Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T03:43:07.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationship between light interception, ground cover and leaf area index in potatoes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. M. Firman  and
E. J. Allen
D. M. Firman
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3DX, UK
E. J. Allen
Affiliation:
Cambridge University Farm, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In field studies of two varieties in Cambridge, UK, in 1985 and 1986, the percentage of total incident radiation intercepted by potato canopies with complete ground cover was as low as 80% for some plots but approached 100% in dense canopies. Although percentage ground cover is useful for assessing canopy growth, it is not wholly suitable for estimating light interception and may lead to serious errors in calculation of efficiency of conversion into dry matter.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 113 , Issue 3 , December 1989 , pp. 355 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

Biscoe, P. V. & Gallagher, J. N. (1977). Weather, dry matter production and yield. In Environmental Effects on Crop Physiology (Eds Landsberg, J. & Cutting, C. V.), pp. 75–100. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bremner, P. M. & Radley, R. W. (1966). Studies in potato agronomy. II. The effects of variety and time of planting on growth, development and yield. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 65, 253–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burstall, L. & Harris, P. M. (1983). Estimation of percentage light interception from leaf area index and percentage ground cover in potatoes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 100, 241–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burstall, L. & Harris, P. M. (1986). The physiological basis for mixing varieties and seed ‘ages’ in potato crops. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 106, 411–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahem, M. & Haverkort, A. J. (1988). Comparison of the growth of potato crops grown in autumn and spring in North Africa. Potato Research 31, 557–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haverkort, A. J. & Harris, P. M. (1986). Conversion coefficients between intercepted solar radiation and tuber yields of potato crops under tropical highland conditions. Potato Research 29, 529–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurana, S. C. & McLaren, J. S. (1982). The influence of leaf area, light interception and season on potato growth and yield. Potato Research 25, 329–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millard, P. & Marshall, B. (1986). Growth, nitrogen uptake and partitioning within the potato (Solatium tuberosum L.) crop, in relation to nitrogen application. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 107, 421–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteith, J. L. (1969). Light interception and radiative exchange in crop stands. In Physiological Aspects of Crop Yield (Ed. Eastin, J. D.), pp. 89–113. Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Russell, G & Ellis, R. P. (1988). The relationship between leaf canopy development and yield of barley. Annals of Applied Biology 113, 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sale, P. J. M. (1973). Productivity of vegetable crops in a Region of high solar input. II. Yields and efficiencies of water use and energy. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 24, 751–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szeicz, G., Monteith, J. L. & Dos Santos, J. M. (1964). Tube solarimeter to measure radiation among plants. Journal of Applied Ecology 11, 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, R. K. & Wilcockson, S. J. (1980). Application of physiological and agronomic principles to the development of the potato industry. In The Potato Crop: The Scientific Basis for Improvement (Ed. Harris, P. M.), pp. 678–704. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Shibles, R. M. & Webber, C. R. (1965). Leaf area, solar radiation interception and dry matter production by soybeans. Crop Science 5, 575–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. J. & Watson, M. A. (1953). Comparative physiological studies on the growth of field crops. III. The effect of infection with beet yellows and beet mosaic viruses on the growth and yield of the sugar beet crop. Annals of Applied Biology 40, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, W. A., Loomis, R. S. & Lepley, C. R. (1965). Vegetative growth of corn as affected by population density. I. Productivity in relation to interception of solar radiation. Crop Science 5, 211–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaag, , Van Der, D. E. (1984). Reliability and significance of a simple method of estimating the potential yield of the potato crop. Potato Research 27, 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar