Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T15:37:22.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Within-field variation in grain yield, yield components and quality traits of two-row barley

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2007

A. RAJALA ,
P. PELTONEN-SAINIO ,
R. KAUPPILA ,
A. WILHELMSON ,
P. REINIKAINEN  and
J. KLEEMOLA
A. RAJALA*
Affiliation:
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Crop Production, Jokioinen, Finland
P. PELTONEN-SAINIO
Affiliation:
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Crop Production, Jokioinen, Finland
R. KAUPPILA
Affiliation:
Kemira GrowHow, Espoo, Finland
A. WILHELMSON
Affiliation:
VTT Biotechnology, Espoo, Finland
P. REINIKAINEN
Affiliation:
LP Research Centre, Lahti, Finland
J. KLEEMOLA
Affiliation:
LP Research Centre, Lahti, Finland
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Recent studies of precision cereal farming systems have documented large within-field and annual variation in grain yield and quality. The principal aim of the present study was to evaluate the degree of within- and between-field variation in biomass, yield, yield component structure and quality traits, such as grain protein of two-row barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), using crop samples collected from field patches of varying yield potential. Plant samples were collected from the fields of commercial farmers located in southern Finland in 2000 and 2001. Selection of low, intermediate and high yielding patches for crop sampling was based on aerial infrared colour images taken twice during the growing season. When stands were mature, plant samples from an area of 0·5 m2 were uprooted for yield component and quality analysis. Nitrogen accumulation prior to heading was strongly associated with biomass accumulation, indicating differences in growth potential of the different field patches. The principal yield determining trait in two-row barley was grain number/m2, whereas single grain weight (SGW) had a lesser effect on grain yield. The degree of variation in the quality parameters, namely protein and SGW, was not associated with grain yield. This suggests that within-field variation in yield potential does not determine heterogeneity of the grain yield in terms of grain weight or grain protein content.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 145 , Issue 5 , October 2007 , pp. 445 - 454
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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

AOAC (1980). Official Methods of Analysis, 13th edn. Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
Asrar, G., Fuchs, M., Kanemasu, E. T. & Hatfield, J. L. (1984). Estimating absorbed photosynthetic radiation and leaf area index from spectral reflectance in wheat. Agronomy Journal 76, 300–306.Google Scholar
Aulakh, M. S., Doran, J. W., Walters, D. T., Mosier, A. R. & Francis, D. D. (1991). Crop residue type and placement effects on denitrification and mineralization. Soil Science Society of America Journal 55, 1020–1025.Google Scholar
Baethgen, W. E., Christianson, C. B. & Lamothe, A. G. (1995). Nitrogen fertilizer effects on growth, grain yield, and yield components of malting barley. Field Crops Research 43, 87–99.Google Scholar
Bertholdsson, N. O. (1999). Characterization of malting barley cultivars with more or less stable grain protein content under varying environmental conditions. European Journal of Agronomy 10, 1–8.Google Scholar
Birch, C. J., Fukai, S. & Broad, I. J. (1997). Estimation of responses of yield and grain protein concentration of malting barley to nitrogen fertiliser using plant nitrogen uptake. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 48, 635–648.Google Scholar
Blackmore, S., Godwin, R. J. & Fountas, S. (2003). The analysis of spatial and temporal trends in yield map data over six years. Biosystems Engineering 84, 455–466.Google Scholar
Bonnett, O. T. (1961). The Oat Plant: Its Histology and Development. Bulletin 672. University of Illinois: Agricultural Experiment Station.Google Scholar
Booltink, H. W. G., van Alphen, B. J., Batchelor, W. D., Paz, J. O., Stoorvogel, J. J. & Vargas, R. (2001). Tools for optimising management of spatially variable fields. Agricultural Systems 70, 445–476.Google Scholar
Boonchoo, S., Fukai, S. & Hetherington, S. E. (1998). Barley yield and grain protein concentration as affected by assimilate and nitrogen availability. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 49, 695–704.Google Scholar
Borghi, B. (1999). Nitrogen as determinant of wheat growth and yield. In Wheat: Ecology and Physiology of Yield Determination (Eds Satorre, E. H. & Slafer, G. A.), pp. 67–84. New York: Food Products Press.Google Scholar
Cottrell, J. E., Dale, J. E. & Jeffcoat, B. (1982). The effects of daylength and treatment with gibberellic acid on spikelet initiation and development in Clipper barley. Annals of Botany 50, 57–68.Google Scholar
Craufurd, P. Q. & Cartwright, P. M. (1989). Effect of photoperiod and chlormequat on apical development and growth in a spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivar. Annals of Botany 63, 515–525.Google Scholar
Dobermann, A. & Ping, J. L. (2004). Geostatistical integration of yield monitor data and remote sensing improves yield maps. Agronomy Journal 96, 285–297.Google Scholar
Earl, R., Taylor, J. C., Wood, G. A., Bradley, I., James, I. T., Waine, T., Welsh, J. P., Godwin, R. J. & Knight, S. M. (2003). Soil factors and their influence on within-field crop variability, Part I: field observation of soil variation. Biosystems Engineering 84, 425–440.Google Scholar
EBC (1998). Analytica EBC. Nürnberg, Germany: Fachverlag Hans Carl Getränke.Google Scholar
Engel, R. E., Long, D. S., Carlson, G. R. & Meier, C. (1999). Method for precision nitrogen management in spring wheat: 1. fundamental relationships. Precision Agriculture 1, 327–338.Google Scholar
Fathi, G., McDonald, G. K. & Lance, R. C. M. (1997). Effects of post-anthesis water stress on the yield and grain protein concentration of barley grown at two levels of nitrogen. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 48, 67–80.Google Scholar
García del Moral, L. F., García del Moral, M. B., Molina-Cano, J. L. & Slafer, G. A. (2003). Yield stability and development in two- and six-rowed winter barleys under Mediterranean conditions. Field Crops Research 81, 109–119.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, C. M. & Blomberg, M. (2004). Estimation of leaf area index of Beta vulgaris L. based on optical remote sensing data. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 190, 197–204.Google Scholar
Home, S., Wilhelmson, A., Tammisola, J. & Husman, J. (1997). Natural variation among barley kernels. Journal of American Society of Brewing Chemistry 55, 47–51.Google Scholar
Hutley-Bull, P. D. & Schwabe, W. W. (1982). Some effects of low-concentration gibberellic acid and retardant application during early growth on morphogenesis in wheat. In Chemical Manipulation of Crop Growth and Development (Ed. McLaren, J. S.), pp. 329–342. London: Butterworth Scientific.Google Scholar
James, I. T. & Godwin, R. J. (2003). Soil, water and yield relationships in developing strategies for the precision application of nitrogen fertilizer to winter barley. Biosystems Engineering 84, 467–480.Google Scholar
Joernsgaard, B. & Halmoe, S. (2003). Intra-field yield variation over crops and years. European Journal of Agronomy 19, 23–33.Google Scholar
Jones, J. L. & Allen, E. J. (1986). Development in barley (Hordeum sativum). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 107, 187–213.Google Scholar
Jones, J. B. (1998). Plant Nutrition Manual. London: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Justes, E., Mary, B., Meynard, J.-M., Machet, J.-M. & Thelier-Huche, L. (1994). Determination of a critical nitrogen dilution curve for winter wheat crops. Annals of Botany 74, 397–407.Google Scholar
Kätterer, T., Ekersten, H., Andrén, O. & Pettersson, R. (1997). Winter wheat biomass and nitrogen dynamics under different fertilization and water regimes: application of a crop growth model. Ecological Modelling 102, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Appleyard, M. (1984). Cereal Development Guide. 2nd edn. Warwickshire, UK: Arable Unit, National Agriculture Centre.Google Scholar
Langer, R. H. (1979). How Grasses Grow. 2nd edn. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Lauer, J. G. (1991). Barley tiller response to plant density and ethephon. Agronomy Journal 83, 968–973.Google Scholar
Lawlor, D., Lemaire, G. & Gastal, F. (2001). Nitrogen, plant growth and crop yield. In Plant Nitrogen (Eds Lea, P. J. & Morot-Gaudry, J.-F.), pp. 343–368. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Passarella, V. S., Savin, R. & Slafer, G. A. (2002). Grain weight and malting quality in barley as affected by brief periods of increased spike temperature under field conditions. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 1219–1227.Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P. (1999). Growth and development of oat with special reference to source-sink interaction and productivity. In Crop Yield, Physiology and Processes. (Eds Smith, D. L. & Hamel, C.), pp. 39–66. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P. & Järvinen, P. (1995). Seeding rate effects on tillering, grain yield, and yield components of oat at high latitude. Field Crops Research 40, 49–56.Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P. & Peltonen, J. (1995). Floret set and abortion in oat and wheat under high and low nitrogen regimes. European Journal of Agronomy 4, 253–262.Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P. & Rajala, A. (2007). Duration of vegetative and generative development phases in oat cultivars released since 1921. Field Crops Research 101, 72–79.Google Scholar
Peltonen-Sainio, P., Kangas, A., Salo, Y. & Jauhiainen, L. (2006). Grain number dominates grain weight in cereal yield determination: evidence basing on 30 years' multilocation trials. Field Crops Research 100, 179–188.Google Scholar
Plant, R. E., Munk, D. S., Roberts, B. R., Vargas, R. L., Rains, D. W., Travis, R. L. & Hutmacher, R. B. (2000). Relationships between remotely sensed reflectance data and cotton growth and yield. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43, 535–546.Google Scholar
Prystupa, P., Savin, R. & Slafer, G. A. (2004). Grain number and its relationship with dry matter, N and P in the spikes at heading in response to N×P fertilization in barley. Field Crops Research 90, 245–254.Google Scholar
Przulj, N. & Momcilovic, V. (2001). Genetic variation for dry matter and nitrogen accumulation and translocation in two-rowed spring barley II. Nitrogen translocation. European Journal of Agronomy 5, 255–265.Google Scholar
SAS Institute (1985). User's Guide: Statistics. Version 5th edn. Cary, New York: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Savin, R., Stone, P. J., Nicolas, M. E. & Wardlaw, I. F. (1997). Effects of heat stress and moderately high temperature on grain growth and malting quality of barley. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 48, 615–624.Google Scholar
Serrano, L., Filella, I. & Penuelas, J. (2000). Remote sensing of biomass and yield of winter wheat under different nitrogen supplies. Crop Science 40, 723–731.Google Scholar
Sippola, J. & Yläranta, T. (1985). Mineral nitrogen reserves in soil and nitrogen fertilization of barley. Annales Agriculturae Fenniae 24, 117–124.Google Scholar
Skerritt, J. H., Adams, M. L., Cook, S. E. & Naglis, G. (2002). Within-field variation in wheat quality: implications for precision agricultural management. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 1229–1242.Google Scholar
Smith, D. L., Dijak, M., Bulman, P., Ma, B. L. & Hamel, C. (1999). Barley: physiology of yield. In Crop Yield: Physiology and Processes (Eds Smith, D. L. & Hamel, C.), pp. 67–107. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. C., Wood, G. A., Earl, R. & Godwin, R. J. (2003). Soil factors and their influence on within-field crop variability, Part II: spatial analysis and determination of management zones. Biosystems Engineering 84, 441–453.Google Scholar
Timlin, D., Pachepsky, Y., Walthall, C. & Loechel, S. (2001). The use of a water budget model and field maps to characterize water availability in a landscape. Soil and Tillage Research 58, 219–231.Google Scholar
Van Alphen, B. J. (2002). A case study on precision nitrogen management in Dutch arable farming. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 62, 151–161.Google Scholar
Vold, A. (1998). A generalization of ordinary yield responses functions. Ecological Modelling 108, 227–236.Google Scholar
Wade, A. & Froment, M. A. (2003). Barley Quality and Grain Size Homogeneity for Malting: Volume I: Agronomic Effects on Varieties. HGCA Project report No. 320. London: Home Grown Cereals Authority.Google Scholar
Wallwork, M. A. B., Logue, S. J., MacLeod, L. C. & Jenner, C. F. (1998). Effects of high temperatures during grain filling on the grain growth characteristics and malting quality of three Australian malting barleys. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 49, 1287–1296.Google Scholar
Welsh, J. P., Wood, G. A., Godwin, R. J., Taylor, J. C., Earl, R., Blackmore, S. & Knight, S. M. (2003). Developing strategies for spatially variable nitrogen application in cereals, part II: wheat. Biosystems Engineering 84, 495–511.Google Scholar
Wendroth, O., Reuter, H. I. & Kersebaum, K. C. (2003). Predicting yield of barley across a landscape: a state-space modelling approach. Journal of Hydrology 272, 250–263.Google Scholar
Wood, G. A., Welsh, J. P., Godwin, R. J., Taylor, J. C., Earl, R. & Knight, S. M. (2003). Real-time measures of canopy size as a basis for spatially varying nitrogen applications to winter wheat sown at different seed rates. Biosystems Engineering 84, 513–531.Google Scholar
Wych, R. D., Simmons, S. R., Warner, R. L. & Kirby, E. J. M. (1988). Physiology and development. In Barley (Ed. Rasmusson, D. C.), pp. 103–125. Agronomical Monographs 26. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Yamagishi, J., Nakamoto, T. & Richner, W. (2003). Stability of spatial variability of wheat and maize biomass in a small field managed under two contrasting tillage systems over 3 years. Field Crops Research 81, 95–108.Google Scholar
Zarco-Tejada, P. J., Ustin, S. L. & Whiting, M. L. (2005). Temporal and spatial relationships between within-field yield variability in cotton and high-spatial hyperspectral remote sensing imagery. Agronomy Journal 97, 641–653.Google Scholar