Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:11:08.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in plant morphological expression in 12 perennial ryegrass cultivars following frequent and infrequent cutting management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2015

P. A. CASHMAN ,
T. J. GILLILAND ,
M. McEVOY ,
S. WATSON  and
M. O'DONOVAN
P. A. CASHMAN
Affiliation:
Teagasc Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast BT7 1NN, Northern Ireland
T. J. GILLILAND
Affiliation:
Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast BT7 1NN, Northern Ireland Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Plant Testing Station, Crossnacreevy, Belfast BT5 7QJ, UK
M. McEVOY
Affiliation:
Teagasc Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
S. WATSON
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Applied Plant Science and Biometrics Division, New Forge Lane, Belfast, Co. Antrim, UK
M. O'DONOVAN*
Affiliation:
Teagasc Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars are out-breeding populations of differing phenotypes, potentially allowing for directional selection to occur after sowing. To investigate this, the morphology of individual space plants (i.e. isolated plants sown at 0·75 m row spaces) grown from tillers extracted from single-cultivar swards subjected to frequent cutting (FC) or infrequent cutting (IC) for 5 years (aged accessions) were compared with plants grown from seed (seed accessions). The study examined 12 cultivars, creating 36 ‘accessions’ of 80 plants in each. These plants were examined for 23 morphological measurements to test for and classify directional selection in perennial ryegrass swards. A high degree of separation was achieved between the 12 seed accessions, validating the discriminating power of the experiment. Changes in morphological expression of plants taken from swards indicated selection in favour of particular morphological ideotypes. This directional selection was identified in 10 of the accessions subjected to FC and eight subjected to IC management. Emergence natural height (plant undisturbed height at inflorescence emergence) and plant volume (emergence width × emergence natural height) were the characters modified most between seed and aged accessions. The magnitude of these morphological changes varied between cultivars. Glencar had the greatest number of morphological characters exhibiting directional selection under frequent cutting, whereas Greengold had the greatest number exhibiting directional selection under infrequent cutting. The plants grown from aged swards were also smaller than the seed accessions in all characters, raising the possibility that they may also be less productive. The present study showed that sward management can cause and influence directional selection of plants from within the morphological range of expression within perennial ryegrass cultivars.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 154 , Issue 3 , April 2016 , pp. 456 - 471
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

Anderson, V. J. & Briske, D. D. (1995). Herbivore-induced species replacement in grasslands: is it driven by herbivory tolerance or avoidance? Ecological Applications 5, 1014–1024.Google Scholar
Briske, D. D., Boutton, T. W. & Wang, Z. (1996). Contribution of flexible allocation priorities to herbivory tolerance in C4 perennial grasses: an evaluation with 13C labeling. Oecologia 105, 151–159.Google Scholar
Brock, J. L. & Thomas, V. J. (1991). The pasture ryegrass plant, what is it? Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 53, 111–116.Google Scholar
Charles, A. H. (1970). Ryegrass populations from intensively managed leys: I. Seedling and spaced plant characters. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 75, 103–107.Google Scholar
Charles, A. H. (1973). A comparison of ryegrass populations from intensively managed permanent pastures and leys. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 81, 99–106.Google Scholar
Easton, H. S., Stewart, A. V. & Kerr, G. A. (2011). Ryegrass in pasture – breeding for resilience. In Pasture Persistence Symposium – Grassland Research and Practice Series (Ed. Mercer, C. F.), pp. 139–148. Hamilton, New Zealand: New Zealand Grassland Association.Google Scholar
European Commission (2014). Common Catalog of Varieties of Agricultural Plant Species. 21. Lolium perenne L. – Perennial ryegrass . Brussels: European Commission. Available online from: http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/propagation/catalogues/agri2011/21.html (accessed February 2015).Google Scholar
Food and Environment Research Agency (FERA) (2014). United Kingdom National List/Plant Breeders Rights Technical Protocol for the Official Examination of Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) – Perennial Ryegrass. Sand Hutton, UK: FERA.Google Scholar
Fulkerson, W. J. & Donaghy, D. J. (2001). Plant-soluble carbohydrate reserves and senescence – key criteria for developing an effective grazing management system for ryegrass-based pastures: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 261–275.Google Scholar
Gardner, A. L. (1960). Agronomic characteristics of ryegrass plants obtained from an eleven year olf sward. Grass and Forage Science 15, 259–261.Google Scholar
Gilliland, T. J. & Gensollen, V. (2010). Review of the protocols used for assessment of DUS and VCU in Europe – perspectives. In Sustainable Use of Genetic Diversity in Forage and Turf Breeding (Ed. Huyghe, C.), pp. 261–275. New York, USA: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Gilliland, T. J. & Meehan, E. J. (2014). Grass & Clover: Recommended Varieties for Northern Ireland 2013–14. Belfast, UK: DARD.Google Scholar
Grogan, D. & Gilliland, T. J. (2011). A review of perennial ryegrass variety evaluation in Ireland. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 50, 65–81.Google Scholar
Guthridge, K. M., Dupal, M. P., Kölliker, R., Jones, E. S., Smith, K. F. & Forster, J. W. (2001). AFLP analysis of genetic diversity within and between populations of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.). Euphytica 122, 191–201.Google Scholar
Hazard, L. & Ghesquière, M. (1997). Productivity under contrasting cutting regimes of perennial ryegrass selected for short and long leaves. Euphytica 95, 295–299.Google Scholar
Hazard, L. & Ghesquière, M. (1995). Evidence from the use of isozyme markers of competition in swards between short-leaved and long-leaved perennial ryegrass. Grass and Forage Science 50, 241–248.Google Scholar
Hazard, L., Barker, D. J. & Easton, H. S. (2001). Morphogenetic adaptation to defoliation and soil fertility in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne). New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 44, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazard, L., Betin, M. & Molinari, N. (2006). Correlated response in plant height and heading date to selection in perennial ryegrass populations. Agronomy Journal 98, 1384–1391.Google Scholar
Kaufman, L. & Rousseeuw, P. J. (1990). Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lee, J. M., Donaghy, D. J., Sathish, P. & Roche, J. R. (2009). Interaction between water-soluble carbohydrate reserves and defoliation severity on the regrowth of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.)-dominant swards. Grass and Forage Science 64, 266–275.Google Scholar
Lee, J. M., Matthew, C., Thom, E. R. & Chapman, D. F. (2012). Perennial ryegrass breeding in New Zealand: a dairy industry perspective. Crop and Pasture Science 63, 107–127.Google Scholar
McNeilly, T. & Roose, M. L. (1984). The distribution of perennial ryegrass genotypes in swards. New Phytologist 98, 503–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paenke, I., Sendhoff, B. & Kawecki, T. J. (2007). Influence of plasticity and learning on evolution under directional selection. The American Naturalist 170, E47–E58.Google Scholar
Pike, A., McNeilly, T. & Putwain, P. D. (1979). Survivor populations of S23 perennial ryegrass from zero-grazed and set-stocked swards. Grass and Forage Science 34, 89–94.Google Scholar
UPOV (2012). Techniques Used in DUS Examination TWF/43/23. Workshop on Data Handling, International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants Beijing, 2012. Geneva: UPOV. Available online from: www.upov.int/en/publications/workshop_on_data_handling.htm (accessed February 2015).Google Scholar
UPOV (2014). Trial Design and Techniques used in the Examination of Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability. Document TGP/8. Geneva: UPOV. Available online from: http://www.upov.int/edocs/tgpdocs/en/tgp_8.pdf (accessed February 2015).Google Scholar
Watson, S. (2001). DUST for Windows (DUSTNT): Report on Developments. TWC/19/8: UPOV Technical Working Party on Automation and Computer Programs . Geneva: UPOV.Google Scholar
Watson, S. (2012). Using the Dust Software. UPOV/data/BEI/04/12. Workshop on Data Handling, International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants Beijing, 2004 . Geneva: UPOV. Available online from: http://www.upov.int/export/sites/upov/en/publications/pdf/upov_data_bei_04_12.pdf (accessed February 2015).Google Scholar
Weatherup, S. T. C. (1998). Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability trial (DUST) Analysis System. User Manual. Belfast, UK: Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland Biometrics Division.Google Scholar