Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:11:50.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of foliar applied chlormequat on radiation attenuation by winter barley canopies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. F. Green ,
T. C. K. Dawkins  and
B. Hunter
C. F. Green
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LE12 5RD
T. C. K. Dawkins
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LE12 5RD
B. Hunter
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Nottingham, School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LE12 5RD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Biomass production in barley is determined by the amount of solar radiation absorbed by the foliage (Gallagher & Biscoe, 1978). As incident irradiance per unit area varies little between neighbouring sites and seasons in the cereal growing areas of the U.K. (Monteith, 1978), biomass production will largely be governed by the size of the canopy, the orientation of canopy constituents and the efficiency of conversion of absorbed radiation into dry matter (Green, 1984). Reviewing the literature, Monteith & Elston (1983) have highlighted the constancy of mean seasonal efficiency, concluding that growth is limited by the ability of the stand to absorb radiation.

Type
Short Note
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 105 , Issue 1 , August 1985 , pp. 213 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

Feucht, D., Schmitz, M. & Hofner, N. (1982). Changes in leaf blades and the chlorophyll content of flag leaves of winter wheat due to growth regulator applications. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenernahrung und Bodenkunde 145, 288–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, J. N. & Biscoe, P. V. (1978). Radiation absorption, growth and yield of cereals. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 91, 47–60.Google Scholar
Goring, H. & Munnich, H. (1976). Effects of CCC onshoot and root growth. Acda Universitatis Nicolai Copernici, Biologia 18, 89–93.Google Scholar
Green, C. F. (1984). Discriminants of productivity in small grain cereals. Journal of the National Institute of Agricultural Botany 16, 454–464.Google Scholar
Green, C. F. & Ivins, J. D. (1984). Late infestations of take-all (Gaeumannomyces graminis var. ritici) on winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ov. Virtue) crops: yield components and photosynthetic potential. Field Crops Research 8, 199–207.Google Scholar
Kifafunda-Twine, J. (1979). The effect of synthetic growth regulators on growth and yield of barley (Hordeum sativum Jess.) grown at different moisture regimes. Dissertation Abstracts International B, 39, 5172.Google Scholar
Kushuchowa, S., Munnich, H. & Goring, H. (1979). The effect of chlorocholine chloride and etahel on cell division and cell elongation in primary leaves of wheat seedlings. Biologia Plantarum 27, 42–50.Google Scholar
Ledent, J. F. (1978). Changes in the angle and curvature of the uppermost leaves of winter wheat. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 90, 319–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteith, J. L. (1973). Principles of Environmental Physics, pp. 21—22. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Monteith, J. L. (1978). The physical basis of maximum yield. In Maximising Yields of Crops. ADAS. ARC Symposium, Harrogate, pp. 19–23. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Monteith, J. L. & Elston, J. (1983). Performance and productivity of foliage in the field. In The Growth and Functioning of Leaves(ed. Dale, J. E. and Milthorpe, F. L.), pp. 499–518. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robertson, G. A. & Greenway, H. (1973). Effects of CCC on drought resistance of Triticum aestivum L. and Zea mays L. Annals of Botany 37, 929–934.Google Scholar
Roebuck, J. (1980). Recent trends in growth regulators for wheat. In Winter Wheat. Proceedings of the 16th NIAB Crop Conference, pp. 47–52.Google Scholar
Smith, A. R. & Thomas, T. H. (1979). Hormonal control of growth. Annual Report of the Plant Breedi Institute, UK, pp. 91–92.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, N. G. (1957). Statistical Methods, pp. 166–169. Iowa: State University Press.Google Scholar
Thomasson, A. J. (1971). Soils of the Melton Mowbray District. Memorandum of the Soil Survey of Great Britain.Google Scholar
Treharne, K., Hewitt, E., Hoad, G. & Child, R. (1983). The bioregulation of wheat growth and yield. In Better British Wheat (ed. Hardcastle, J.), pp. 19–21. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Zadoks, J. S., Chang, T. T. & Konzak, C. F. (1974). A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Research 14, 415–421.Google Scholar