Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:24:34.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Varietal Responses in Spring Barley to Natural and Artificial Lodging and to a Growth Regulator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. M. Stanca ,
G. Jenkins  and
P. R. Hanson
A. M. Stanca
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 2LQ
G. Jenkins
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 2LQ
P. R. Hanson
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 2LQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Eight varieties of spring barley differing in their morphology and resistance to lodging were grown in a trial as main plots which were split for seven treatments: a natural control (C), a control with plots which were mechanically supported (S) and four artificially induced lodging treatments: permanent early lodging (PEL); temporary early lodging (TEL); permanent late lodging (PLL) and temporary late lodging (TLL). The seventh treatment (GR) was an application of the growth regulator BAS 09800W. In comparison with S, treatments PEL, TEL, PLL and TLL reduced grain yield by 38–1, 24–8, 22–0 and 13–9 % respectively. Natural lodging in C plots reduced the yield of the two weakest strawed varieties, Guilden and Jupiter, by 8 and 10% respectively in comparison with treatment S. Yields (C) of these two varieties were increased by GR which had no effect on the yield of other varieties, but reduced grain size in some cases. Treatment GR significantly reduced but did not eliminate natural lodging in weaker strawed varieties and reduced the length of the top four internodes. Lodging reduced grain size in terms of 1000–grain weight and sieving fractions and increased the content of husk and protein. Lodging susceptibility was positively correlated with plant height but showed no clear relationship with the number of vascular bundles, stem diameter, wall thickness, or with the content of lignin, cellulose and hemicellulose in the basal internodes. Lodging resistance appeared to be closely associated with short basal internodes.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 93 , Issue 2 , October 1979 , pp. 449 - 457
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Aganovic, Z. & Miletic, N. (1972). Decrease in yield and technological quality of grain of spring barley as affected by the weather and severity of lodging. Agronomski Glasnik 34, 207–312. Seen in Field Crop Abstracts 1975, 28, 126, No. 1341.Google Scholar
Bebbigier, A. (1968). The creation of semi-dwarf barley varieties. Euphytica supplement No. 1, pp. 177–184.Google Scholar
Briggs, D. E. (1978). Barley. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, M. J. & Wilson, R. K. (1966). Development and application of a new chemical method for predicting the digestibility and intake of herbage samples. Proceedings of the Tenth International Grassland Congress, pp. 445–453.Google Scholar
Day, A. D. (1957). Effect of lodging on yield, test weight, and other seed characteristics of spring barley grown under flood irrigation as a winter annual. Agronomy Journal 49, 536–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haahr, V. & Von Wettstein, D. (1976). Studies of an induced, high-yielding dwarf-mutant of spring barley. Barley Genetics III. Proceedings of the Third International Barley Genetics Symposium, Garching, pp. 215–218.Google Scholar
Hirai, S., Hasegawa, K., Hiraki, M. & Agematsu, J. (1977). A new malting barley, ‘FUJI NIJO II’, with stiff straw by mutation breeding. Report Research Laboratory, Kirin Brewery Co. Ltd, No. 20, pp. 25–36.Google Scholar
Konishi, T. (1976). The nature and characteristics of EMS-induced dwarf mutants in barley. Barley Genetics III. Proceedings of the Third International Barley Genetics Symposium, Garching, pp. 181–189.Google Scholar
Larson, J. C. & Maranville, J. W. (1977). Alterations of yield, test weight, and protein in lodged grain sorghum. Agronomy Journal 69, 629–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulder, E. G. (1954). Effect of mineral nutrition on lodging of cereals. Plant and Soil 5, 246–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinthus, M. J. (1973). Lodging in wheat, barley and oats: the phenomenon, its causes, and preventive measures. Advances in Agronomy 25, 210–256.Google Scholar
Prusakova, L. D. (1973). Prevention of lodging in spring barley by means of growth retardants and antiauxins. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Breeding and Productivity of Barley. Institute of Cereal Crops, Komeriz 2, 493–507.Google Scholar
SÁNchez-Monge, E. (1977). Plant breeding in Spain. Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of Eucarpia ‘Interspecific hybridisation in plant breeding’, Madrid, pp. 13–20.Google Scholar
Sisler, W. W. & Olson, P. J. (1951). A study of methods of influencing lodging in barley and the effect of lodging upon yield and certain quality characteristics. Scientific Agriculture 31, 177–186.Google Scholar
Skopik, P. (1969). Relationship between the change of the cellulose and lignin contents in the haulm of spring barley and lodging rate of the same variety. Rostlinna Vyroba 42, 265–273.Google Scholar
Spahr, K. (1960). Untersuchungen über die Standfestigkeit von Sommergerste. Zeitschrifl fur Ackerund Pflanzenbau. 110, 299–331.Google Scholar
Starr, C. & Smith, D. (1978). A semi-micro dry-block and automated analyses technique suitable for determining protein nitrogen in plant materials. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 96, 639–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waite, R., Johnston, M. J. & Armstrong, D. G. (1964). The evaluation of artificially dried grass as a source of energy for sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 62, 391–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitmore, E. T. (1960). Rapid method for determination of the husk content of barley and oats. Journal of the Institute of Brewing 64, 407–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar