Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T05:54:17.002Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of defoliation on populations of Festuca arundinacea Schreb. sown in spring and autumn*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. D. Thomas  and
Alec Lazenby
W. D. Thomas
Affiliation:
Plant Protection Ltd., Jealott's Hill Research Station, Bracknell, Berks
Alec Lazenby
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The effects of defoliation regime on seasonal and total yields of spring- and autumnsown material of three populations Festuca arundinacea(syn. 1 and syn. 2 from North Africa and the British cultivar S. 170) were examined at Cambridge from the period June 1963 to April 1965.

A micro-plot technique was used in which defoliation treatments were defined by vertical height above soil level. The vertical growth intervals between successive defoliations were, for the summer cutting regimes 7.5–25 cm and 2.5–12.5 cm, and for the winter regimes 7.5–20 cm, 2.5–20 cm, 7.5–12.5 cm, and 2.5–7.5 cm.

In summer 1963 mean yields of all populations were very similar, being equivalent to approximately 12000 kg/ha. Mean population yields for the following three 6-month periods were equivalent to (in kg/ha): syn. 11519, 14740, 3385; syn. 2 2194,17669, 5523; S. 170 1656, 19832,3696.

Variety x treatment interactions were found in every season. In particular, S. 170 winter production was reduced by severe defoliations in the preceding summer, and syn. 1 and syn. 2 summer production by severe defoliations in the preceding winter. It is suggested that such interactions may have been responsible for conflicting assessments of the relative potential production of these populations.

Syn. 1 appeared to offer no advantage over S. 170, and syn. 2 only to outyield S. 170 where spring sowing was followed by infrequent or lax defoliations in all seasons. Agronomic implications are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , June 1971 , pp. 391 - 400
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

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

Anslow, R. C. (1965). Light interception and growth rate of a perennial ryegrass sward. Proc. 9th int. Grassld Congr., pp. 403–5.Google Scholar
Anslow, R. C. (1967). Frequency of cutting and sward production. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 68, 377–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anslow, R. C. & Back, H. L. (1967). Grass growth in midsummer and light interception and growth rate of perennial ryegrass sward. A reply to a recent reinterpretation of published data. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 22, 108–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armitage, E. R. & Templeman, W. G. (1964). Response of grassland to nitrogenous fertiliser in the West of England. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 19, 291–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockman, J. S. & Walton, K. M., (1963). The use of nitrogen on grass-white clover swards. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 18, 7–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brougham, R. W. (1956). Effect of intensity of defoliation on regrowth of pasture. Aust. J. agric. Res. 7, 377–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brougham, R. W. (1958). Interception of light by the foliage of pure and mixed stands of pasture plants. Aust. J. agric. Res. 9, 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, R. (1963). Some aspects of the equilibrium between overground and underground plant parts. Jaarb. Inst. biol. scheik. Onderz. LandbGewass (1963), pp. 31–39.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, B. N. (1961 a). Analysis of ecotypic differences in tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.). Ann. appl. Biol. 49, 560–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatterjee, B. N. (1961 b). Analysis of ecotypic differences in tall fescue and their agronomic significance. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Reading.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J. L. (1969). Growth of grazed plants. Proc. Aust. Grassld Conf. (1968), pp. 125–37.Google Scholar
Davidson, J. L. & Milthorpe, F. L. (1966). Leaf growth in Dactylis glomerata following defoliation. Ann. Bot. 30, 173–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A. (1966). The regrowth of swards of S24 perennial ryegrass subjected to different pre-treatments. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 67, 139–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. O. (1963). Exp. Prog. 15, Rep. Grassld Res. Inst. 1961–1962, p. 10.Google Scholar
Green, J. O., Anslow, R. C., Corrall, A. J. & David, G. L. (1962). Exp. Prog. 14, Rep. Grassld Res. Inst. 1960–1961, p. 13.Google Scholar
Green, J. O., Anslow, R. C., Corrall, A. J. & David, G. L. (1963). Exp. Prog. 14, Rep. Grassld Res. Inst. 1961–1962, pp. 12–13.Google Scholar
Green, J. O., Anslow, R. C. & Corrall, A. J. (1965). Exp. Prog. 17, Rep. Grassld Res. Inst. 1963–1964, pp. 15–19.Google Scholar
Hunt, I. V. (1965). Comparisons of production from 12 varieties of cocksfoot. Res. Bull. 36 W. Scotl. Coll. Agric.Google Scholar
Ibanez, del Pozo (1963). The effect of cutting treatment on the dry matter production Lolium perenne and Dactylis glomerata. Versl. Landbouwk. Onderz. 69, no. 17.Google Scholar
Jewiss, O. R. & Powell, C. E. (1966). The growth of S48 timothy swards after cutting in relation to carbohydrate reserves and leaf area. Rep. Grassld Res. Inst. 1965, pp. 67–72.Google Scholar
Jones, Ll. I. (1959). Varietal characteristics of herbage plants in relation to their agronomic assessment. In Measurement of Grassland Productivity, ed. Ivins, . London: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Lazenby, Alec & Rogers, H. H. (1965 a). Selection criteria in grass breeding. IV. The effect of nitrogen and spacing on yield and its components. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 65, 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazenby, Alec & Rogers, H. H. (1965 b). Selection criteria in grass breeding. V. Performance of Lolium perenne genotypes grown at different nitrogen levels and spacings. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 65, 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, L. H. (1960). The utilization of carbohydrate reserves in pasture plants after defoliation. Herb. Abstr. 30, 239–45.Google Scholar
Mitchell, K. J. & Coles, S. J. J. (1955). Effects of defoliation and shading on short-rotation ryegrass. N.Z. Jl Sci. Technol. A 36, 586–604.Google Scholar
Neal-Smith, C. A. (1955). Report on herbage plant exploration in the Mediterranean region. Report no. 415, F.A.O., Rome, 1955.Google Scholar
Reith, J. W. S., Inkson, R. H. E., Stewart, A. M., Holmes, W., McCulsky, D. S., Reid, D., Heddle, R. G., Clouston, D. & Copeman, G. J. F. (1961). The effects of fertilizers on herbage production. I. The effects of nitrogen, phosphate, potash on yield. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 56, 17–29.Google Scholar
Rogers, H. H. (1960). Rep. Pl. Breed. Inst. 1958–1959, p. 83.Google Scholar
Rogers, H. H. (1962). Rep. Pl. Breed. Inst. 1960–1961, pp.71–73.Google Scholar
Rogers, H. H. (1963). Rep. Pl Breed. Inst. 1961–1962, pp. 66–67.Google Scholar
Rogers, H. H. (1965). Rep. Pl. Breed. Inst. 1963–1964, p. 88.Google Scholar
Thomas, W. D. & Lazenby, Alec. (1968). Growth cabinet studies into cold tolerance in Festuca arundinacea populations. I. Effects of low temperature and defoliation J. agric. Sci., Camb. 70, 339–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar