Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T19:37:00.104Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting dry weights of pigeon-pea plants from non-destructive measurements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. L. Hammerton
J. L. Hammerton
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston, Jamaica
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Seven non-destructive field measurements were made on 1270 pigeon-pea plants varying widely in age, size and plant type, before determining their dry weight. The non-destructive measurements were generally highly correlated with one another, and were all significantly correlated with total, total above-ground and structural dry weights. In one experiment dry weights were best predicted by a multiple regression using stem diameter, length of longest branch and number of branches as predictors. Field height and stem diameter were the best predictors in a second trial. It is suggested that dry weights can be estimated by taking certain measurements at regular intervals, simultaneously sampling a number of plants to determine the best predictive equation. Where it is unnecessary or impracticable to do this, stem diameter appears to be the best single index of dry weight.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 88 , Issue 2 , April 1977 , pp. 449 - 454
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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

Avery, T. E. (1967). Forest Measurements. New York, London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Cannell, M. G. R. (1971). Production and distribution of dry matter in trees of Coffea arabica L. in Kenya as affected by seasonal climatic differences and the presence of fruit. Annals of Applied Biology 67, 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancer, J. (1964). The measurement of growth in coffee. II. The relationship between components of the shoot and stem diameter at the base of the shoot. East African Agriculture and Forestry Journal 30, 21–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honer, T. G. (1964). The use of height and squared diameter ratios for the estimation of merchantable cubic foot value. Forestry Chronicle 40, 324–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rees, A. R. & Tinker, P. B. H. (1963). Dry matter production and nutrient content of plantation oil palms in Nigeria. I. Growth and dry matter production. Plant and Soil 19, 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1967). Statistical Methods. Iowa State University Press, Ames, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Wormer, T. M. & Ngugi, D. (1968). Calculating the weight of young coffee trees from non-destructive observations. Experimental Agriculture 4, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, H. E., Strand, L. & Altenburger, R. (1964). Preliminary fresh and dry weight tables for seven tree species in Maine. Maine Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 12.Google Scholar