Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T22:15:01.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the growth and development of biculm wheat lines with freely tillering cultivars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. Marshall  and
W. J. R. Boyd
C. Marshall
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, School of Agriculture, University of Western AustraliaNedlands, W.A. 6009, Australia
W. J. R. Boyd
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, School of Agriculture, University of Western AustraliaNedlands, W.A. 6009, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The growth, development and grain yield of two low-tillering lines of wheat of Israeli origin were compared with those of two freely tillering Australian wheat cultivars (Gamenya and Egret) in field plots. The majority of individuals from the low-tillering selections were uniculms or biculms. Detailed observations were made on the main shoot of the biculms. There was no difference in the duration of primordia production by the main shoot apex between genotypes but the rate of initiation of spikelet primordia in the lowtillering lines was significantly greater than that of the tillering cultivars and this resulted in a large ear with more spikelets. The rate of leaf appearance was very similar in all genotypes but the later-appearing leaves of the biculms were very large in comparison with those of the cultivars. The majority of the biculms produced the tiller in T3 position. At maturity the main shoot and tiller of biculm individuals produced 60 and 40% respectively more dry weight than the equivalent shoots of the tillering cultivars. The total biomass per plant of the biculms was similar to that of Egret but less than that of Gamenya. The grain yield of the main shoot of the biculms was 50% greater than that for the tillering varieties and this was associated with an increase in the number of grains per ear as there was little difference in grain size. In the biculm a high proportion of the spikelets in the mid part of the main shoot ear produced five grains; grains from basal florets were significantly larger than those of upper florets mainly because they had a longer duration of growth. Overall the grain yield of the two tillering cultivars, either per plant or per metre of row length, was approximately 30% greater than that of the low-tillering selections. The greater growth of the main shoot axis in the biculms therefore did not compensate for the grain contributed by the tillers of the freely tillering cultivars.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 104 , Issue 1 , February 1985 , pp. 163 - 171
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

Aspinall, D. (1962). The control of tillering in the barley plant. II. The control of tiller-bud growth during ear development. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 16, 286–304.Google Scholar
Aspinall, D. (1965). The effects of soil moisture stress on the growth of barley. II. Grain growth. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 16, 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atsmon, D. & Jacobs, E. (1977). A newly bred ‘Gigas’ form of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): morphological features and thormo-photoperiodic responses. Crop Science 17, 31–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, W. J. R., Marshall, C. & Wade, L. J. (1983). Genetic and agronomic studies of determinate tiller development patterns in wheat. Proceedings of the 7th Australian Plant Breeding Conference, Adelaide, pp. 314–316.Google Scholar
Bremner, P. M. (1972). Accumulation of dry matter and nitrogen in grains in different positions of the wheat ear as influenced by shading and defoliation. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 25, 657–668.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1968). The breeding of crop ideotypes. Euphytica 17, 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1979). A barley breeding programme based on an ideotype. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93, 261–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, C. M. & Hamblin, J. (1976). The biological yield and harvest index of cereals as agronomic and plant breeding criteria. Advances in Agronomy 28, 361–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friend, D. J. C. (1965). Ear length and spikelet number of wheat grown at different temperatures and light intensities. Canadian Journal of Botany 41, 1663–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, D. P. (1973). Inflorescence development of semi dwarf and standard height wheat cultivars in different photoperiod and nitrogen treatments. Canadian Journal of Botany 51, 941–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Islam, T. M. T. & Sedgley, R. H. (1981). Evidence for a ‘uniculm effect’ in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in a Mediterranean environment. Euphytica 30, 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jewiss, O. R. (1972). Tillering in grasses – its significance and control. Journal of the British Orassland Society 27, 65–82.Google Scholar
Johnston, G. F. S. & Jeffcoat, B. (1977). Effects of some growth regulators on tiller bud elongation in cereals. New Phytologist 79, 239–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, D. R. & Whingwiri, E. E. (1980). Effect of tiller removal and shading on spikelet development and yield components of the main shoot of wheat and on the sugar concentration of the ear and flag leaf. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 7, 501–510.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1973). The control of leaf and ear size in barley. Journal of Experimental Botany 24, 567–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Faris, D. G. (1970). Plant population induced growth correlations in the barley plant main shoot and possible hormonal mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Botany 21, 787–798.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, 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohamed, G. E. S. & Marshall, C. (1979). Physiological aspects of tiller removal in spring wheat. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93, 457–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, P. B. & May, L. H. (1964). Studies on the growth of the barley apex. II. On the initiation of internode elongation in the inflorescence. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 17, 619–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahman, M. S. & Wilson, J. H. (1978). Determination of spikelet number in wheat. III. Effect of varying temperature on ear development. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 29, 459–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, R. A. (1983). Manipulation of leaf area and its effect on grain yield in droughted wheat. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 34, 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sofield, I., Evans, L. T., Cook, M. G. & Wardlaw, I. F. (1977). Factors influencing the rate and duration of grain filling in wheat. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 4, 785–797.Google Scholar
Wardlaw, I. F. (1971). The early stages of grain development in wheat: response to water stress in a single variety. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 24, 1047–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar