Hostname: page-component-669899f699-b58lm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T16:32:40.256Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in development of contrasting rice cultivars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. Senanayake ,
R. E. L. Naylor ,
S. K. De Datta  and
W. J. Thomson
N. Senanayake
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Aberdeen, AB9 1UD, UK
R. E. L. Naylor
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Aberdeen, AB9 1UD, UK
S. K. De Datta
Affiliation:
International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines
W. J. Thomson
Affiliation:
Crop Biology Department, SAC-Aberdeen, AB9 1UD, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Experiments were conducted in glasshouses at IRRI, Philippines, during 1987 and 1988 to identify varietal differences in apical development using six rice cultivars having extreme characters; Jirasar 280 (early senescence), Neo-Dunghan 1 (late senescence), Macunting (small seeds), ABB (large seeds), C12474–1 (long culm), and B581–A6–458 (short culm); and five cultivars, IR20, IR22, IR34, IR54, IR64, of the same growth duration.

The length of time from physiological panicle initiation (PI) to flowering varied from 25 to 50 days. The onset of physiological PI occurred when the fourth penultimate leaf was fully exserted. The visual panicle initiation stage (VPI) coincided with spikelet differentiation in all cultivars. Nitrogen top-dressing at 55–57 days before the anticipated maturity date (the present N management recommendation) did not coincide with the actual panicle initiation stage in any of the cultivars and the major yield determinants (i.e. the primary and secondary branches) therefore differentiated in conditions of internal nitrogen shortage. Spikelet abortion took place both before and after flowering. Reduction of pre-flowering abortion is important in increasing rice grain yields and could be achieved by improved N management. It is important to recognise cultivar differences and periods of loss of potential yield in developing efficient N management protocols.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 123 , Issue 1 , August 1994 , pp. 35 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Akimoto, S. & Togari, Y. (1939). Varietal differences in panicle development of rice with reference to early and late transplanting. Proceedings of the Crop Science Society of Japan 11, 168–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Datta, S. K. (1981). Principles and Practices of Rice Production. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Hall, V. L., Sims, J. L. & Johnston, T. H. (1968). Timing of nitrogen fertilization of rice. II. Culm elongation as a guide to optimum timing of applications near midseason. Agronomy Journal 60, 450–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Appleyard, M. (1984). Cereal Development Guide, 2nd edn.Stoneleigh: National Agricultural Centre, Arable Unit.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M., Appleyard, M. & Fellowes, G. (1985). Variation in development of wheat and barley in response to sowing date and variety. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 104, 383–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ling, C. H., Cai, Z. J. & Sou, S. P. (1980). The practical value of using the leaf index and leaf remainder in determining the stages of panicle differentiation of the rice plant. Scientia Agriculturea Sinica 14, 1–11.Google Scholar
Matsushima, S. (1961). Theory and Technique of Rice Cultivation, Determination of Yield and its Application. Department of Agriculture, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Google Scholar
Matsushima, S. & Manaka, T. (1957). Developmental Process of the Young Panicle of Rice and its leienlificaiion (In Japanese, English summary). Nogyo, Gjutsu: Kyokai.Google Scholar
Ming, H. L. (1974). Studies on the relation among the leaf age index, the stage of panicle development and number of tillers in rice. Journal of Taiwan Agricultural Research 23 (3), 175–186.Google Scholar
Naylor, R. E. L. & Munro, L. M. (1993). Apical development in barley and wheat varieties. Aspects of Applied Biology 34, 105–110.Google Scholar
Naylor, R. E. L., Sinclair, K. D. & Stokes, D. T. (1988). The development of triticale in comparison with other cereals in northern Scotland. Crop Research 28, 13–24.Google Scholar
Senanayake, N., De Datta, S. K., Naylor, R. E. L. & Thomson, W. J. (1991). Lowland rice apical development: stages and cultivar differences detected by electron microscopy. Agronomy Journal 83, 1013–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srivastava, D. P. (1981). Development stages in very early maturing rice cultivars and their significance in varietal performance. Oryza 18, 143–146.Google Scholar
Tanaka, A., Navasero, S. A., Garcia, G. V., Parao, P. T. & Ramirez, E. (1964). Growth habit of the rice plant in the tropics and its effect on N response. International Rice Research Institute, Technical Bulletin 3.Google Scholar
Vergara, B. S. & Chang, T. T. (1985). Flowering Response of Rice Plants to Photoperiodism: Review of Literature (4th Edn). Los Baños, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S. (1981). Fundamentals of Rice Crop Science. Los Baños, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T. & Konzac, C. F. (1974). A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Research 14, 415–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar