey, M. A.Harris, G. A. (1959). N.Z. J. Agric. Res. 2, 947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, W. (1943). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 35, 617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mcalister, D. F. (1943). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 35, 442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, S. & Stein, W. H. (1948). J. Biol. Chem. 176, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pucher, W. G., Leavenworth, C. S. & Vickery, H. B. (1948). Analyt. Chem. 20, 850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spies, J. R. (1952). J. Biol. Chem. 195, 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoddart, J. L. (1964a). J. Agric. Sci. 62, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoddart, J. L. (1964b). J. Agric. Sci. 62, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yemm, E. W. & Willis, A. J. (1954). Biocliem. J. 57, 508.Google Scholar