Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:30:41.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of methods of growing sugar-beet seed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. Hull  and
R. K. Scott
R. Hull
Affiliation:
Broom's Barn Experimental Station, Higham, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk
R. K. Scott
Affiliation:
Broom's Barn Experimental Station, Higham, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Two experiments with sugar-beet seed crops at Dunholme Field Station Lincolnshire,1955–7, one at Broom's Barn, Suffolk, 1963–4, and two in Bedfordshire 1965–7, compared transplanting with various direct.drilling techniques. The early experiments were made with multigerm varieties and the 1965–7 experiments with genetic monogerm varieties.

At Dunholme direct drilling under a barley cover crop controlled virus yellows and yielded more multigerm seed suitable for processing than did transplanting. In later experiments transplanting gave variable yields; pests damaged plots transplanted in autumn and those transplanted in spring were susceptible to drought. Many transplants lodged and ripened late and direct drillings produced seed that germinated better.

Direct drilling during July with no cover crop consistently yielded better than undersowing or open drilling in August. To establish a regular, dense stand of plants, which is essential for large yields of seed of good germination was more difficult with than without cover crops. The time the cover crop was removed did not consistently affect yield. Crops sown in summer without cover yield most seed but are most susceptible to disease and are unsuitable for areas with a disease risk.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , January 1969 , pp. 109 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

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

Bornscheuer, E. (1959). The influence of cultivation of stecklings and the development of the sugar beet seed crop on seed yield and quality. Ph.D. thesis' Georg-August University, Gottingen.Google Scholar
Byford, W. J.Hull, R. (1967). Some observations on the economic importance of sugar-beet downy mildew in England. Ann. appl. Biol. 60, 281–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coy, R. (1966). Production of sugar-beet seed under existing conditions. J. int. Inst. Sug. Beet Res. 1' 127–33.Google Scholar
Ellerton, S. (1947). An experiment to show the effect of nitrogenous fertilisers and of topping the stem on the yield and quality of sugar beet seed. Report to the 10th Winter Congress of the International Institute for Sugar Beet Research.Google Scholar
Hull, R. (1954). Control of yellows in sugar beet seed crops in Great Britain. Agriculture, Lond. 61, 205–10.Google Scholar
Hull, R. (1961). The health of the sugar beet crop in Great Britain. J. R. agric. Soc. 122, 101–112.Google Scholar
Jensen, V. (1963). Production of sugar beet seed with special regard to wintering of stecklings in the field. Zucker 16, 596–600.Google Scholar
Scott, R. K. (1967). Sugar beet seed production. Agric. Prog. 42, 112–18.Google Scholar
Scott, R. K. (1968). A survey of sugar beet seed growing in Europe and N. America. I.I.R.B. (in the Press).Google Scholar
Sneddon, J. L. (1963). Sugar beet seed production experiments. J. natn. Inst. agric. Bot. 9, 333–45.Google Scholar