Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T11:58:19.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The growth of vining peas

III. The effect of shading on abscission of flowers and pods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. T. Meadley  and
G. M. Milbourn
J. T. Meadley
Affiliation:
Wye College (University of London), Ashford, Kent
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

When incoming radiation was reduced artificially to 50% daylight during the postflowering period in peas, the rate of abscission of flowers and pods increased in the same way as when the density of planting is raised. Shading from flowering onwards reduced yield almost to the level of peas that were shaded throughout the growing season, even though peas that received full daylight until flowering had many fertile tillers and a greater reproductive potential in terms of the total number of flowers produced. Conversely, when shades were removed at flowering time the crop was able to compensate and yields approached those of peas grown entirely in full daylight, this was mainly due to a reduction in absoission losses of flowers and pods so that the majority of pods formed on the main stem contributed to final yield.

It is suggested from these results that the major source of dry matter for pea yield is the photosynthate produced during the post-flowering period rather than that translocated from roots or stems following storage during the vegetative period.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , August 1971 , pp. 103 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

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

Adams, W. B. (1958). Bipening of green peas; 1957. Tech. Memo. Fruit Veg. Cann. quick Freez. Ees. Ass. p. 24.Google Scholar
Addicott, F. T. & Lynch, R. S. (1955). Physiology of abscission. A. Rev. Pl. Physiol. 6, 211–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, G. (1966). A yield tenderometer relationship in shelled peas for adjusting yield to a given maturity. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 66, 121–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardwick, R. C. (1968). On the yield of Pisum sativum L. The vining pea. Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Kertesz, Z. I. (1935). The chemical determination of the quality of canned green peas. N.Y. St. agric. exp. Stn Tech. Bull. 233.Google Scholar
Meadley, J. T. & Milbourn, G. M. (1970). The growth of vining peas. II. The effect of density of planting. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 74, 273–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milbourn, G. M. & Hardwick, R. C. (1968). The growth of vining peas. I. The effect of time of sowing. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 70, 393–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salter, P. J. & Williams, J. B. (1967). The effect of irrigation on pea crops grown at different plant densities. J. hort. Sci. 42, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar