Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:42:11.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of seed size on growth, development and yield of monogerm sugar beet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. K. Scott ,
F. Harper ,
D. W. Wood  and
K. W. Jaggard
R. K. Scott
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, nr Loughborough, Leicestershire
F. Harper
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, nr Loughborough, Leicestershire
D. W. Wood
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, nr Loughborough, Leicestershire
K. W. Jaggard
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, nr Loughborough, Leicestershire
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Samples of monogerm sugar-beet seed which had been cleaned but not processed, contained fruits weighing 2–27 mg and true seeds weighing 0·2–5·0 mg with seed weight averaging about 20% of fruit weight. Increasing fruit size by round hole sieving resulted in progressively greater percentage emergence. Radiography revealed that one reason for this improvement was that more locules were completely filled, and fewer contained shrivelled seeds or were empty. Commercial processing of one seed lot eliminated some but not all of the empty fruits or those containing poorly developed seeds.

In the field, seedling size and root:shoot ratio increased with increasing seed size. Thus at equivalent plant densities, sugar yields were less from the smallest seed than from other grades because of the combined effects of less total growth and a less efficient partitioning of assimilates. Although improvements in establishment with increasing size grading were progressive, sugar yield at comparable plant densities was greater only from medium grades relative to the smallest grades, whilst yields from large and medium grades were similar. This difference was maintained irrespective of length of growing season or plant density.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 82 , Issue 3 , June 1974 , pp. 517 - 531
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

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

Austin, R. B. & Longden, P. C. (1967). Some effects of seed size and maturity on the yield of carrot crops. Journal of Horticultural Science 42, 239–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. N. (1959). Seed size in herbage legumes. Herbage Abstracts 29, 235–41.Google Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1966). Plant growth and crop yield. Annals of Applied Biology 57, 173–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornscheuer, E. (1972). Influence of different production regimes on sugar-beet seed. 35th Winter Congress of the International Institute of Sugar Beet Research, Report No. 2, 1–8.Google Scholar
Bremner, P. M. & Wilton, B. (1965). Transplanting sugar beet. Report of the School of Agriculture, University of Nottingham, pp. 69–73.Google Scholar
Chetram, R. S. & Heydecker, W. (1967). Moisture sensitivity, mechanical injury and gibberellin treatment of Beta vulgaris seeds. Nature, London 215, 210–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellerton, S. (1971). Sugar beet breeding and seed production. Agricultural Progress 46, 32–39.Google Scholar
Hammerton, J. L. (1961). Studies of the effects of soil aggregate size on the emergence and growth of beet (Beta vulgaris L.). 1. Seedling emergence. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 56, 213–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, R. & Scott, R. K. (1969). A comparison of methods of growing sugar-beet seed. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72, 109–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, R. W. & Holmes, J. C. (1964). The growth of the swede crop in relation to seed size. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 63, 221–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longden, P. C. (1969). A machine for rubbing small samples of sugar beet seed. Journal of the International Institute of Sugar Beet Research 4(1), 49–61.Google Scholar
Longden, P. C., Johnson, M. G. & Love, B. (1971). Sugar beet seedling emergence prediction from radiographs. Journal of the International Institute of Sugar Beet Research 5(3), 160–68.Google Scholar
MacKay, D. B. (1961). The effect of pre-washing on the germination of sugar beet. Journal of the Institute of Agricultural Botany 9, 99–103.Google Scholar
MacLachlan, J. B. (1972). Effect of seed size on yield of monogerm sugar beet (Beta vulgaris). Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 11, 233–6.Google Scholar
Peto, F. H. (1964). Methods of loosening tight seed caps in monogerm seed to improve germination. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 13(3), 281–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, R. K. (1967). Sugar beet seed production. Agricultural Progress 42, 112–18.Google Scholar
Scott, R. K., English, S. D., Wood, D. W. & Unsworth, M. H. (1973). The yield of sugar beet in relation to weather and length of growing season. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 81, 339–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savitsky, V. F. (1954). Relation between the weight of fruit and weight of germ in monogerm and multigerm beets. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 8(2), 16–21.Google Scholar
TeKrony, D. M. & Hardin, E. H. (1968). The problem of under-developed seeds occurring in monogerm sugar beets. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 15(7), 623–39.Google Scholar