Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:39:45.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An experiment to determine the effects of date of sowing on the yield and quality of harvesting* peas 1953–56

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. M. Proctor
J. M. Proctor
Affiliation:
Pea Growing Research Organization Ltd., Yaxley, Peterborough
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Three sowings of marrowfat peas were made at about 20-day intervals at forty-seven centres in eastern England over 4 years. The sowing period ranged from late February to late April, varying with seasonal conditions. Bird damage caused considerable loss of sowings but satisfactory yield data were obtained from forty-one of the trials.

Highest yields were obtained from drillings made in the last 10 days of February. After mid-March each week's delay in sowing resulted in a yield loss of about 3/4 cwt. per acre. Quality fell off slightly from February onwards.

Early sowings suffered some loss of plant in tractor wheelings but were negligibly affected by cold weather.

Early sowings appear likely to encounter better harvest weather than late sowings and the chances of good harvest weather seem appreciably better in the centre and south of the pea-growing area than in the north. Early sowings mature before the cereal crop, enabling better attention to be given to the pea harvest.

It was concluded that the crop should be sown as soon after the middle of February as soil conditions allow.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , October 1963 , pp. 281 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

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

Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1961). Personal communication.Google Scholar
Boswell, V. R. (1929). Bull. Agric. Exp. Sta. Md, 306, 352.Google Scholar
Brouwer, R. (1959). Jaarb. Inst. Biol. Scheik, Onderz, Landbgew, p. 17.Google Scholar
Home Grown Threshed Peas Joint Committee (1950). Progress Report on Field Experiments, 1945–49, p. 9.Google Scholar
Home Grown Threshed Peas Joint Committee (1952). Second Progress Report on Field Experiments, 1950–51, p. 8.Google Scholar
Home Grown Threshed Peas Joint Committee (1954). Report for 1952–53, p. 34.Google Scholar
Karr, E. J., Linck, A. J. & Swanson, C. A. (1959). Amer. J. Bot. 46, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, R. G. & Linck, A. J. (1958). Plant Physiol. 33, 347.Google Scholar
Proctor, J. M. (1958). Pea Growing Handbook (1958 edition). Pea Growing Research Organisation, p. 77.Google Scholar
Reynolds, J. D. (1950). Agriculture, Lond., 56, 527.Google Scholar
Wright, D. W. & Geering, Q. A. (1947). Agriculture, Lond., 54, 124.Google Scholar