Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-495rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-06T22:05:29.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Development in barley (Hordeum sativum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. L. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture (Crop Husbandry), University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales
E. J. Allen
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture (Crop Husbandry), University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales

Summary

Four experiments are reported which studied the effects of date of sowing on the development of winter and spring barley. The first three experiments (1979–80, 1980–1, 1982–3) were carried out at Trefloyne, Tenby and used the varieties Sonja (winter) and Jupiter (spring). The final experiment (1983–4) was carried out in Cambridge using the varieties Igri (winter) and Triumph (spring). A wide range of dates of sowing (August-June) was used and there were considerable differences in temperature between seasons.

In both Sonja and Igri, delaying sowing from August to mid-February reduced the number of mainstem leaves but further delay in sowing increased the number of leaves. In Jupiter, delaying sowing until late October had little effect but further delay consistently reduced the number of leaves. In Triumph, delaying sowing reduced final number of leaves over the whole range (October-May).

In all experiments rate of leaf emergence was characterized by long periods when leaves emerged linearly with time, despite considerable variation in temperature. The only consistent changes in rate of leaf emergence occurred shortly after each equinox, rates slowing in the autumn and increasing in the spring. Rates of leaf emergence were similar in different seasons and sites for similar periods despite differences in temperature.

Initiation of spikolet primordia proceeded linearly with time for most dates of sowing. For winter varieties rates of spikelet initiation increased with delay in sowing provided emergence occurred before the spring equinox. Further delay in sowing decreased the rate of spikelet initiation. In contrast in Jupiter and Triumph the rate increased with each delay in sowing. During periods of low temperature, rate of spikelet initiation slowed but frequently increased to faster rates in succeeding increasing temperatures. Such increasing temperatures had no effect on rate of initiation of later-sown treatments which had not experienced the low temperatures. Effects on spikelet initiation were found when no effects on leaf emergence could be detected.

Initiation of spikelet primordia in all varieties appeared to begin when a fixed number of leaves (different in some varieties) had emerged and end when a fixed number of leaves were left to emerge. Delaying sowing in winter varieties until February and in Jupiter over the whole range reduced the number of leaves emerging during spikelet initiation and was the developmental mechanism through which large differences in date of sowing became small differences in date of anthesis (and grain maturity).

Attempts to relate development to temperature were unsuccessful and the major influence on development appeared to be daylength. Number of emerged mainstem leaves was the most consistent measure of development over sites, seasons and varieties and for winter varieties was influenced by the direction of change of daylength at emergence. Two positive linear relationships between number of leaves and daylength at emergence were found for the periods from summer to winter solstice and from spring equinox to summer solstice. The slope of the latter relationship was greater than the former. For the period from winter solstice to spring equinox a negative linear relationship between number of leaves and daylength at emergence was found. In Triumph number of leaves decreased with decreasing daylength in the autumn and decreased further with increasing daylength. The effects in Jupiter were less clear but there was evidence of the effect of both daylength at emergence and direction of change on number of leaves.

In view of the control of number of leaves exercised by daylength, close negative linear relationships between time from sowing to anthesis and date of sowing were found. The significance of the results for relating agronomic practice to development is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Baker, C. K. & Gallagher, J. N. (1983). The development of winter wheat in the field. 1. Relation between apical development and plant morphology within and between seasons. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 101, 327335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canada Department of Agriculture (1974). Selected tables and conversions used in agrometeorology and related fields. Publication 1522.Google Scholar
Cannell, R. Q. (1969). The tillering pattern in barley varieties. II. Effect of temperature, light intensity and daylength on the frequency of occurrence of the coleoptile node and second tillers in barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72, 423435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chujo, H. (1966). Differences in vernalisation in wheat under various temperatures. Proceedings of the Crop Science Society of Japan 35, 177186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. P. & Russell, G. (1984). Plant development and grain yield in spring and winter barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102, 8595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, S. A. & Hough, M. (1984). The effects of several husbandry factors on the growth and yield of winter sown barley at four sites in each of three years. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 655–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, J. N., Biscoe, P. V. & Dennis-Jones, R. (1983). Environmental influences on the development, growth and yield of barley. In Barley: Production and Marketing (ed. Wright, G. M. and Wyn-Williams, R. B.), pp. 2149. Agronomy Society of New Zealand Special Publication No. 2.Google Scholar
Hay, R. K. M. & Abbas Al-Ani, M. K. (1983). The physiology of forage rye (Secale cereale). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 101, 6370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, R. K. M. & Tunnicliffe Wilson, G. (1982). Leaf appearance and extension in field-grown winter wheat plants: the importance of soil temperature during vegetative growth. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 99, 403410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Appleyard, M. (1984). Cereal plant development and its relation to crop management. In Cereal Production. Proceedings of the 2nd International Summer School in Agriculture held by the Royal Dublin Society in cooperation with the W. K. Kellog Foundation (ed. Gallagher, E. J.), pp. 161173. London: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M., Apfleyard, M. & Fellowes, G. (1982). Effect of sowing date on the temperature response of leaf emergence and leaf size in barley. Plant, Cell and Environment 5, 477484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M., Appleyard, M. & Fellowes, G. (1985). Effect of sowing date and variety on main shoot leaf emergence and number of leaves of barley and wheat. Agronomie 5 (2) 117126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Ellis, R. P. (1980). A comparison of spring barley grown in England and in Scotland. 1. Shoot apex development. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 95, 101110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Jones, H. G. (1977). The relations between the main shoot and tillers in barley plants. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88, 381–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Riggs, T. J. (1978). Developmental consequences of two-row and six-row ear types in spring barley. 2. Shoot apex, leaf and tiller development. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 91, 207216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, J. C. (1979). Effects of date of sowing on contrasting barley varieties. Ph.D. thesis. University College of Wales, Aberystwyth.Google Scholar
Russell, G., Ellis, R. P., Brown, J., Milbourn, G. M. & Hayter, A. M. (1982). The development and yield of autumn- and spring-sown barley in south east Scotland. Annals of Applied Biology 100, 167178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, R. K. & Dennis-Jones, R. (1976). The physiological background of barley. Journal of the National Institute of Agricultural Botany 14, 182187.Google Scholar
Seale, R. S. & Hodge, C. A. H. (1976). Soils of the Cambridge and Ely District. Soil Survey Special Survey No. 10.Google Scholar
Soil Survey Record (1974). No. 24. 1. Soils in Dyfed II (Pembroke Haverfordwest).Google Scholar
Tottman, D. R. & Makepeace, R. J. (1979). An explanation of the decimal code for the growth stages of cereals, with illustrations. Annals of Applied Biology 93, 221234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, A. H., Bragg, P. L., Porter, J. R. & Rayner, J. H. (1984). A winter wheat crop simulation model without water or nutrient limitations. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102, 371382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar