Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:37:22.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relation of seed vigour to field establishment of garden pea cultivars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. A. Perry
D. A. Perry
Affiliation:
Scottish Horticultural Research Institute, Invergowrie, Dundee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Emergence trials of five different seed lots each of cv. Lincoln and Kelvedon Wonder at six centres provided 27 different sowing treatments. Although mean emergence between treatments varied, the rank order of the lots remained almost constant. The results of seedling evaluation and conductivity vigour tests correlated well with field emergence, with neither test superior to the other. Grades of vigour were established and related to the performance of the seed lots in the field trials.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 74 , Issue 2 , April 1970 , pp. 343 - 348
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

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

Anon. (1966). International rules for seed testing. Proc. int. Seed Test. Ass. 31' 1–152.Google Scholar
Bayliss, G. T. S. (1941). Fungi which cause preemergence injury to garden peas. Ann. appl. Biol. 28' 210–18.Google Scholar
Bayliss, G. T. S.Deshpande, R. S.Stohey, I. F. (1943). Effect of seed treatment on emergence of peas. Ann. appl. Biol. 39' 19–26.Google Scholar
Caldwell, W. P. (1960). Laboratory evaluation of vigour of garden peas. Proc. Ass. off. Seed Analysts N. Am. 50' 130–6.Google Scholar
Clabk, B. E.Baldauf, D. (1958). A cold test for peaseeds. Proc. Ass. off. Seed Analysts N. Am. 48' 133–5.Google Scholar
Flentje, N. (1964). Pre-emergence rotting of peas in South Australia. II. Factors associated with the soil. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 17' 651–64.Google Scholar
Haenseler, C. M. (1925). Pea root rot studies. Rep. New Jers. St. agric. Exp. Stn 37' 403–14.Google Scholar
Heydeckeb, W. (1965). Report of the vigour test committee' 1962–1963. Proc. int. Seed Test. Ass. 30' 369–78.Google Scholar
Hynes, H. J.Wilson, R. D. (1939). Fungicidal treatment of pea seed. Beneficial results from dusting. Agric. Oaz. N.S.W. 50' 657–9.Google Scholar
Isely, D. (1957). Vigor tests. Proc.Ass.off.Seed.Analysts N.Am. 47' 176–82.Google Scholar
Kendall, M.G. (1962). Rank Correlation Methods, 3rd ed London:Charles Griffen.Google Scholar
King, J.M. (1967). Vining peas, plant populations and profitability. Agriculture,. Lond.74' 167–70.Google Scholar
Matthews, S. & Brandnock, W.T. (1967). The detection of seed samples of wrinkle-seeded peas (Pisumsativum L.) of potentially low planting value. Procint. Seed Test. Ass. 32' 553–63.Google Scholar
Perry, D.A. (1968). Vigour of germination in vitro as an indicator of field emergence ability in peas. Hort.Res. 7' 148–50.Google Scholar
Perry, D.A. (1969).Seed vigour in peas (Pisum sativumL.) Proc. int. Seed Test:Ass.. 34' 221–32.Google Scholar
Schoornel, A.F. (1957). Pea disease survey in Wisconsin.The use of soil tests in seed testing. Proc. int. Seed Test. Ass.. 22' 287–98.Google Scholar
Wellington, P.S. (1962). An analysis of discrepancies between germination capacity and field establishment of peas. J. natn. Inst. agric. Bot.9' 160–9.Google Scholar
Jones, F.R. & Linford, M.B. (1925). Pea disease survey in Wisconsin.Res. Bull, agric. Exp. Stn Univ.Wis.. 64' 21–2.Google Scholar
Jones, F.R. & Linford, M.B. (1925). Pea disease survey in Wisconsin.Res. Bull, agric. Exp. Stn Univ.Wis.. 64' 21–2.Google Scholar