Effects of reduced plant height on breeding requirements and ...

University <strong>of</strong> ManiÈoba 

EFT'ECTS OF REDUCED PLANT IIEIGHT ON BREEDING REQUIREMENTS AND 

AGRONOMIC BEHAVIOI'R IN BARLEY, HORDEITM VI'LGARE, 1,. 

by 

Brian Gordon Rossnagel 

A Thesís 

SubnitËed to the Faculty 

GraduaËe Studies 

In Pârtial Fulfíllment <strong>of</strong> the 

Requirements for the Degree 

<strong>of</strong> 

Doctor <strong>of</strong> Philosophy 

DeparLment <strong>of</strong> Plant Science 

Jrme 1978

EFFTCTS OF RIDUCED PLANT HEIGHT I"}N BREEDINÊ REQL|IRE¡4ENTS A'I!D 

AGRrJNO¡IIC BEHAVIÔUR iN BARLEY, HNRDEUM VULI,{IE, L. 

BY 

BRIAN âTìRDNN RT]SSNAGTL 

A dissertîtiorì subnritted to the Faculty <strong>of</strong> Graduatc Studies <strong>of</strong> 

thc Univcrsity ol Ma¡ìitobr in partial fulfillment <strong>of</strong>'thc requirements 

ol' thc dcglcr' ol' 

DOCTOR OF PH¡LOSOP¡¡Y 

6 rc¡e 

l't:¡-flrissiort lras lrccrt gfilrttcd to ihc LllìllitRY o l.' T'lltì LJNlvUlL- 

SII Y ol' ltl^Nl1'olJA to lcrrd or scll copics <strong>of</strong> this tlisscrtatir.¡n, to 

thc N^TIONAL LIBR^l{Y ()þ'(ì^NAl)A t{) nl¡crol¡ln¡ this 

rlissertrtion rnd to lend or sell copics <strong>of</strong> the l'ilnr, ¿nd UNIVtIRSITY 

MIcROFILMS to publish an rbstruct <strong>of</strong> this dissertation. 

Tho uuflìo!' rcscrvcs othcr. ¡rublicatiou r¡ghts, i¡nd ne¡thrjr the 

dissertation lror extcnsivc cxtracts lron.l it Ùray bc ¡Sl,;iterl or other- 

wisc rcprr.rduecd w¡t¡ìout I ho aullloÍ's wÌitfen ¡rernrission.

ACKNOWI,EDGMENTS 

It has been a great privilege to study under the supervision 

<strong>of</strong> Dr. S.B. Helgason to whom I an indebted for hís 

guidance during my research and the preparation <strong>of</strong> this 

manuscrÌpt. f wish also to acknowledge the assistance <strong>of</strong> 

the other members <strong>of</strong> the examination commLttee for their 

patience and assl-stance durlng the course <strong>of</strong> my years at 

the Universíty <strong>of</strong> Manítoba. 

I especíally wish to thank Dr. R.J. Baker <strong>of</strong> Agriculture 

Canada, Winnlpeg whose guiding hand was <strong>of</strong> invaLuable assls- 

tance Ín analyzing and interpreting my data. 

Ihe kind assistance <strong>of</strong> Dr. D.C. Rasmusson and the 

Ðepartnent <strong>of</strong> Agronomy and Plant Genetics <strong>of</strong> the UniversÍty 

<strong>of</strong> Minnesota is aLso acknowledged. 

I wish to tharù D.F. Sahnon' 1,. 0'Brien, G.C. Seoles 

and T,. Hopkins for providlng much needed physical and 

technícal assistance at critical tLmes during my research, 

and I am also indebted to the following persons or ínstitutlons 

who provided land on whÍch much <strong>of</strong> my research was 

carried out: Agriculture Canada Research Statíon, Brandon 

(or. n.l. Ìfolfe), Sissons Farms ltd., Portage l-a Prairie 

and G. Kaberníck Farms, Sanford. 

Financial support in the form <strong>of</strong> post-graduate scholar-

shíps from the National Research Council <strong>of</strong> Canada, the 

Brewing and Malting Barley Research Institute, \{innipeg and 

the University <strong>of</strong> Manitoba ls gratefully acknowledged. 

Thanks are also due to ny typíst, Marian f.,oshack, whose 

speed, accuracy and wil"lingness to work anyt irne were much 

apprecíated. 

f al-so wish to acknowledge the assistance <strong>of</strong> my wife, 

LaureL, whose perseverance, patíence and help during the 

course <strong>of</strong> rny research, particularly during the writing <strong>of</strong> 

the manuscrtrpt, was <strong>of</strong> utmost lmportance. 

FinaLly I wish to dedicate this thesis to the memory 

<strong>of</strong> my father, Charles J. Rossnagel- <strong>of</strong> Plumas, Manltoba whose 

love for agriculture and particular i.nterest in crops 

instllled in me the deslre to continue my educatíon in my 

chosen flel-tl <strong>of</strong> trop Science and Agronomy. 

íii

ÎABI,E OF TONTENTS 

av 

írÞâ dô r, 

. Etrv 

],IËIOFTÀBIjES ..... xi 

ABSÎRÀCÍ¡.¡.xvii 

INIRODUCfÏON . . . 

I,ITERATI.IRE REVIEìf 

Seni-dwarf Growth Habit .... 

Heritability and Selection . 

Correlations ¡ r r 

Response to Nitrogen FertÍlization o . 

Rou¡ Spac ing in Cereals . r . . 

Seeding Rate in Cereafs 

Ernergence, PJ-anting Depth and toleoptile 

length in Semi-dwarfs .... .... G o. 

Root System Size in Serni-dwarfs .... c...... 

}iIATERIATSANDMET¡{ODS .... ". ". 40 

Experiment I: Components <strong>of</strong> Variance, Heritability 

Estimates and Phenotypic Corre lati-ons 

Experiment II: Nitrogen Fertilization <strong>of</strong> 1a11 and 

Semi-dwarfBarleys......... 

Experiment III: Row Spacíng and Seeding Rate 

Study....te.tooe.¡rrr 

5 

10 

2I 

29 

32 

37 

38 

40 

45 

49

Êxperirnent IV r Coleoptile l.,ength Study . 

Experiment V: Root Systen Size and Growth 

RateStudy.o.. 

Experiment VI: Seeding Ðepth and Emergence 

Study . 

"Pâge' 

RESUT,TS 56 

Experiment l: Components <strong>of</strong> Variance ' Heritabili-ty 

Estimates and Phenotypic Correlations . 

Components <strong>of</strong> Yaríance and lleritability 

E st imate s 

Inter-Poputation and Population-Control 

Genotl¡pe Comparisons o o.. ¡ ô. o.. 

Phenotypic Correl-ations 

Experiment II: Nitrogen 

and Seni-Dwarf Barleys 

Fertilization <strong>of</strong> î411 

PlantHeight .. . r.. o e. r t o c., 77 

Yielil . s 6.. . o. r.. 77 

Spikes per Unit Area ....... 84 

Kernels per Spike o ' e o.. o..... o. o.. 87 

200KernelWeíghto¡o. ..... 90 

Ðegree <strong>of</strong> lodging o o . . . . o . o o o o o 94 

TestWeight... o 98 

Days tolieading ¡ . r s . . . t o ¿ o . . . 103 

51 

53 

55 

56 

56 

6'J- 

67 

76

Þâ o-â r 

Days to l'{aturity .... .,108 

Days in Post-Ànthesis ...114 

Percent Earley Nitrogen o ¡ . . " .118 

levels <strong>of</strong> ALpha-amylase . r . ô . I . . . . . . . . L23 

SaccharifyingActivit¡r. . . . t ¡ o L23 

Soluble Amíno-Nitrogen . . c¡....'""129 

Experiment lII: Row Spacing anC Seeding Rate 

Study.r...e.ro..I29 

Plant Height . ". Ò 0... c....... t ¡ o ¡ L29 

Yield..ô¿0..r"."134 

Spikes per Unit Àrea o ..¡139 

Kernels per Spike ",., " :-42 

200KernelWeight c. o. .,...146 

îestWeight o o. û 146 

Percent Barley Nftrogen ........ ¡ o 150 

Experiment IT: Coleoptile 1-,ength Study 154 

Extrleriment V: Root System Size and Growth 

Rate Study o. o c 

Experirnent Vï: Seeding Depth and Ene*genee 

Study.... 

DISCUSS]ON 

160 

L65 

t1A

vaa 

"Page ii 

Experiment I: C omponents <strong>of</strong> Variance, Heritabílity 

Estimates and Phenot)tpic Correlations . . , Lt4 

Components <strong>of</strong> Yariance and Heritability 

SstÍmates ø... ",,. u4 

P1ant Height . " 

....175 

Kernel Weight ,. L76 

Degree <strong>of</strong> T,odging . . . o o . è o '. t.I77 

lest Weíght and Percent Plunpness . . . . L77 

Days to Heading o.. r ...e.I77 

Days to Maturity and Days in Post-Anthesis . . ! 178 

Kernels per Spike ... o ¡ ¡ r ¡ 178 

Yield.¡ooo.'..","""L79 

Inter-Populat ion and Populat ion -C ontrol 

Genotype Comparisons ô o r '... r ô å 181 

Phenotypic Correlations r e o 0 .,, . . . . 184 

PlantHeight . ". ô. o... o .... 184 

Yield"¡...¡l-87 

Kernels per Spike .0.. 190 

Kernel Weight . . . . 191- 

festWeight., i... o 6 . ! .. o. o 193 

Plumpness. . ¿ o o e o e a c e o o . ¡ . ¡ . e o L93

vaal 

ËÞe rro 

Days to Heading . ".. o Lgî 

Days to Maturity .., " 195 

Lodgingûoo.¡195 

Quality Paraneters .... ¿ o. 195 

0vera11 "..".196 

Experiment II: Nitrogen Fertílizaiion <strong>of</strong> la11 

and SemÍ-dwarf Barleys L99 

PlantHeight .. . "... l-99 

Yield . 2oI 

Spikes per Unit Area ..... r. 2oz 

KerneLs per Spike .., ¡ " 2Q4 

Kerne] Weight 2o5 

Yield Conponents o... " ".,. 206 

Lodgíngo.o.206 

Te st '#e ight 2o8 

Days to Heading 208 

Days to Maturity .. c o.. ¡ c. 208 

Ðays ln Post-Anthesis " " ..oo" 208 

Quality Parameters c... zog 

Overvier,¡ ...2IO

.tÞa d.^ al 

Experiment III: 

Study . 

Row Spac ing and Seeding Rate 

..2I3 

Plant Height ". 

.,...2L3 

Yie1d" ".2L4 

Yield Components ., o. ô 2L7 

fest !'Ieight and Percent Barley Nitrogen . . 2L8 

Experiment IV: Coleoptile l,ength Study , . . 219 

Experiment V: Root System Size and Growth 

Rate Study ,. ".22o 

Experiment VI: Seeding Depth and Emergence 

Study".e.o22L 

GENERAT D]SCUSSTON 223 

SUMII{,{RY .{ND CONCI,USIÛNS " 

Experiment I; Components <strong>of</strong> Variance ' Heritability 

Estimates and Phenotypic Correlations . . . . . . . 

Experiment Il: Nitrogen Fertilization <strong>of</strong> Ta11 

and Semi-dwarf Barleys ... o.. 

Nitrogen Response o. o o 

Genotypic Differences and Genotype X 

Fertilizer Tnteraction . o ¡. 

Experinent IIf: Row Spac ing and Seeding Rate 

StudY"...oû.o.oo 

Experiment IV: Coleoptile T,ength Study . o é e . ¡. 

Experiment V: Root Systera Size and Growth 

Rate Stud}¡ e.. o 

Experinent YI: Seeding Depth and Emergence 

Study " 

234 

234 

236 

237 

237 

239 

240 

247 

24L

SUGGÊSTIONSFORFIIIURSRESEÀRCH ,.,.242 

oÞa oal 

OF RSFERENCES 

'IST 

. , 244 

APPENDIX ,,,258

TABl,E 

1. 

? 

4. 

IIST OF TABI,ES 

Broad Sense Heritability Estimates for llgronomic 

Characteristics in Bar'le¡i 

Broad Sense fierítability Estimates for Ägronomic 

Characteristics in fall x Semi-dwarf Wheat 

Crosses 

Pedigrees <strong>of</strong> Crosses and Parental l,ínes Giving 

Rise to ?opulations C-70-1, C-7A-2 and C-70-3' 

and Relative levels <strong>of</strong> Àgronornic Paraneters 

<strong>of</strong> Parental lines, Experiment I . . . 

Genotypes Used in 

Application Study, 

N itrogen-Fert iii zer 

Genotypes Used in Coleoptile lfngth-_Study and 

Emergéirce Study, Experirnent IV and Experiment 

I/T 

Genotypes Used in Root Size StudY' 

Experírnent V . . 

Components <strong>of</strong> Variance + Std. Error and 

uerita¡iIity Estinates I std. Error, Experiment 

T.." 

Experirnent II 

B. PopuJ.ation Means and Ranges <strong>of</strong> Agronomic and 

Quality Parameters, Experinent I ..... 

g, Mean Yield 0ver All Ënvironments <strong>of</strong> tiìe Híghest 

Yielding T,ines lt¡ithin the Plant Height Categorles 

(Ta11, intermediate and semi-dwarf) for Each <strong>of</strong> 

the lhree Populations, Experiment I . ' 

I0. Phenotypic Correlations, Experiment I " 

11" Nitrogen 

Fertilizer -Application Study' ANOVA 

for Pfant Height 

12. Nitrogen Fertilizer Application StuCy, Means 

for Plant Height (em. ) 

4L 

52 

54 

57 

62 

65 

68 

78 

79

11. Nitrogen Fertil-izer Application Study. 

Fertilizer X Genotype Interaction Means for 

Plant Height (cm.) at Portage, I9?5 

fþ" l.litrogen !'ertil.izer Application Study, .A.NOVÂ 

for Yield (k.s, /na.) . 

15. Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, Means 

for Yield (Y.e"/Y\a,) 

" 

16, Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, AN0VA 

for Spikes,/Unit Area ... o 

17, Nitrogen Fertil-izer Appl-ication Study, Means 

for Spikes/Unit Ârea o.. c r e.... 

18. Nitrogen Fertilizer Applícation Study, ANOYA 

f or Kerne lsrlspilce 

:..9. Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, lrleans 

for Kerne ls,/Spike 

2A. Nitrogen Fertilizer Lpplication Study' ANOVÀ 

for 200 Kernel weight 

2L Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, Means 

for 200 Kernel lfeight .. e. i. 

22" Nitrogen Fertílizer Application Study. 


200 Kernet Yfeight at Carman, 1975,.. ô r ¡.. 

23. Nitrogen Fertilizer Applicatíon Study. 

Fertilizer X Genotvpe Genotype Interaction Means for 

20ô Kernel WeÍght át Sanford, 19?6 

24. Nítrogen FertilÍzer Âlplication Study, AN0VA 

for Degree <strong>of</strong> Lodging r . . . 

25, Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, Means 

for lodging 

26, Nitrogen I'ertílizer Application Study. 


T,odging at Carman, 1975 " 

22. Nitrosen Fertilizer Application Studv. 

FertiÏizer X GenotS'pe- lnteraction Meäns for 

Lodging àt Portàge. !975 

"Page n' 

80 

81 

85 

86 

88 

89 

9l 

92 

93 

95 

96 

97 

99 

100

tÀBL,E 

ôo 

29, 

34,. 

3r, 

32, 

'¡a 

34" 

35, 

36" 

37. 

38, 

39. 

&c. 

4I. 

!{itrogen Fertilizer'A.pp1ication Study' ÄNOVA 

for test Weight (ke,/]n]-. ) 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Aôplication Study' Means 

for Test weight (kS./hL. ) 

Nitrogen Fertitízer Application Study. 

Fertilizer X Genotvpe Interaction l{eans for 

sest Weight (]xg,/]n1-.) at Carn¡an, L9?5 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study. 

Fertil-izer X Genotype Interaction Means for 

Test weight (kg"/hl ) at Portage, 1975 

'Page " 

Nitrogen Fertitizer Application Study' ÀNOrlA 

for Days to Headíng " . . 1-06 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, Means 

for Ðays to Heading 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Stud;r. 


Days to Heading at Carman, l-975 , 

Nitrogen Fertil-izer Application Study. 

Fertilízer X Genotype Interaction Means for 

Days to Heading at Portâge' 1975 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Applícation Study' -{NOY,{ 

for Days to Maturity 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study' Means 

for Days to Maturi tY 

Nitrogen Fertilizer AppJ-ication Study. 

Fertilizer X Genotl4)e Interactíon Means for 

Days to Maturity at Cattrtan, !97 5 

Nitrogen Fertil Ízer Application Study' ÀNOVA 

for Days in Post-Ànthesis . 

Nitrogen FertiÌízer Application St'rdy' Means 

for Dáys in Post-Ànthesls " 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Applícation Study' 

Fertilízer X Genotype Interaction Meqns for 

nãv=-1"-pã"t-Antheäis at Carriran, I975 ' 

l_04 

105 

lo7 

109 

110 

111 

1L2 

1-13 

l_15 

l_16 

LL7

TABT-,8 

42, 

43, 

I+4, 

r+5. 

46. 

48. 

49" 

50, 

5r. 

(t 

Nitrogen Fertilizer .A,pplicatíon Study" 

Fertj-lizer X Genotype Interaction Means for 

Days in Post-Ânthesis at Porta1en 1975 

Nitrogen Fertilizer .A.pplication Study, ANOVA 

for Barley Nitrogen 

Nitrogen Fertil-izer .a-pplication Study, Means 

for Barley Nítrogen (mS./foO S. ) 

Nitrogen Fertj-1izer Àpplication Study" 


Barley Nitrogen at Carman, 19?6 . 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, ANOVA 

for Alpha-amylase 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, Means 

for Alpha-amylase 

Nitrogen Fertil-i¿er Applicatíon Studyu 

Fe:'tílizer X Genotype Tnteraction Means for 

alpha-amylase at Portage, I97 5 

Ni-trogen Fertitizer ÀpplicatÍon Study' ANOVrl 

for saccharifying Àctivity 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study' Means 

for Saceharifying Activity 

Nitrogen Fertilizer Applieation Study" 

Fertilizer X Genotype lnteraction Means for 

Saccharífying Activity at Portage' 1975 , . i i ' 

Nitrogen Ferti-lizer Application Study, ÀNOYA 

for Soluble Âmíno-Nitrogen 

"Page " 

('t Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Study, Means 

for Soluble Amíno*Nitrogen 

L32 

54, 

55" 

Seeding Rate - Row Spac 5-ng Study, ANOVA for 

Plant Height " " 

Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study' Means for 

Plant He ieht (cm. ) . 

133 

135 

56. Seeding Rat.e -.Row Spacing Study, ANOVA for 

Yíe1d (ke,/ha.) . 136 

l-19 

720 

L21 

122 

1.24 

725 

127 

130 

131

TABI,E "Pags " 

57, Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, Ivleans for 

Yield(ke./ha.).. ....L37 

58, Seeding. Rate - Row Spacing Study, ANOVA for 

Spikes,/Unít Area .. " ".140 

59, Seeding. Rate - Row Spaci4g Study, Means for 

Spikes,/UnitAye7-(I.22m¿) ....141 

60. Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, ANoVA for 

Kernels/Spíke . . ....... ".143 

61. Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, Means for 

Kernels/Spike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l-45 

62, Seeding Rate - Row Spaeíng Study, ANCVA for 

20OKernell{eight ô..... r.6.6. o. ¡. "]'47 

63, Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, Means for 

200Kernel lveight..o. ..""e148 

64, Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, AN0VA for 

Testweight (ke'-/}r.]-).,. . o..t4s 

65, Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, Ivleans for 

TestWeight(Rq,./t.I.)."" ¡."¡151 

66, Seeding Rate - Row Spaclng Study, ANOVA for 

PereentBarleyNÍtrogen.ô.. ,,L52 

67. Seeding Rate - Row Spacing Study, Means for 

Percent Barley Nitrogen . . . . . . . r . "153 

68, AN0VA for Coleoptile length, Experiment IV . . . . L5s 

69. ÂN0VA for Root Number, Experiment IV " . ' 155 

?O. ANOVA for Root Score, Experiment IV . . . . 156 

?I, ANOVA for Shoot l,ength, Experiment IV. . . l-56 

72. Þieans for Experiment IV , " 

.¡.r157 

?3" Correlation Coefficients (r) and Rank 

CorreLation Coefficients (r") for Coleoptile 

l,ength Study, Experiment fV . . ".158

74. 

75" 

?6, 

77, 

78,. 

79, 

80. 

81" 

82, 

83. 

84. 

85, 

Ranks <strong>of</strong> Genotypes Used in Coleoptile length 

Study, Experiment IV., and Seeding Ðepth Study, 

Experiment VI .. ."...161 

tpage " 

ANOVA for Root Dry !,leight, Root Size Study, 

Experinent V . . ¡ . . . " . , . . L6z 

Genotypie Means for Root Dry Weight (me.), 

Root Slze Study, Experiment V . . "... ¡....163 

ANOVA for Root Growth Rates fron Root Size 

Study, Experiment T. " . "..".164 

Root Growth Rates (ng./wk. ) for Root SÍze 

Study, ExperÍmentV....... '...... c ¡ 166 

Ranks <strong>of</strong> Genot¡¡peð Used in Root Size Study, 

Experiment V .0.... ..,..L67 

Rank Correlations (r-) tor Root Size and 

Root Growth Rate Stutly, Experiment V ".0.. 

ANoVA for Number <strong>of</strong> Seedlings Enez'ged, 

Seeding Depth Study, Experinent VT 

¡ ¡ 168 

AN0VA for Emergence Rate, Seedlng Ðepth 

Study, Experiment VI ¡¡.170 

Mean Number <strong>of</strong> Seedlings Emerged and Mean 

Emergence Rate for Each Seeding Depth' 

Ex¡rerinent VI .. ...."170 

GenotJ¡pe Means for Number <strong>of</strong> Seedlings 

Energed and Emergence Rate, Seeding Depth 

Study, Experiment VI .......L72 

Mean Numbers <strong>of</strong> Seedlings Emerged for 

Genotype X Seeding Depth Interaction, Seeding 

Depth Study, Experiment VL . ., . " . . 173

ÂBSîRACg 

Rossnagel, Brian Gordon. Ph.D., The lJniversity <strong>of</strong> 

Manítoba, June , 1978. Eåfects <strong>of</strong> Redu-ced Plan-b Heieht 

xvl-t 

on Ëreefi:!4åReq uirements and Agronomic Behaviour Ín Barlev, 

llgrdeum Vu]-gare, i,. lvlajor Pr<strong>of</strong>essori Dr. S.B. Helgason. 

three barley, Hordeum lg¿g3g, L., populations, each 

having one semi-dwarf parent in c onmon, were inve stigated 

for tv¡o years at two locations" lhe objective was to 

estimate heritabilitÍes <strong>of</strong> several agronomic parameters, 

their genotype by environment interactions r and their interrelationships, 

with particular emphasis on <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>. 

Plant <strong>height</strong> was highly heritable and adversely related to 

all other agronomic tralts except lodging. The se adverse 

relationships, although significant, were not strong. The 

most serious drawbacks <strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> were associations 

with <strong>reduced</strong> kernel size parameters and late 

rnatwity. Environmental Ínteractions and- their effects on 

testing procedures for all- characters measured are discussed 

in the manuscript, as are further character interrelation- 

ships . 

three seni-dwarf and two tal-1 genot¡r¡les were tested 

for response to nitrogen fertilization at three locations 

during two years. No genotype by fertilizer j-nteractions

xvii i 

occurred for yield, but the se¡ni-dwarfs tended to perform 

better under more optitnu t growing cond.itions, ie. better 

weed control, moisture and fertility. 

One semi-dwarf and one ta1l genotype were tested at 

three locations to determine the effects <strong>of</strong> altered <strong>plant</strong> 

density on relative performance. Again no significant 

inieractions occurred for yie1d, ho¡/ever, there was a ten- 

dency for the semi-dwarf to show relatively greater improve- 

ment than the tâll as <strong>plant</strong> density i-ncreased. The seraj-- 

dwarf showed a negative response to adverse growing 

conditions. 

The semi-dwarfs studied appeared to achieve yield 

improvernents via increases in the nunber <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit 

area and kernels per spike, at the expense <strong>of</strong> kernel weíght. 

îhe ínterre lationships <strong>of</strong> these yield components are discussed 

with particular reference to the semi-dwarfs, as are methods 

for developing high yielding semi-dwarfs with an improved 

bâlance among the yíeld components. 

Pre liminary research was conducted to detêrmíne the 

relati-onships <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> with coleoptile length, root 

system size and growth rate, energence rate and abiÌity. 

Plant heíght was poÊitively associated with coleoptile 

length. Shorter genotJ4)es appeared to have snalLer, slower 

growÍng root systerns. Emergence rate a¿d ability were not 

affected b). <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>height</strong>. these paraneters were all 

positively associated with kerael size.

<strong>height</strong> on these traits, in three six-rowed barley populations, 

each derived from a tall by semi-dwarf cross and grown in 

Southern Manitoba. 

(Z) Oetermine the relative association <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

with several agronomic and quality parameters, and some <strong>of</strong> 

the Ínterre lationships <strong>of</strong> these traits in these sarûe three 

crosses. 

(l) Evaluate these three populations and indívidual 

Iines within each for several agronomic and quality charåcteristic 

s. 

(4) Svaluate the production potential <strong>of</strong> some selected 

short statured (semi-dwarf) barleys relative to ta1l barleys 

in South-tentral Manitoba. 

(J) Deterrnine the response <strong>of</strong> selected seni-dwarf and 

talI barley genotype s to high levels <strong>of</strong> applied nítrogen 

fertilizer in South Central Manitoba. 

(6) Evaluate the relative performance <strong>of</strong> ta11 and 

semi-dwarf genotypes when grown at various combinations <strong>of</strong> 

row spac ing ånd seeding rate in South-Central Manitoba. 

(7) Investigate the relationships between <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

and (a) root system size and growth parameters, (b) coleoptile 

length, (c) ability to, and rate <strong>of</strong>, emergence; and 

the lnterre lationships <strong>of</strong> these characteristic s. 

2

I]TERATURE REVIEW 

Semi-dwarf Growth Habit 

The advantages <strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> pl-ant <strong>height</strong> in several 

cereal crops were recognized by <strong>plant</strong> breeders and agron- 

omists well before the discovery and introduction <strong>of</strong> dwarf 

and semi-dwarf germplasms. Briggle and Vogel (1968) indieat- 

ed that the trend to shorter wheat cul-tivars in the United 

States began in the early 1940's. This was primaríly an 

attempt to improve straw strength and a1low more flexibility 

in farn management practices, especially to make better use 

<strong>of</strong> nitrogenous fertilizers. 

lhe North .A,merican semi-dwarf revolution began wi-th the 

release <strong>of</strong> "Gaines" wheat by Dr. 0. A. Vogel in the North- 

western United States ín L96L. This short strawed cultivar 

was developed via selection froln the progeny <strong>of</strong> a cross 

involving a Japånese semi-dwarf wheat, "Norin 10", which 

had been brought to the United States by Dr. S. t. Salmon 

in l-946 (Reitz and Salmon, 1968). The tremendous success 

and exceptional yielding ability <strong>of</strong> fGainesn' drew worldwide 

attention. 

Another widely heralded achieve¡nent was the semi-dwarf 

rice cultivar øIRB", released by the International Rice 

Research Institute in 1968 (Chandler, 1968), which led to a

new era in rice research and production. Again the purpose 

<strong>of</strong> the shorter straw was to allow more intensive use <strong>of</strong> 

farm inputs, especÍally nitrogenr to increase grain yields. 

Semi-dwarf rice varieties have Led to as much as double the 

yields <strong>of</strong> the older standard <strong>height</strong> cultívars in sone areas 

<strong>of</strong> Asia. 

Short-strawed wheat and rice genotype s have been suc- 

cessful- primarily due to their improved lodgíng resistance 

under conditions <strong>of</strong> both high fertílity and moísture 

(Briggle and Vogel, 1p68¡ Chand3er, 1969). Nevertheless 

Briggle and Vogel (1968) índicated that the semi-dwarf 

wheats did have some inherent yÍeld advantage as wel-l. 

Success with wheat and rice prompted researchers in 

other crops to look for a similar avenue <strong>of</strong> irnprovement. 

Mutants produced by irradiation have been the prímary source 

<strong>of</strong> short straw in barley. Among released semi-dwarf barley 

varÍeties are "Midas" developed in the United Kingdom, 

<strong>of</strong>fering a potential ten percent yield advantage over other 

varieties at the t j-rne <strong>of</strong> its release (World Crops, L969), 

and "Deba Abedr', a Danish variety <strong>of</strong>fering greater response 

to nitrogenous fertilizers as conpared to sirnilarly adapted 

standard eultivars (Kirby, 1968 ) . 

Konishi (L9?6) indicated that the main barley growing 

areas <strong>of</strong> Japan are occupied by semi-d.warf cultivars with 

the "uzun gene giving them all a semi-brachytic growth 

habit. The most common Japane se variety <strong>of</strong> this type is 

"Akashinriki". 

4

In the United States the barley breeding project at 

the University <strong>of</strong> Mínne sota has been the most successful 

in developing semi-dwarf genotypes, utilizing a semi-dwarf 

source produced by irradiation <strong>of</strong> the Norwegian cultivar 

"Jotun' at the Norwegían Gol.Lege <strong>of</strong> Agriculture, VollebeJ-sk, 

Norway. 

This project has registered M21 and M22' two germplasms 

with good agronomic performance and adapted to the mid- 

western and northern barley growing areas <strong>of</strong> the United 

States (Rasmusson et al. , L9?3), 

This sarne source <strong>of</strong> short straw has been utilízed to 

develop types adapted to the Canadian prairies by the 

bartey project group at the University <strong>of</strong> Saskatchewan in 

Saskatoon. Germplasm from both these institutions is being 

utilized at several locations throughout North Ameríca. 

Heritabi-lity and Selection 

fhe <strong>plant</strong> breeder is faced with the task <strong>of</strong> exploiting 

the available genetic variabilíty and avoiding or modifying 

undesirable character associations in order to develop a 

genotype which has some advantâge over presently available 

ones and is both agronomically and commercially acceptable. 

îo exploit the available variability one must impose some 

type <strong>of</strong> selection. Since most agronomically ímportant 

characters are quantitatively inherited, and therefore 

greatly ínfluenced by environmental conditions (Fiuzat and 

Atkíns, ]-g53), one needs ã measurement to determine the 

5

extent to which the observed variability is heritable and 

therefore selectable. Such a measurement is termed heritability, 

and, in the broad sense, is measured by the ratio 

<strong>of</strong> the genetic variabilit¡' to the environmental varÍability 

(A]lard, 1960). This measurement gives the breeder an indic- 

ation <strong>of</strong> the method <strong>of</strong> selection most likety to succeed, 

the sel-ection íntensity required in various generations and 

the generation during which selection is most 1ikely to be 

effective. 

Heritability estimates for yield and other <strong>plant</strong> 

characters have been calculated in several- crops (Fiuzat 

and Atkins, Agfi). In general, characteristics such as 

maturity and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> have been reported to be highly 

heritable, while yield and its related components have been 

l-ow in heritability. It shoufd be noted that heritability 

estimates in self-pollinated crops are dependant on: (1) 

the generation in which they are neasured, since with increased 

homozygositÍ, the non-heritable (dominant) fraction 

<strong>of</strong> the genetie variance j-s decreased in cornparison to the 

additive (heritable) fraction (Grafius et 41., 1952)¡ 

(2) the amount <strong>of</strong> geneti-e variability in the naterial 

studied, and (3) the method used to cal-c ulate the genetic 

variance and thus the herÍtability estimate (Frey and 

Horner, !955). 

Various ínvestigators have reported heritability 

estimates for several characteristics in barley (fable 1). 

Heritability estimates have generally been high for <strong>plant</strong> 

6

Tabl-e 1. Broad Sense Ileritability Estim,ates for Agronomic Characteristics in .Barley. 

Châracteristics 

InvestigaÈors 

Kernê1s 

per Head 

Lodging 

ZPlump Heading Days tô 

Kernels Date Maturity 

P1ânt Yiel-d Test Kernel 

tleight l,¡eight l{eight 

43-46 

97 

40 

1ow 

77 

Borthakr:r ( 19 70) 

Bray ( I963) 

sriggs(1974) 

Croolc & Poehlnaa 

(r97r) 

lnE. 

int-hígh 

high 

89 

high 

1ow 

Ínt-high 

Duwayri ( 19 74) 

& Atkins 

'tFiuzat 

86 

87 

92 

9L 

39 

ZL 

51 

44 

75 

44 

( t9s3) r+* 

1r. 

59 78 

60 

61 96 

64 Bl 

60 97 

Frey & llornerî 

75 

68 

77 

64 

s9 

(19ss) r. 

II. 

77 

40 

83 

94 

83 

90 

96 

Jogi(1956) I. 

rt. 

1TI. 

83 

41 

74 

3t 

74 

50 

Manzj uk f¡ Barsukov 

(t97 4) 

*Iíasr C! aL, (197 2) 

Rasmusso'iì & Glass 

6s 74 

63 90 

90 49 

65 

57 

4B 

J5 

73 

75 

(1e67) r. 

II. 

89 

high 

high 

high 

high 

69 

high 

high 

n].gh 

R.ui:ger -et af . ( 1966) 

Jain & Chandra 

( 19 70) 

Sethi et lL. (lgi 2) 

SzLrres (197 2) 

't S:uC-v c.rntained EalL x semi-dwarf crosses. 

*rt f,61¿¡, m:nerais indicate differenË hl"brid populations lnvesËígaÈed.

<strong>height</strong>, days to heaC.ing and days to maturity; interrnediate 

to high for test weight and lodgingi and low to intermediate 

for yield. The estinates for kerneL weight, number <strong>of</strong> 

kernels per spike, and plumpness, have been nore variable, 

but generally have been intermediate to high. 

Herítabilities for quality faetors have not been extensiveÌy 

investigated. However, diastatic power or saccharifying 

activity and levels <strong>of</strong> o(-anylase appear to be 

highly heritabLe, while barley nitrogen seens to be quite 

variable and in general low in heritability. 

fwo studies refeffed to in Table I (Fiuzat and Atkins, 

1953¡ and Nasr et ù,. I9?2) considered crosses involving 

short and tall genotypes. The heritabilities reported for 

this material did not deviate greatl-y from those reported 

for nornal <strong>height</strong> by norrnal <strong>height</strong> hybrids. 

lable 2 contains herltabÍlity estimates reported by 

several investigators from experinents invo lvíng tall x 

seml-dwarf wheat crosses. llhese heritability estimates do 

not differ frorn those reported for other crops nor from 

ta1l x tall wheat crosses, indicating that shortened straw 

had litt1e or no effect on transmission <strong>of</strong> other characters. 

One exception to this is the very low herítability for days 

to raaturity reported by Dyck and Baker (L9?5). fhe selection 

<strong>of</strong> agrononically desirable hÍgh yielding semi-dwarfs 

in numerous wheat breeding programs around the world 

(Morrlson and Campbe11, 1969) substantlates the conclusion 

that shorter culm length does not affect the heritabÍlity 

8

Table 2. Broad Sense Heritability Estlmates for Agronomic characteristics in Tall x Seni-dr,¡arf l¡lheat Crosses. 

Investigators Charâcteristics 

Plant Yfeld Test Kernel- Pefceflt 1learilng Days to T,odglng Kernels 

Height Wêíght l^feíghÈ plumpness Ðate Maturiry per Splke_ 

(1969) rf 63 67 

Anr.'ar & Chowdhry 

57 

64 

62 

50 

rr. 66 70 

rrr, 50 61 

rv. 65 64 

QR 

Bhatt (L972) L 77 89 

11. 80 77 

30 

38 

Dyci< & Balcer 

(1975) r. 60 77 

rr. 46 76 

high 

Fonseca & PattersolL 

(1968) high lor^?-1nt. low-inr. high 

Johnson êt. aL. 

-(1e63t 61 61 81 

Panlgrahl (L962) 7i-90 S3-8 7 

Reddi et. al. 

(r.959) r. 63 48 

II. 51 15 

* Rornan numerals ind.fcate differenÈ hybrLd populatíons studied.

<strong>of</strong> other chãracteristics in rn¡heat. 

t orre lati ons 

Altering an existing character, or bringing a new orre 

into a breeding population imrnediately raises the question 

<strong>of</strong> how it will affect other important characteri stic s " l\¡i11 

there be any undesirable character associations? Reduced 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> is such a parameter and many investigators have 

reported its relationship to several agronomic and quality 

characteristic s . 

Plant <strong>height</strong> has been positively associated vrith yield 

in barley (Fiuzat and Atkins, 1953; Sharrna, Lg?O ¡ Duwayri, 

I)14 and Konishi, 1976), ín wheat (Johnson et al., L966(a), 

Shahs, 1967¡ Fonseca and Patterson, 1p6B; Borojevic, 196B; 

Kaufmann et al., 1969¡ Barriga, L974¡ Ðyck and Baker, 1975), 

and in oats (Wallace gL 4, 1954¡ ?etr, 1959). KÍesselbach 

et al., (1953), and Rutger et aI., (196?), both reported no 

association ín barley as did Pepe and Heiner (19?5) with 

wheat. Nasr gq aL (I9?3) reported no correlatÍon between 

<strong>height</strong> and yield in six <strong>of</strong> seven barley crosses, and a 

positive relationship in the other cross. fn wheat, Hamblin 

and Donald (f9?l+) reported a positive association in material 

at F3, but found no relationship in the same material at F5 

under high nitrogen conditions. In fact the correlation was 

negative but not significant. 

McNeal et al. (Lg74) working with improved adapted semi- 

dwarf wheats reported a negative correlation <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

l0

wíth yield. fhis group discussed the irnportance <strong>of</strong> the 

influence <strong>of</strong> genotypic selection in correlation studies, 

índicating that the genotypes studied may bias conelation 

data. fn the barley work referred to, the study <strong>of</strong> Nasr 

et al., (1973) involved tal1 x short- strawed crosses, and 

the short genotypes were relatively unimproved and unadapted. 

Konishi's study (Konishi, l-976) involved several Japanese 

short statured types and a norrnal strain <strong>of</strong> barley. He 

noted that the very short types were inferior while the 

"not so shortrr types were not ínferior to the normal. 

Konishi stated, *For increasing total production <strong>of</strong> a dwarf 

mutant, it ís necessary to have long stems to some extent, 

and so irnprove the form for light interception <strong>of</strong> the <strong>plant</strong>.,n 

Konishi noted that similar results had been reported for rice 

by Kawai (r9Ø) in that all dwarf rice mutants which had 

stems shorter than BJ percent <strong>of</strong> the original variety showed 

decreased yield. 

"Perhaps the most outstanding character <strong>of</strong> semi-dwarf 

wheats is resistance to lodging.rt, ( Bríggle and Vogel, 1968). 

this posÍtive relation between shorter straw and <strong>reduced</strong> 

lodging in wheat has been supported by many observations. 

This led to a statement by Klatt (I9?3), to the effect that, 

pri-or to L962, pAant, <strong>height</strong> and straw weakness had limited 

the yield potential <strong>of</strong> wheat, which was significantly increased 

by the first semi-dwarf varieties. 

Chandl-er (1969) stated that in rice, the most important 

single morphological feature affecting lodging resistance i.s 

11

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, and that lodging decreased rice yield" The 

exceptional yield <strong>of</strong> "IR8rf rice demonstrated the value <strong>of</strong> 

shorter straw in reducing lodging and thereby allowing in- 

creased yie1d, especially under growing conditions approach- 

ing the optimum. 

T-,odging is a problem in barley (CIMMYT Review, 19?6) ' 

and can cause large reductions in yield and its components 

(Sisler and 01sen, 195L), Short straw has been associ-ated 

with <strong>reduced</strong>. lottging by Ðuwayri (L9?4), Konishi (I)16)i and 

Nasr g! aL. (1973) in two <strong>of</strong> seven crosses involving short 

and tall genotypes. The latter reported no relationship in 

the remaining five erosses studied. Rutger et a1. (1967 ) 

lÍkewise reported no significant relationship. 

Yield cornponents have been much Ínve stigated in agricultural 

crops (Adams, 1967). The yield components in 

cereals¡ heads per unit area, seeds per fipj.ke'' and seed 

weight, have been stltdied most notably by Grafíus and his 

co-workers since 1956 (Grafius, L956), and Frey and his 

associates since 1962 (Frey, L962), Since yield components 

are <strong>of</strong>ten used as units <strong>of</strong> selection, the effect <strong>of</strong> morphological 

changes, such as <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> he i'ght, on these 

components is <strong>of</strong> irnPortance. 

lhe relationship between <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and number <strong>of</strong> 

heads per unit area has been investigated in the wheats. 

T.,ebsock and Amaya (L969) reported a positive relationship in 

one <strong>of</strong> four durun wheat crosses. Johnson et al. (1966(b)) 

and Fonseca and. Patterson (19óB) reported a positive relatÍon-

ship in common wheat. 0n the other hand, McNeal et al", 

(f974) in studies using âdapted short strawed ând normal- 

<strong>height</strong> wheats, reported a negative correlation as did 

Rutger et al" (196?) in a barley study" Konlshi (f9?6) 

indicated all the short types he studied had as many, or 

slightl-y fewer, spikes than the normal strain. 

ft should be noted that the number <strong>of</strong> heads per unit 

area is much affected by the environment, as evidenced by 

j.ts 1ow heritability estimates (Rutger g!, al. , 1966t Lebsock 

and Amaya, L969), Since seeding rates can be easily rranip- 

uLated to give variation in this eomponent, many workers 

have acknowledged its inportance but hâve chosen not to 

relate it to other characteristi"e s " 

Kernels per spike ís the yield component with which the 

seni-dwarf <strong>plant</strong> types have had the least problem; probably 

since the material used to introduce the short culm was 

selected wlth this in mind. Rasmusson (L9?3) noted that the 

se:ni-dwarf mutant stock used in the Mínne sota barley program 

had "normal spike length". syne (1972) indicated that the 

seni-dwarf wheats had more kernels per spike than the talls, 

as did Johnson et a1. (1966 (b)). syme (19?2) stated that 

his studies in wheat indicated there was not necessarily a 

direct associatlon <strong>of</strong> kernels per spike and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>. 

Other reports in wheat concur: Fonseca and Patterson (1968), 

Lebsock and Amaya (1969). However, Barriga (L964) indicated 

a positive relationship whereas the report by McNeal et aI. 

(1974) showed a negative relationship between ptant <strong>height</strong> 

13

and kernels per bpike. 

Inconsistent relationships between kernel weight and 

pfant <strong>height</strong> have been reported. A positive association 

has been reported in barley (Fiuzat and Atkins, A953 and 

Konishi, 1976) and in wheat by several workers (Johnson 

et al. 1966àr Shahs, I969i Kaufmann g.!.4., 1969r Reddi 

et a1., 1969). lwo inve stigations (Fonseca and Patterson, 

1p6B; Lebsock and Àmaya, 1969) indicated a positive 

relationship in some wheat and durum wheat crosses, and no 

relationship in others, whí1e Vüallace et at. (l-954) report- 

ed no association in oats, as dÍd Crook and Poehlman (f9?1) 

ln results from a barley expe:'inent. 

Konishi (f9?6) reported that the shorter barleys he 

worked with were generally inferior to the normal cultivar's 

for grain weight per spike, but, his better semi-dwarfs had 

the same or slightly better grain weight per spike than the 

normal. Hígh grain weÍght per spike results from a combination 

<strong>of</strong> large numbers <strong>of</strong> kernels per spike and high kernel 

weight. 

the relatíonshÍp <strong>of</strong> yield. and its components with <strong>plant</strong> 

<strong>height</strong> is not consístent. Depending on the genotypes in- 

volved in the study ând the environment in which the research 

was conducted, various researchers have arrived at different 

conclusions. McNeal et al. (19?4) stated, "these data 

suggest that genotype determines the relationship <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> 

heÍght to grain yield and yÍeld cornponents, as rnight be 

expected when semi-d$¡arf and conventional <strong>height</strong> tlru)es are 

74

c onpared 'r . 

Two other important agronomic characteristics are the 

number <strong>of</strong> days to head5.ng and the number <strong>of</strong> days to maturity. 

Barker (f964), working with barley, reported a posit5-ve 

correlation <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> with number <strong>of</strong> days to heading, 

while Rutger et al. (f967) indicated they found no relationship 

between these characteristic s. Konishi (f976) indicated 

that the dwarfing genes involved in hÍs study retarded heading. 

In wheat both positive (Fonseca and Patterson, L96B¡ 

Dyck and Baker, L975) and, negative (Johnson et al. , L966(a)) 

relationships have been reported . 

Plant <strong>height</strong> and maturity have been reported as positívely 

associated in wheat ( Johnson et a1. L966(a) ¡ Kaufmann 

et al., l-969), while T,ebsock and Amaya (1969) reported a 

positive correlation in two <strong>of</strong> four crosses and no relatj"on- 

ship in the others. Fiuzat and Atkins (fgfi) reported a 

negative association between <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and maturity in 

bar ley. 

Morphological changes may also lead to changes in 

quality characteristics which are important in terms <strong>of</strong> 

utilization and commercial acceptability. Test weight and 

percent plurap kernels are important characteristics in 

barley in terms <strong>of</strong> feeding and malting quality. Nasr gL åt. 

(a973) indicated a positive correlation <strong>of</strong> <strong>height</strong> with per- 

cent plumpne ss existed in four <strong>of</strong> seven crosses and the 

sane for <strong>height</strong> and test weight in two <strong>of</strong> the seven crosses. 

No significant associations were noted in the remaining 

15

crosses. Rutger et al. (L967 ) also indicated positive 

relationships for these characters and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>. Both 

groups reported hi-ghly signifieant positÍve eorrelations 

between test weight and percent plumpness as did Cr.ook and 

Poehlman (1971). However, Crook and Poehlman (19?I) report- 

ed no significant relationships between <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and 

these characteristics. 

Rutger, et a1. , (t96?) reported a positive correlation 

between pl"ant <strong>height</strong> and leve1 <strong>of</strong> a

eported a non-significant positive correlation between 

these parameters in a barley study. 

Number <strong>of</strong> kernels per spike has been reported as posÍtively 

associated with yield in barley (Jain and Chandra, 

1968¡ Yap and Harvey, l9?2i Ruzldxa. lg?3i Manzjuk and 

Barsukov, l9?4) ànd in wheat (Fonseca and patterson, 1968¡ 

Hsu and Walton, I9?A), Rasmusson and Cannell (I9?O) report- 

ed both posÍtive correlations and non-significant assoeiations 

in bartey, as did lebsock and Amaya (lS6g) and McNeal et al. 

(L9?4) in wheat. It has also been noted that the nr¡mber <strong>of</strong> 

kernels per spike Ís the yield component by whieh the semi- 

dwarf wheats primarily have achieved theír increased y5-eld.s 

(Johnson et aI., l966 (b)r Syme, L96g), 

Kernel weight is the yield component which has been 

reported to be negatively associated with yield <strong>of</strong> barley, 

al-though thís was the case in only one report (Grafius and 

Okoli, f9?4), In general, kernel weight has been positively 

correlated with yield 1n wheat (Fonseca and Patterson, 19óB¡ 

Hsu and Walton, L97O), and in barley (DenHartog and l,ambert, 

1953¡ Jain, 1p6B¡ Rasmusson and Cannell, 1!f0; Sharma, I97O; 

Tap and Harvey, L972¡ Manzjuk and Barsukov, I9?4). Hsi and 

T,ambert (L954) reported both positive and non-signifieant 

associations in barì-ey as díd T,ebsock and Amaya (1969) in 

wheat. Hayter and Ríggs (L973) reported no sígnificant 

correlation <strong>of</strong> kernel weight with yield in barley" the 

lesser importance <strong>of</strong> kernel weight as a yield conponent is 

exempllfied by the number <strong>of</strong> tirne s a non-significant 

L7

elationship <strong>of</strong> it with yíeld has been reported as compared 

to the other components Ín $rhich the association is generally 

positive. 

"The occumeRce <strong>of</strong> negative correlatÍons among morphological 

cornponents <strong>of</strong> yield in crop <strong>plant</strong>s is a widespread 

phenonenorrt', (Adams, 1967), Such negative yíeld cornponent 

interre lationships have been reported in barley (Fiuzat and 

Atkins, lpJl; Rasmusson and Cannell, 1pf0¡ Ruzicka, l9?3i 

Grafius and ûkoli, I9?4) as well as in wheat (Fonseca and 

?atterson, 1t68; Lebsock and .A,maya, 1969¡ Hsu and Walton, 

19?0; MeNeal 9! 4, I9?l+). Fonseca and Patterson (1968) 

reported a positive correlation between nluìnber <strong>of</strong> spikes per 

unit area and kernel weight; however, further analysis using 

path coeffíents indicated that this relationship was negative. 

Several agrononÍc studies with snal1 grains have brought 

out the complex interre lationships <strong>of</strong> yield and its components 

with the environment. It was shown that as yield was altered 

by an environmental change, say increased nitrogen supply, 

the yield components afso changed in that an increase or 

decrease in specific conponents might be compensated for by 

balancing decreases or increases in thê other components. 

Published results <strong>of</strong> wheat studies by Easton and 

Clements (f9n) and Gardner and Jackson (f9?6) indieated 

that yleld increases were duê to increased spikes per unit 

area and kernels per spike, but kernel weight decreased. 

Freyts (L959) research in oats and Stanberry and T.,owrey's 

(wA5¡ studies Ín barley produced sinilar resul.ts. A 

18

majority <strong>of</strong> studies have reported that yield increases were 

due primarily to increased number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area 

accompanied by either no change or a decrease in one or 

both <strong>of</strong> the other yield components. Such was the case 

reported by Guitard et a1" (1961) i-n wheat, oats and barley. 

Reported results <strong>of</strong> ïloodward (f966) and Dubetz and Bole 

(1973) in wheat¡ Foth g! aL (L964) in oats; and Kirby 

(1968), Willey and Holliday (19?1), and Gardener and 

Rathjen Ã9? 5) in barley are in generaÌ agreement with the 

findings <strong>of</strong> Guitard. 

Other important agronomic eharacter associations in 

barley have been reported in the literature. lisi and Lambert 

(f954) reported a negative correlation between yield and 

number <strong>of</strong> days to heading, while Rutger et aI. (196?) 

reported no significant relationship. Fiuzat and Atkins 

(fgfi) reported a negative association <strong>of</strong> yield and maturity 

in one <strong>of</strong> two barley crossesr 

Yiel-d was reported to be positively correl-ated wÍth 

percent plumpness and test weight in barley by Rutger et al-. 

(L96?) and Nasr et al. (1973), although the latter found no 

relationship in some crosses investigated. DenHartog and 

lanbert (]-953) also reported positive yield-test weight 

correlations in barley. 

Yield-quality factor correLations in barfey have also 

been reported. Yield and grain protein have been reported 

as negatívely related (DenHartog and Iambert, 1953; Hsi and 

T,ambert, 1954; Johnston and Aksel, 1964¡ Hayter and Riggs, 

L9

f9?3), DenHartog and T,ambert (L953) and Rutger et al (196?) 

reported negative correfations <strong>of</strong> yield and diastatic power, 

while the latter indicated no association between yield and 

'l eve 1 <strong>of</strong> alpha-amylase. 

Crook and Poeh}nan (I9?I) reported a positive correlation 

between percent plumpness and kernel weight. Test 

weight was reported to be positively comelated with kernel 

weight (DenHartog and ]€.mbert, 1953; Hsi and lambert, I95l+). 

Rutger, et al. (1967) reported a negative assocíation <strong>of</strong> a 

percent plumpne ss with diastatic power and a positive association 

with increased lodging resistance in barley. 

Johnson and Aksel (L964) reported a positive correlation 

between protein and earline ss. 

The interrelationships <strong>of</strong> some <strong>of</strong> the quality factors 

have also been investigated. Protein was reported to be 

positively related to kernel weight (Metcalfe et al. , L96? ¡ 

Hayter and Riggs, L9?3), DenHartog and lambert (I9fi) ana 

Hsi and T-,ambert (f954) indicated no significant correl-ation 

<strong>of</strong> protein level with diastatie power. Metcalfe et aI. 

(L96? ) reported a posítive correlation between protein and 

saccharifying activity. llayter and Riggs Q9?3) reported 

no association between protein and levels <strong>of</strong> alpha-amylase " 

Diastatic power has shown inconsisient corcelations 

with kernel weight. Hsi and T,arnbert (f954) reported no 

coz'relation, Metcalfe et al. (L96?) indicated a positive 

relation, and DenHârtog and Lambert (1953) reported a negative 

correlation. Rutger et al. (196?) reported a positive 

20

correfation between diastatic power and alpha-anylase levels 

as dld Hayter and Riggs (I9?3), 

Response to_Nitroeen Fertilization 

The use <strong>of</strong> nitrogenous fertilizers for increased cereal 

production has been carried out unknowingly sinee man changed 

from nomadic to village agriculture and began to grow crops 

repetitively on the same land. fhe return <strong>of</strong> manure, bones, 

ashes and crop residue to the soil constituted the use <strong>of</strong> 

fertítizer. Slack (1pf0) indicated that prinítive fertilization 

<strong>of</strong> the soil began as early as 900 B.C. the value <strong>of</strong> 

legumes being gro'wn before eereal-s was noted before the 

birth <strong>of</strong> Christ. 

fhe "fertilizer industry" began ín the 1800's lvith the 

use <strong>of</strong> potassium-nitrate mined primarÍIy in Chile (Slack, 

I97o), It was used as a nítrogen source around the world 

until the productíon <strong>of</strong> fertilizers, as we know it today, 

began after ltlorld tr¡ar ïI. Nitrogen was, and still is, the 

primary element required and utilized as fertilizer. 

The effect <strong>of</strong> nitrogen ferti.lizer on grain yields is 

clearly demonstrated by corn yield data from North Carol-ina. 

Corn yields there moved progressively from 1BOO-2000 trg, /na. 

i,n 1945 to 3600-JB0o xg,/ha. in l-968, accompanied by a 

progressive increase in the application <strong>of</strong> nitrogen fertilizer 

<strong>of</strong> 24 :Kg,/:na, in L945 to 84 kg./na. in t96B (cummings 

and Gleason, ]-97l-). Â simitar relationship has developed 

in the other eereals as well. 

2T

l¡¡ith this increased use <strong>of</strong> nitrogenous fertilizers, 

agronomists and <strong>plant</strong> breeders have begun to search for 

genotypes whieh wil-1 give better response to these inputs. 

The cereal varieties <strong>of</strong> the I950's and early 196ors gave 

dependable yield increases only at the lower levels <strong>of</strong> nit- 

rogen application (tummings and Gleason, 19?I) since they 

lodged with greater fertílizer inputs. îhese authors 

stated, '!the achíevement <strong>of</strong> larger increases in yield requires 

the development <strong>of</strong> new <strong>plant</strong> types, with short he5.ght, 

stiff straw, and semi-erect leave s which would be able to 

stand upright even at higher levels <strong>of</strong> nitrogen and r^¡hich 

would be abl-e to capture and use the ful1 sunlight with 

rnaximum efficiency even in dense stands". 

?endleton et al., (L953) and Chandler (t969), working 

with barley and rice respectively, indicated that with the 

standard taIl cultivars the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> high levels <strong>of</strong> 

nitrogenous fertil-izers was linited due to lodging. A large 

part <strong>of</strong> the success <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarf wheats and rices has 

been due to their improved lodging resistance and therefore 

their ability to produce more grain under more fertile conditions 

(griggle and Yogel, 1968¡ Chand].3r, 1969). chandler 

(f969) stated "Culm length is the most important single 

factor affeeting lodging resistance and nitrogen responsive- 

ness.". 

Fertílizer by genotype interactions have been investi- 

gated in various erops. Interactions have occured even when 

the genotypes studied did not differ morphologically to any 

22

extent. Frey et al-. (1951) indicated that c or.n varieties 

were recoÍürended on the basis <strong>of</strong> soil fertility as early as 

1922, In terms <strong>of</strong> fertilizer x genotype interaction, their 

literature review shows that fertilizer responsiveness, in 

particular to nitrogen, had been investigated in wheat, oats 

and barley with both positive and negative resul"ts. 

Several studies since 1!Jl have j-ndicated varying resu1ts. 

lforking with wheat, Beutler and Foote (f963) an¿ 

Syme et aL (19?6) reported significant fertilizer x variety 

interactions, as did Pendleton et a1. (f9fi), Woodward (Ig56), 

and Gardener and Rathgen (t9?5) working with barley. Others 

reported no fertilizer x variety interaction in wheat studies 

(Rhode, 1p6f¡ Bauer, L97oi McNeal et al. 1971) and in barley 

tests (Kirby, 1968). Kirby (1968) indicated that he did not 

uncover any interaction probabty due to a second limiting 

element in the soi1. Syme (f96?), working with wheat, also 

reported no sígnificant interaction, but suggested this was 

due to soil problems, in thj-s case poor wâter infiltration. 

It l-s apparent that the díseovery <strong>of</strong> a fertilizer x 

genotype interaction is dependent on the range <strong>of</strong> genotypes 

included in the study and the Levefs <strong>of</strong> several other envir- 

onmental factors, especially moisture. Stanberry and Lowrey 

(L965) reported that nitrogen gave a 600/, increase in me an 

yield over al-1 moisture levels used, whil-e increased moisture 

over all nitrogen levels gave a 36/, yiel:d increase. However, 

the combination <strong>of</strong> hígh nitrogen and adequate avaiLable 

rnoisture gave â mean yield increase <strong>of</strong> nore tlnan L? OOf". 

23

Their results were from a barley trial, but si¡nilar reactions 

have been reported with the other cereals (Porter g-!. ê.!. ' 

1964). 

Frey et aI. (1951) concluded, n'in general' crops in 

which one variety has a small area <strong>of</strong> adaptation (such as 

corn) tend to show a significant variety by fertility level 

interaction, while those crops in which any one variety has 

a large area <strong>of</strong> production ( such as oats) do not show 

signíficant variety by fertitity level interactions.I' wheat 

and barley would be in this latter category. At the time <strong>of</strong> 

this stateroent not nearly as much breeding work had been 

done in wheat and barley, there were not as large a number 

<strong>of</strong> varieties as there are at present, and the semi-dwarfs 

had not yet become irnportant or avaílable. 

The introduction and use <strong>of</strong> seni-dwarf genotypes has 

l.ed to a renewal <strong>of</strong> interest in the ability <strong>of</strong> Índivídual 

genotypes to respond to increased leve1s <strong>of</strong> nitrogen 

fertility. As already mentioned Briggle and Vogel (1968) 

and Chandle? (1969) have indicated that their short stã.tured 

wheat and rice cultivars do respond better to higher rates 

<strong>of</strong> nitrogen than otder standard <strong>height</strong> types, primarily due 

to lodging resistanee. However, Briggle and Vogel (f968) 

indicated there was also some inherent yield advantage, and 

Beech and Norman, (1968) indicated that the semi-dwarf 

wheats showed a greater yÍeld response to applíed nitrogen 

in their studies ín Àustralia. 

Other workers have investigated the response <strong>of</strong> the 

24

seni-dwarf wheats to nitrogen fertilizers. All researchers 

have reported significant yield increases with increased 

nitrogen ínputs up to a certain level, with the improved and 

adapted semi-dwarfs yielding more than tal1 cultivars at all 

but the lowest nitrogen l-evels. This has especially been 

the case under conditions <strong>of</strong> adequate rnoisture, whether by 

irrigation or precipitation (Porter g! al., 1964¡ Tuohey, 

I9?3), Studies by Beutler arld Foote (L963) and t¡foodward 

(L966) gave results índicating a signifícant interaction <strong>of</strong> 

genotype and fertílity while Porter et al., (1964), Syme 

(f96?), and McNeal et 41. (ry?f), although reporting equal 

or greater yields for the semi-dv¡arfs, reported no significant 

interaction. Porter et 41. (f964) suggested that the semi- 

dwarfs may be more suitable for high production fevels. This 

was supported by Syne (L96?). 

Gardener and Rathjen (19?5) stated with reference to 

barley: "the variatíon in yield response to nitrogen is 

remarkable t' and "there is great scope for selecting cultivars 

suited to particular nitrogen levels.". 

Konishi (I9?6) reported a fertilizer response study 

with short-statured barJ-ey and indicated that a fertilj.zer 

by genotype interaction occurred. fhe study encompâssed 

eight different Japanese dwarf and semi-dwarf strains and 

one normal cultivar <strong>of</strong> barley. fhe interaction occurred 

because one <strong>of</strong> the short statured genotJ,?e s and the normal 

genotype showed a decreased yield at the highest fertílity 

Level while the other seven short genotypes showed a yield 

25

increase" The amount <strong>of</strong> this inc:.ease al-so varied betu'een 

these seven genotln)es " 

The effects <strong>of</strong> Íncreased nitrogen fertility on the 

components <strong>of</strong> yield and other agronomic characteristics 

have been studied extensivel-y in the eereals. Cardener and 

Jackson (L9?6), working with wheat, reported that the main 

effects <strong>of</strong> increased nitrogen on grain yield eomponents were 

increased nunrber <strong>of</strong> spikes per unít area, inereased number <strong>of</strong> 

seeds per spike and decreased weight per indÍvÍdual seed. 

Rohde (1963) reviewed the findíngs reported prior to 1963 

and reported the same general findings excepto most workers 

had found eíther no change or an increase in kerneL weight 

as nitrogen increased. This was due to the faet that the 

work prior to L963 was done at relatively 1ow levels <strong>of</strong> 

applied nitrogen. Since 1963 other reports (Porter et al., 

1964; woodward. 1166¡ Syme, t9ó7¡ McNeal et al", I97l-¡ 

Easton and Clements, l9?3) have agreed with Gardener and 

Jaeksonts statement, except that $¡oodward reported no change 

in kernel weight and Slrme reported an increase in this character, 

as amount <strong>of</strong> nitrogen applied increased. 

Freyrs (f959) classícat ¡rield cornponent study in oats 

also lndicated that as yield increased there was an increase 

1n kernels per spíke, accornpanied by decreased kernel weight. 

lie concluded that seed weíght was an insignificant r¡ariable 

in causing yield response to nitrogen. 

In bâr1ey-fertilizer rate studies the results have been 

variabLe. Stanberry and l,owrey (1965) reported increased 

zo

number <strong>of</strong> spíkes as nÍtrogen inereased. Schreiber and 

Stanberry (f9Ø) indicated that nitrogen applied at <strong>plant</strong>ing 

gave increased kernels per spike and kernel weight but 

lowered the number <strong>of</strong> spikes per <strong>plant</strong>. This was probably 

<strong>of</strong>fset by increasing the number <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s and thereby 

effectively giving more spikes per unit area, Gardener and 

Rathjen (19?5) reported that variation in cultivar yieLds 

with n5.trogen was due to r¡ariation in ear nwnbers, whíle 

grain weight per ear reriained constant, since changes in 

kernels per spike and kernel weight were <strong>of</strong> opposite magni- 

tudes and compensated for each other. They indicated that, 

in general, kernels per spike íncreased and kernel weight 

dropped as nitrogen l"ncreased. Reisenauer and Díckson (1961) 

also reported. a lower welght per kernel as nitrogen l-evel 

increased . 

Konishl (19?6) reported that fertÍtization resul,ted j.n 

an increaged nu¡rber <strong>of</strong> spikes for all genotlrpe s I but at the 

higher leve1s <strong>of</strong> fertíl"izer, genotypes responded differently" 

l{e also reported that the re sponse <strong>of</strong> grain weight per spike 

to fertilisation was varíab1e wlth some genotypes responding 

positively and others negatívely. 

Konishi's final conclusion regardlng the highe:' yielding 

dwarf mutants was; 'rthe increased grain yield <strong>of</strong> dwarf 

mutants by heavy fertilizer appLication ís principally due 

to the increase (or not d.ecrease) ln the grain weight per 

spike, but not by the nurnber <strong>of</strong> spikesn (Konishi, L9?6), 

Increasing nitrogen fertÍlizer applieatíon has generally 

27

given rise to increased ni-trogen in the grain, particularly 

at higher level-s <strong>of</strong> applied nitrogen in barley (Reisenauer 

and Dickson, 196I; Kírby, 1968; Gardener and Rathjen, 19?5), 

and in wheat (Woodward, Ip66¡ Syne, 196? ¡ McNeaI g! ê1., 

19?t¡ Ðubetz, 1972 r Gardener and Jaekson, 1976; Syme et al., 

19?6), [he first increments <strong>of</strong> nitrogen fertilizer tend to 

give larger yield increases with a small increase in grain 

nítrogen content while further Íncreases <strong>of</strong> nitrogen tend 

to give a reverse effect (Syme, L96?). 

Pl-ant <strong>height</strong> increases with addition <strong>of</strong> nitrogen in 

both tall and semi-dwarf varieties (Pendl-eton gq 41. , L953; 

Rohde, 19ó3; Woodwarð,, I)66¡ McNeal et al., I9?I). However, 

Chandler (tgøg) pointed out that in the nítrogen responsive 

semi-dwarf rice varieties the internode elongation due to 

nitrogen fertílizer is rel-ativel-y less than that in the 

non-responsive tall types. Konishi (f9?6) indicated that 

all genotypes he studied responded similarly for culm length 

as fertilizer increased. 

McNeal- and Davis (1954) and McNeal et al. (I9?I) report- 

ed no effect <strong>of</strong> nitrogen application on test wei-ght in wheat, 

while Rohde (1963), working at low rates <strong>of</strong> applied nitrogen, 

reported an increase in test we ight as nitrogen level in- 

creased.. Tn a barl-ey study, Reisenauer and Dickson (1960) 

reported thât the fírst 40-pou¡d-per-acre increment <strong>of</strong> 

nitrogen gave an increase in kernel plumpness, while the 

next two 4o-pound increments resulted in decreased kernel 

plunpness. 

28

Stanberry and Lowrey (L965) reported that nitrogen 

fertilized barley headed earlier than non-fertilized at 

Yuma, hrizona. at the sane time indicating that these 

results were opposite to those reported for the l,{id. -Vi¡e st 

and Eastern U.S.A.. In spring wheat grown in Montana, 

McNeal and Davis (1951+) reported a delay in heading due to 

nitrogen in a wheat study. 

In a barley quality study Reisenauer and Dickson (L961) 

dernonstrated that d j-astatic power and alpha-amylase levels 

increased with increasing nitrogen application in accordance 

with a previous report (Atkins et al-. , 1955). fhey also 

concluded that the best quality malting barley was produced 

at low yíeld leve Is . 

Row Spacine in Cereals 

In an extensive review <strong>of</strong> research on the effect <strong>of</strong> row 

width on cereal yield Hotliday (l-96]) concluded; 'rAt constant 

seed rate, decreasing the row width below 7 to B inches 

(t?,9 to 2o,) cm, ) has, in most cases, l-ed to a small j-n- 

crease in cereal yieId. This has been <strong>of</strong> the order <strong>of</strong> 5 to 

|Fr, Conversely, increasing the row width aboie the standard. 

has in most cases gíven some decrease in yield.rt He also 

concluded, rrThere is evidence that the yield advantages <strong>of</strong> 

narrow rows are more pronounced at seed rates both below and 

above the normal. The fall.ing <strong>of</strong>f <strong>of</strong> yield at wide rows is 

more pronounced at high seed rates."'. [he work Hotliday 

reviewed was carried out with standard <strong>height</strong> material-. 

29

Holliday's conclusions have generally been borne out 

by results obtained since his review by BaldwÍn (1963), 

Siernens QgAl), and C1ark, (1975) workíng with wheat, oats 

and barley. In barley studies Austenson and Larter (L969) 

reported similar results, as did Stickler and Younís (1966) 

in sorghum work; Fothe et al. (7964) in oat studies; and 

Koleva (1963), Furrer (L964), Stoskopf (tgtZ), csefalvai 

(1968), Furrer and stauffer (lg?z), and Briggs (19?5) in 

wheat experiments. Other reports indicateci no effect <strong>of</strong> 

row-spacings on yield j-n cereals (wichens, 1968), in wheat 

(Fischer et al. , L9?6), and in barley (lvliddleton gj gt., 

1964), while Young and Bauer (f973) working with wheat re- 

ported no significant effect except where weed competition 

was a confounding factor giving narrow row spac ings an 

advantage. Finlay et a1, (A9?I) and Foth et aL-. (L964) 

concluded that the effect <strong>of</strong> row spacíng was dependent on 

environment in that it is expressed only when conditions 

are favourable for crop growth. 

Also <strong>of</strong> inportance is the effect <strong>of</strong> genotype by row- 

spacing interaction on yiel-d. This is particularly the case 

wj-th novel germplasm which gives a different morphological 

<strong>plant</strong> type. Such ínteractions have been reported in the 

cereals (Harrington, 1941), in barley (linlay et a1., a9?I), 

in wheat (Stoskopf, 1967 ) and in rice (Owen, 1968). Some 

researchers reported no interaction even when spaci.ngs did 

affect yield (Briggs, I9?5)" 

Several researchers felt that the semi'dwarf character 

30

Íright be <strong>of</strong> great signifi.cance in row-spacing effects, and 

research has been carried out on row-spacíng by genotype 

interaction for yield involving genotypes differing in 

ptant <strong>height</strong>. l'/orking with rice, Owen (1968) reported that 

a semi-dwarf variety responded to narrow row spacing with 

greater yields whiLe a tall cultivar did noì;. Stickler and 

Younis (L966) report a similar result with sorghum. 

Stoskopf (l-96?) reported no signíficant interaction in a 

wheat study, but ihere was a trend for the short-strawed 

high-yielders to yiel-d nore at narrow spacings. 

Finlay et al. (tgZt) in their barley work, noted that 

the higher yielding cultivars dísplayed a greater response 

to narrower row spacing than did. the lower yielder:s. 

The effects <strong>of</strong> row spacing on yieJ-d components have 

been investigated. Decreased row spac ing has been reported 

to give more spikes per unit area in barley (lttiddleton g! a1., 

1964i Finlay et al., I97I¡ Àhmed, I9?O), and more panicles 

per unit area in oats (Foth et al., L964) and in rice (0wen, 

1968). Narrower rows have been reported to decrease the 

number <strong>of</strong> kernels per Èpike or panicle (Owen, 1968; Fintay 

et al. , a97I) while Foth et aI. (f964), Middteton g!. af., 

(L964), and Csefalvai (1968) reported an increase as row 

spacing decreased. îhe above authors reported little, if 

any, effect <strong>of</strong> inter-row width on kernel weight. 

Finlay et a1., (1971) reported earlier heading <strong>of</strong> bar- 

l-ey at narrow row spacings in one <strong>of</strong> two yearsr Bríggs 

(197 5) reported a trend toward earlier maturity in wheat at 

3l

narrovr rôw spacings. CAark (I975) reported no irnprovement 

ín lodging resistance at wider row spacings. Siemens (f9Ø) 

reported no effect <strong>of</strong> row spacing on test weight ín barley. 

Young and Bauer ( I9?3), in a wheat study, found no 

change Ín protein with row spacing, except where weeds were 

present; then protein decreased âs row space increased. 

Contrary to this, Siemens (I9Ø) reported increased protein 

in wheat and barley as row spacing increased. Foth et AI., 

(1964) reported no relatíonship between the percentage <strong>of</strong> 

nitrogen, phosphorous and potassiwn in the <strong>plant</strong> tissue, 

and distances between rows <strong>of</strong> oats. 

. Seedíne Rate in Cereals 

Seedíng rate studies ín cereals prior to 1p60 were 

extensively reviev/ed by Holtiday (f96o). He concluded that 

there is an optimum seeding rate for each crop in each en- 

vironmental zone, and .the higher the yield potential the 

higher the optima. Iie regards "the yield per unit area as 

being conposed <strong>of</strong> the number <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s per unít area rnultiplied 

by the yield per p1ant, the latter decreasing with 

Ínereasing <strong>plant</strong> density. " 

Kirby (l-967) noted that "Grain yield reaches a maximum 

with increasíng (p1ant) density, after which a further in- 

crease in density leads to a fa1l in grain yield.". This 

drop in yield would be due to a greater drop in yield per 

<strong>plant</strong> than could be <strong>of</strong>fset by the inereased number <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s. 

A number <strong>of</strong> workers reported no effect on grain yield 

32

from varyíng seeding rates in barley (Middleton et at., 

1964i Bockstaele and Maddens, I966i îin]¿y et al., Ig?L), 

in oats (Jones and Hayes, 196?) Folkins and Kaufmann, 

L974), or in wheat (nl-Hattab et al. , IgZa; Furrer and 

Stauffer, 1970; Fisctrer e-!.4.., Ig76). Woodward (1956) 

reported the same results workj-ng with al_1 three cereals. 

These results as such were due to either the experiment 

covering only a narrow range <strong>of</strong> seed.ing rates or compensa- 

ti-on among yield cornponents. 

Guitard et at. (i-g6f) reported a linear increase ín 

yield up to an optiraun seeding rate in wheat, oats and 

barley, with a significant decrease in wheat and barley 

yields at very high seeding rates. Briggs (fg?5) also 

reported an increased wheat yield with increased seeding 

rate over the range <strong>of</strong> rates usea (33.6 to 100.p Xe./na.), 

Kirby (196?) reported lower barley yields at very high ptant 

densities. McFadden (1970) reported an optimum seed.ing rate 

for two barley cultivars, both above and beLow which yields 

dropped. Símilar results have been reported by Woodward 

(1956) and Vlilley and Holliday (19?1). young and Bauer 

(1971) reported a significant yÍeld increase when they 

doubled the seeding rate in a barley trial¡ however, the 

origi-nal rate was a relatively low one. Zeídan (f9?4) 

reported a significant yietd decrease i-n wheat at higher 

<strong>plant</strong> densitie s . 

0n the other hand, Pelton (1969), working with wheat in 

the dry area <strong>of</strong> south-western Saskatchewan, ¡spsrted that 

33

lower seedíng rates gave higher yields when weeds and insects 

were controlled, especially in years with severe moisture 

stress. He used seeding rates ranging from 22 to IOI Ug,t/na, 

He noted that <strong>plant</strong> survival and tillering nade up for 1ow 

rates, and overall there were no differences in the number 

<strong>of</strong> mature kerne Is per unit area. 

Some i-nvestigations have revealed cultívar by seeding 

rate interactions for yie1d. In reporting on a seeding rate 

and row spacing wheat study Briggs (I9? 5) stated, "In view 

<strong>of</strong> the differences j.n c ultivar response to seeding rates 

for the important agronomic characteristics studied here, 

it ís suggested that all newly lícensed cultivars <strong>of</strong> wheat 

should be subjeeted to this type <strong>of</strong> tesi, particularly íf 

they are <strong>of</strong> a novel germplasm type.rt, Such would be the 

case with semi-dwarf genotypes. 

Cultivar by seeding rate interactions for yield have 

been reported for barley (Demirlicakmak et a!,, 1963) , for 

sorghum (Stickler and Younis, 1966), and wheat (lv¡alih, t969¡ 

ãei.d.an, f9?4). the sorghum and wheat studies involved tall 

and semi-dwarf genotype s and the interaction was due to 

shorter genotypes performing better than tal-ls at greater 

<strong>plant</strong> densities. Other reports ( cuitard. et aI., lg6li 

McFadden, l-970; Cl-ements e! ù," 1974¡ Briggs, 1975¡ Fischer 

et a1" , L9?6) indicated no interacti-on. Two <strong>of</strong> these studies 

involved short stature genotJrpes, one exclusively (Fischer 

et a1. , 1976) and one a range <strong>of</strong> tall and short genotypes 

(Clements et 41, , L974), 

34

Reports on the effect <strong>of</strong> seeding rate on the yield 

c ornponents have indicated that increasing seeding rate gave 

rise to increased number <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s per unit area, and fewer 

spikes per <strong>plant</strong>, associated with decreased numbers <strong>of</strong> ker- 

nels per spike and weight per kerne). (Guitard et al. , J-96l-), 

ïncreased seed rates gave increased nunber <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit 

area by the increased number <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s being greater than 

losses due to fewer spikes per pIant. Results from work with 

bartey by Bockstaele and Maddens (f966), Kirby (t96?), nay 

and îhompson (1970), and Willey and Holtiday (1971)¡ work 

with wheat by Malik (L969), Zeidan (f9?4), and Fischer É 4. 

(A9?6); ând work wlth oats by Jones and Hayes (196? and L96B)t 

are essentially in agreement with Guítard e! al. Middleton 

et aI. (L964), working wíth barley, found the same with the 

exception <strong>of</strong> no change in kernel weight over densitÍes. 

Briggs (l.9?5) also reported no effect <strong>of</strong> densities on kernel 

weight in wheat, while Woodv¡ard (1956) reported increased 

seeding rates gave smaller spikes and smalfer kernels, YieId 

reduetions at above -optimum seeding rates are due to eontin- 

uing decreases Ín kernels per spike and kernel weight with no 

further increase in spíkes per unit area to compensate for 

the }osses Ìn the other cornponents (Willey and Holliday, 

L97L), As previously stated, PeJ"ton (f969) indicated that 

<strong>plant</strong> survival and tlllering (Í.e., inereased spikes per unit 

area) can compensate to maintaln yields at lower seeding 

rate s . 

Increased seeding rates have been reported to lead to 

35

increased lodging in two barley experiments (Bockstaele and. 

Maddens, 1966; Day and lhompson, I9?O). 

Higher seeding rates gave decreased <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> in 

oats (Folkins and Kaufnann, L9?4), in barley (Bockstaele 

and Maddens, L966), and in wheat (Pe1ton, 1969; SJ--Hattab 

et al., I9?O), while Cl-ement (I9?2) reported the opposite 

effect in wheat. Aturcd (19?0) and Fi¡rlay et al-. (fpZf) 

working with barley and Briggs (f975) working with wheat, 

reported either variable or no effects <strong>of</strong> density on <strong>plant</strong> 

he Íght . 

lloodlvard (L956) working with wheat, oats and barley 

reported that lower seeding rates resulted in higher test 

weight. However, Briggs (I9?5) working with wheat, and 

Middleton et al. (f964) and Day and Thompson (f970) ¡otfr 

working with barley, reported no effect <strong>of</strong> seeding rate on 

test weight. 

From a barley experiment Day and Thompson (1pf0) re- 

ported the number <strong>of</strong> days to maturity decreased as the rate 

<strong>of</strong> pLanting went up, as did Young and Bauer (19?1) and 

Briggs (I9?5), both working with wheat. Finlay et al. 

(Lg?I) reported a decreased number <strong>of</strong> days to heading as 

seed rate increased in barley, as did Clements (1pf2) with 

wheat . 

Folkins and Kaufmann (I9?4) reported that stern size 

decreased with increased <strong>plant</strong>ing rate in an oat experiment. 

Woodward (1956) reported a simil-ar deerease in straw stiff- 

ness in his work wi.th wheat, oats, and barley. 

JO

the effect <strong>of</strong> seeding rate on yield is affected by the 

environment, in particular, the amount <strong>of</strong> water avail-able. 

Pelton's (t969) results with lower seed.ing rates gíving 

better yields when under moisture stress are evidence <strong>of</strong> 

this. Kirby (19?O) reported no difference in total water 

use for the growing season with barley seeded at various 

rates i however, he did report that differences existed in 

water use at different times <strong>of</strong> the season for the different 

densities. He suggested that the higher density <strong>plant</strong>ings 

used more v;ater earl-y in the growing period, and may then 

suffer moisture stress during the grain filling stage. This 

could present a problem in dry years or dry areas. 

Ðay and Thompson (19?0), from work with winter barley, 

reported that seeding date also had an effect on the optimum 

seeding rate. They indicated that as the seeding date was 

delayed the seeding rate should be increased. 

Briggle and Vogel (1968) indicated that one <strong>of</strong> the 

problems with the semi-dwarf wheats in the Pacific Northwest 

was that they did not emerge well from deep <strong>plant</strong>ing, 

apparently due to shorter coleoptile length. 

A close positive correlation between culm length and 

coleoptile length was reported by Allan et al. (1962), 

sunderman (1964), Burleigh et al. (L964), and $than (L9?6). 

in wheat studies, and by Takahashi (L946) in bartey experi- 

ments . 

JI

A positive rel-atj-onshj-p between coleoptile length and 

the ability to ernerge fron greater <strong>plant</strong>ing depth has been 

reported in barley ( Kaufmann, 1968) and in wheat (Sunderman, 

1963; Burleigh et a]-, L964, Whan, l-926). 

A1lan et aI, (L962) reported that another associated 

problem was emergence rate. This group and Burleigh et a1. 

(f-964) reported that the seni-dwarf short coleoptile wheats 

emerged more slowly. fhey calculated an emergence rate 

index and found this to be closely related to coloeptile 

length. 

All"an et al. (1g61) indicated that the heritabilities 

<strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and eoleoptíIe length in wheat are high¡ and 

since they are apparently independently inherited, it should 

be possible to select for short cuJ-m length with improved. 

coleoptile length. This view has been supported by Chowdhry 

and A1lan (lgøl). 

Boyd gþ a1. (19?r) indicated that seed size and time to 

germination were positively related to seedling vÍgor. This 

relationship between seed size and emergence characteristics 

in barley was previously reported by Kaufmann (1968). 

Root System Size in Semi-Dwarfs 

Bríggle and Vogel (1968) reported that the earliest 

seroi-dwarf wheats did not do we]-l when grown wrder dryland 

conditions in the Central United States. They suggested this 

was due to problems involving moisture stress, since these 

varieties did weLl under irrigation in the same area. 

38

l,upton et 41. (7974) pointed out this could be an indication 

<strong>of</strong> limited root development. 

Vfork in India reported. by Subbiah et a1. (1968) indic- 

ated that some <strong>of</strong> the short wheats had more extensive root 

systens than did the standard <strong>height</strong> genotypes, where others 

had poorer root systems. However, in very extensive studies 

<strong>of</strong> the root systems <strong>of</strong> wheat, Lupton et al. (19?4) ana 

0'3rien (L975), both working with Norin-10 deríved serni- 

dwarf genotypes, reported no evidence <strong>of</strong> differences in the 

síze or extent <strong>of</strong> the root systerûs <strong>of</strong> semi-dwarf and normal 

heíght genotype s. 

39

MATERÏALS AND IETHODS 

The experiment was designed to investigate the Ínter- 

relationships <strong>of</strong> various agronomic and quality characteristics, 

in particular the effect <strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> heì ght, 

and to obtain estirnates <strong>of</strong> genetic variance and heritabiì-ity 

for these characteristics in three six-rowed barley hybrids, 

Hordeum vulgare 1,., each derived from a cross having one 

semí-dwarf parent in comrnon. The pedigrees, descriptions 

<strong>of</strong> and agronomic eomparisons between the parents, their 

sources, and the numbers <strong>of</strong> lines used i-n each hybrid, 

henceforth referred to as populations, are presented in 

îable J. 

lhe crosses.were made at the Universi.ty <strong>of</strong> Manj-toba in 

1970 and the material was carried through the segregating 

generations to F5 via single seed descent. The F2 and F3 

l\¡ere grown at Winnípeg and the F4 was grown in CaLifornia. 

No selection was done during this period. Therefore each 

F5 line traced to a separate F2 <strong>plant</strong>. 

T.n 1973 and l.974 the material was grown in a two- 

replicate completely randomized block design experirnent at 

each <strong>of</strong> two locations, the UnÍversity <strong>of</strong> Manitoba Crop 

Research site, lfinnípeg, and at the Agricul-ture Canada 

40

Table 3. Pedigrees <strong>of</strong> Crosses and Parental Línes gívíng ríse to Populations 

C-70-1, C-7O-2 and. C-7C-3, and Relâtive Levels <strong>of</strong> Agronomic 

ParaDeLers <strong>of</strong> ?arental Lines, Experinent I. 

Population Pedígree 

c-70-1 

c-70-2 

c-70-3 

Parental Lines 

Minn 64-62 x Bonanza 

Mí¡r- 64-62 x 66NL288 

Minn 64-62 x 816507-55 

vlínn 64-62 Jotun/Kíndredl /vanxaee/ / | 

'Irop}:y / / / /lícir"soî/ / /lltírm 59-38 

BonaÍEa Lícenced Canadian 6-row 

barley varíety 

66N1288 14C247 lParkTand, 

816507-55 Para9on/Parkland// 

CL5791/ / /Conqsest 

raËÍve c DaÈa 

Number <strong>of</strong> 

Línes Soutce 

103 

87 

4L 

41 

U. <strong>of</strong> l.{anitoba, Canada 

U. <strong>of</strong> Manitoba, Canada 

U. <strong>of</strong> Manitoba, Canada 

U. <strong>of</strong> Mifmesota, U. S.A. 

Agr. Can. Res. Stn., 

Brandon, Man. , Canada 

U. <strong>of</strong> Manítoba, Canada 

Agr. Can. Res. Stn. , 

Brandon, Þlan., Cênadâ 

Ht. (cn. ) Yield 1000 Kernel Test lüL . 

(ke./ha.) r^'t. (s.) (kg./h1.) . Lodging Mature 

* Bonanza 87.9 3859 

*66N1288 87.4 3666 

xBr6507-55 67.6 3337 

xxMirm 64-62 66.0 3303 

35 ,4 

36 .9 

J¿.1+ 

14,, 

65. L 

67.3 

62.3 

64 .2 

Degree <strong>of</strong> Days to 

(1-e) 

3.0 

* Data from 1970 Western Co-operatíve 6-row Barley Test, Means <strong>of</strong> 17 l-ocations. 

,.* hleighLed data calculated from results <strong>of</strong> Experíment I <strong>of</strong> thís nanuscript. 

3,4 

2.7 

L.4 

8s.6 

86. 0 

81.3 

89.4

Research Station, Brand on, Manitoba. Grovring condj-tions 

were excellent in 1973. Ín 1974 seeding was delayed and 

germination hampered by wet spring conditions at Brarrdon, 

and both sites suffered drought stress later in the season" 

Seeding dates in L9?3 we're May B at Brandon and May 16 at 

Winnipeg, and ín 1974, \úay 25 at Brandon arrd. illay 18 at 

Winnipeg. 

In :..973 the plots consisted <strong>of</strong> 2 rows 2.4 rneters long, 

with lo cm. spaees between rows and- 61 cm. spaees between 

plots. Every fifth plot was a control genotype, In 1974 

the plot design was identical- except that the length <strong>of</strong> plot 

was 3.1 meters and control-s were less frequent. All plots 

were seeded at rates approximating nornal field <strong>plant</strong>ing 

rates based on a uniform seed number per plot. 

lhe following measurernents were taken on eaeh plot: 

(r) punt Height - taken in cm. just prior to maturity, 

measured from ground leve1 to top <strong>of</strong> spike. 

(z) yiefa - recorded as grams per plot. All plots were 

hand harvested and threshed in a Hege Combine ín 

r.97 3 and in a stationary Vogel Plot Thresher in 

I97+, In l-973 the center l".B meters <strong>of</strong> both rows 

was harvested fron each p1ot, fn L97 4 the center 

2.4 meters <strong>of</strong> both rows was harvested at Winnipeg, 

while at Brandon only one 2.4 meter section <strong>of</strong> the 

row \\ras harvested. 

(3) Kernels per spike - based on hand counts <strong>of</strong> 10 

spikes per p1ot, taken ât random. 

OF ¡ìIANIIoBA 

42

(4) 200 Kernel weight * record.ed in grams ¡ measured as 

the weight <strong>of</strong> 200 random, thresl"red, deawned kernels. 

(5) Test weight - reeorded as (kilograms per hectoliter) 

and determined by standard procedures using threshed 

and deawned grain samples. 

(6) percent plumpness - recorded as percent <strong>of</strong> grain 

remaining on top <strong>of</strong> a 2.4 x 19.0 mm. perforated 

oblong seive after hand shaking a 100 gram sample 

<strong>of</strong> threshed, deawned grain 100 times. 

(7) lays to heading - recor

ìr(12) Saccharifying activity - recorded as units, determined 

by the method outlined by Bendelow (fg??), 

x(11) Percent Barley nitrogen - recorded as percent; 

determined by the Kjeldhal procedu_re. 

*(14) Solubl-e amino-nitrogen - recorded as mg. per 1o0 mg. 

<strong>of</strong> barley; deterrnined as per roethod outli-ned by 

Bendelow (19??), 

Analysis <strong>of</strong> variance was calculated for each characteristic 

in each population on the combined datâ over years and 

locations. Genetic and environmental variances were calculated 

using the estirnated mean squares (Stee1 and Torrie, 

1960). fieritabilíty estimates were computed by the nethod 

<strong>of</strong> Constock and Moll (1963) based on the eomponents <strong>of</strong> 

varíance. lhe standard errors for the heritabilities were 

computed by the method outlined by Pesek and Baker (fpZf). 

Missing plot data were solved for, where necessary, by the 

nethods <strong>of</strong> Healy and Westmacott (L956), 

To test for differences between genotypes and the 

significance <strong>of</strong> genetic variance the approxinate F test (F') 

suggested by Cochran and Cox (f95?) was used, with degrees 

<strong>of</strong> freedom calculated by the Sâtterhthwalte approximation 

(I,eclerg et aL. , a962). 

Paired t-tests were used to determine whether or not 

population means differed from each other for the various 

characterístic s . 

Simp1e phenotypie correLation coefficients were conputed. 

between all combinations <strong>of</strong> characteristics within each 

44

population, using individual line means from the whole 

experiment. Honogeneity <strong>of</strong> correlation coefficients was 

calculated as outlined by Steel and TorrÍe (f96O), and when 

such were found to be homogeneous across the three populations, 

pool-ed correlation values were computed. 

Data fron control plots did not enter into the analyses 

described above. This data was used only for purposes <strong>of</strong> 

the breeding project from which all the rnaterial was taken. 

The purpose <strong>of</strong> thís study was to determine the response 

<strong>of</strong> three semi-dwarf and two ta11 barley genotypes (described 

in Îable 4) to high levels <strong>of</strong> applied nítrogen fertilizer, 

and to determine if any significant nitrogen fertilizer by 

genotype interaction occurred. 

A four replicate split plot experiment was <strong>plant</strong>ed in 

fïve environments; the University <strong>of</strong> Manitoba l\¡eed Research 

site at Carman, Manitoba ín L975 and I)16, at the Sisson's 

Farrn l-,td. site at Portage La Prairie, Manitoba Ln J-975 and 

LQl6, and at the G. Kabernick far¡n site at Sanford, Manitoba 

in L976. 

lhe sites are described below: 

Site 

Carman IÇfJ 

?ortage I)lJ 

Soil lype 

Very Fine 

Sandy T,oan 

Very Fine 

Sandy Loam 

Previous Crop 

0at s 

Wheat 

45 

Avai lab1e 

so i t-N-¡:ZE--'¡r( ke.,/ha. ) 

¿y. r 

37 ,0

Table 4, Genotypes used in Nítrogen FertíLízer Applícatíon Study, 

Experiment II. 

Plant 

Genotype Pedigree lleight Class 

Bonanza ** Tal1 

C7O2O24 l{inn 6t+-62 x 66N1288 Tall 

C703011 ¡finn 64-62 x Bx65O7-55 Serni-dwarf 

C703032 l4ínr. 64-62 x 816507-55 Se¡nÍ-d¡varf 

Minn 64-62 ** Semi-dwarf 

** Described ín Table 3,

Site 

Sanford 19?6 Clay 

Cawnan 19?6 Fine Sandy 

Loam 

Portage a)f6 Fine Sandy 

f-.,Oam 

Soil !¡fpe Previous Crop 

Flax 

Rape seed 

Sunflower s 

36,o 

24,? 

34,8 

All sites were fertilized prior to seeding.wÍth a 

broadcast application <strong>of</strong> 11:48¡0 to attempt to achieve 

recorunended Pro, levels. Planting dates were May lJ at 

Carrnan and May 16 at Portage ín I9?5, I{ay I at Sanford, 

May B at por-bage and May lp at Carman rn Lg?6. Growing 

conditions were average except for a heavy weed infestation 

at Carnan in I97 5 and severe moisture stress at both Carman 

and Portage in 1976, 

The five main plots were rates <strong>of</strong> nitrogen fertilizer; 

applied as l4:0:O broadcast and harrowed in prior to <strong>plant</strong>ing, 

at Levels <strong>of</strong> 0.00, 67,26, 134'-52, Z}I.?B ana 26g,o4 

kilograrns <strong>of</strong> actual nitrogen per hectare. Sub-plots were 

genotypes. Plots were four rows 6.1 meters long with 30 cm. 

between rows and between plots. .4.11 plots were seeded at 

noymal field seeding rates. 

The following characteristies were measìlred for each 

plot at each environrnent: (Unless oi;herwise specified, 

rneasurements were iaken as ín Experiraent I.) 

(r) Prant <strong>height</strong> 

(e) yief¿ - recorded as kg,/ha.- Â four meter section 

47

<strong>of</strong> both <strong>of</strong> the center rou/s <strong>of</strong> each p1ût was hand 

harvested and threshed in a Vogel Plot Thresher, 

except at Carman, 19?6 where whole plots were 

f iel-d harvested with a "lüGE" pl-ot combine. 

(J) Number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit aï'ea - the number <strong>of</strong> 

fertile heads was counted in a random one meter 

section <strong>of</strong> one <strong>of</strong> the two center rows <strong>of</strong> each 

plot. (Íhis is equivalent to a 0.11 square rneter 

area " ) 

(4) Kernels per spike 

(5) 2oo Kernet weight 

(6) legree <strong>of</strong> lodging - recorded as a value on a scale 

<strong>of</strong> one to nine, with one being no lodging. Taken 

ín 1975 only. 

(7) fest weight - recorded as tg./trt. and determined 

by standard procedure s. 

(B) oays to Heading 

(9) nays to maturity 

(lO) Post-anthesis period 

( 11) Percent barley nitrogen 

(1e) ,tlpfra-amylase 1eve1s - taken in L9? 5 only 

(13) Saecharifying activity - taken in IgZ5 onlry 

(t4) Sotu¡te amino-nitrogen - taken in 1975 onl.y 

Analyses <strong>of</strong> variance were computed for each character 

at each location to deternine: (1) if differences existed 

between treatments and (2) if any nitrogen fertilizer by 

genotype interactions had occurred r 

48

Orthogonal single degree <strong>of</strong> freedon comparisons were 

employed to compare genotypes where desirable" Duncan,s 

Multiple Range test was used to determine significance <strong>of</strong> 

differences between treatment means atìd betlveen fertilizer 

x genotype interaction means when a significant interaction 

had occured. 

This study vras conducted to deterrnine the effects <strong>of</strong> 

varying row spacing and seeding rate on the yield and agron- 

omie characteristics <strong>of</strong> tall and semi-dwarf barley genotypes. 

Two genotypes were studied, one taIl, cv. ',Bonanza,,, and. one 

semi-dwarf , Minn64-62. 

A three replicate 2 x) x I factoríal experiment was 

grown at three l-ocations in 19?6t t]ne G. Kabernick farm, 

Sanford, Manitoba; the University <strong>of</strong> Manitoba Weed Research 

site, Carman, Manitoba¡ and the University <strong>of</strong> Manitoba Crop 

Research site, ttlinnipeg, Manitoba; with genotypes, seeding 

rates, and row spacings the respective factors. Each geno- 

type was tested at every combination <strong>of</strong> levels <strong>of</strong> factors 

two and three in each replicate. 

the three level-s <strong>of</strong> factor two (seeding rate) were the 

number <strong>of</strong> germinable seeds equal to seeding rates <strong>of</strong> 56.0, 

84.0 and LL?,A kg./ina. <strong>of</strong> Bonanza. The three levels <strong>of</strong> 

factor three (row spacings) were 1J.0, 30.5 and 61.0 cn. 

Plots were 6.1 meters long by 2.4 neters wíde having 

16 rows at the narrowest, B at the internediate and 4 rows 

49

at the wídest spacing. 

fhe experirnent was <strong>plant</strong>ed on April 2f at ttlinnipeg, 

May ? at Sanford, and June 3 at Carrnan. Weeds were controlled 

by chemical application at aìl sites to the extent 

possible, and hand weeding was done as the need dictated at 

$Iinnipeg and Sanford. The experinent receÍved a J.0 cm" 

irrigation thírty-four days after <strong>plant</strong>ing at Tfinnipeg. 

The Sanford sÍte suffered some excess noisture stress d.uring 

June. The Carnan location suffered severe drought stress 

throughout the growing season. The Wirueipeg site suffêred 

mild hail damage just prior to harvest. 

the following characteristies were measured in the same 

fashion as in Experiment II. 

(1) Ptant heÍght (cm.) 

(2) Yield (ks,/he..) 

(l) sPikesr/unit area 

(4) Kernels,/spire 

(S) zao Kernel weight 

(6) rest weight (kg,/n1.) 

(?) r,o¿ging - at lfinnipeg only 

(8) Percent barley nitrogen 

Analyses <strong>of</strong> rrarianc e were used to determine slgnif,icant 

differences between l-evels <strong>of</strong> the factors and <strong>of</strong> interactions 

anong these factors. Slngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparisons 

were calcu1âted to determíne the manner in whieh the factors 

'seeding rate" and 'row spacingÊ affected the relative performance 

s <strong>of</strong> the genotypes. 

50

Experiment lV: _-.t0qlepptite leneth Stuqy 

This experiment was conducted to determine the relation- 

ship between eoleoptite length and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> in seleeted 

taIl and semí-dwarf barley genotypes described in Tabte J. 

Four semi-dwarf and three tall genotln)es were lncluded. 

The study was conducted at the Universíty <strong>of</strong> Minnesota, 

U.S.A. in February, 1976. A four replicate conpletely 

randomized block design was used, each replicate consisting 

<strong>of</strong> six seeds <strong>of</strong> each genotype individually pi.aced embryo 

upright ín the center <strong>of</strong> a paper towel" This towel was 

then rolled up, fastened, placed in a beaker containing 

water and placed ín a dark incubator for germination. Síx 

seeds were used to insure a sarnple size <strong>of</strong> five for each 

replicate <strong>of</strong> each genotype" The incubator was kept at 15 

degrees C for seven days, but due to this temperature, germination 

did not ensue and the temperature was raised to 2j 

deg"ees C for seven more days. After this, the material was 

removed and the following measurenents were taken: 

(1) Coleoptile ]-ength (mm.). 

(2) Seminal root number" 

(3) Root score - based on a visual rating in which 

roots were scored as l-ong, medium, or short. lhese 

were given weights <strong>of</strong> three, two and one respectively, 

with the sum constituting the total- score. 

( 4) sfroot length ( rnm. ) . 

Analyses <strong>of</strong> variance were computed to determine dif- 

51

Table 5. GenoÈypes used in Coleoptile l,ength Study and Emergence 

Study, Experíment IV and Experíment VI. 

Plant 

Genotype Pedígree Height Class 

Bonanza 

c 7010 13 

c703019 

Mion 64-62 

c703032 

c7 03029 

c703011 

)t* Describêd in Table 3. 

t(* Ta1l 

þÍinn 64-62 x Bonanza Tall 

Mítr' 64-62 x 816507-55 Tall 

** Semi-dwarf 

ùlínn 64-62 x 816507-55 Semi-duTarf 

þfínrt 64-62 x 816507-55 Semi-dr^rarf 

l4ir'r' 64-62 x 816507-55 Semi-dr¡arf

ferences between genotype s which were then descríbed by a 

Duncanrs Multiple Range Test. Single degree <strong>of</strong> freedon 

cornparísons were calculated to determine differences 

between tall and semi-dv¡arf genotypic cl-asses. 

Sinple phenotypíc correlations were calculated for the 

paraneters rneasured and rank correlations were determined 

to describe the relationship between these traits and <strong>plant</strong> 

heíght, yiel"d, 2O0 kernel weight and percent plumpness. 

These last four pararneters were determined fron previously 

grown plots <strong>of</strong> these genot)¡pes. 

fhis study was designed to determine if dífferences ín 

root size existed between the members <strong>of</strong> a selected group <strong>of</strong> 

tall and. semi-dwarf barley genotype s described in Table 6. 

A five replieate cornpletely randomized block experiment 

was conducted in the greenhouse ín 1975. Plants were grown 

in five inch clay pots in a I¿2¡ 1 soil, sand, and peat moss 

medium. Samples were taken once every seven days fro¡r 28 to 

70 days after <strong>plant</strong>ing. 

The <strong>plant</strong>s were renoved from the pots and the roots 

were hand washed fron the medium, The roots were then 

removed from the <strong>plant</strong>s, dried overnight at J0 degrees C, 

and weíghed. 

Analysis <strong>of</strong> variance was ealculated for each sampling 

date to determine if differences existed between genotypes 

53

Table 6. Genotypes used ín Root Size Study, Experíment V. 

Genotypes Pedígree 

B<strong>of</strong>l.ar.za 

8r6507-55 

c7 010 13 

c702024 

Mí¡n 64-62 

c703011 

c7 03029 

** Described ín Table 3. 

Mínn 64-62 x Bonanza 

Minr. 64-62 x 66N1288 

Mirn 64-62 x 816507-55 

ltlínn 64-62 x 816507-55 

PIant 

Helght Class 

Ta11 

Ta11 

Ta11 

Ta11 

Semi-dwarf 

Serni-dwarf 

Serní-dwarf

and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> c lasse s . 

Root growth rates were calcu]ated as the sum <strong>of</strong>, root 

dry weight at sampting L, 2, 3, 4, J, and 6 nrultiplied by 

respective weightings <strong>of</strong> 6. 5, 4, 3, 2. ând 1. Genotypes 

were then compared for these parameters. 

Rank correlations were computed among the paraneters 

for maximum root dry weight and root growth rate with <strong>plant</strong> 

<strong>height</strong>, yield, 200 kernel we ight and percent plumpness, and. 

with eaeh other. 

This experiment was designed to c ompare seleeted semi- 

dwarf and ta1l genotypes for the abil-ity to emerge fron: 

various <strong>plant</strong>ing depths. The genotype s used are deseribed 

in lable J. 

A three-repficate completely randomized block desígn 

experinent was grown in a l:1:1 soi1, sand, and peat moss 

nedium in boxes in the greenhouse in l-975, Planting depths 

\\tere 2,54, 5,O8, ? .62 and 10.16 cm. 

Emergence rate indexes (ÉRI) were calculated by the 

method deseribed by A.11an et. aI. (f962). 

Lnalysis <strong>of</strong> variance was used to determine genotypie 

differences. the relationship <strong>of</strong> ERI to <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, 

coleoptile length, yieId, 200 kernel weight, and percent 

plurnpness was studied by rank correlation procedures. 

55

ÞT¡êTTT ,,rrq' 

Conrronents o{ Variance and. Heritabilitv Estimates 

Means, estimates <strong>of</strong> the cornponents <strong>of</strong> variance, and 

heritability estimates for ten agrononic parameters in each 

<strong>of</strong> the three populations ¡ C-fO-l, C-?O-Z and C-l0-J are 

presented in Table ?" Significant genetic variance ((lfr) 

existed for all traits in each population, except for yield 

in C-?0-3, 

Significant genotype x location x year tO.frr" I interaction 

variance components exÍsted for a number <strong>of</strong> pararneters 

in each population. fhe onlytF!r" which wes l-arger than the 

genotypic conponent was for yield in C-?t-Z, but this did 

not detraet frorn the significance <strong>of</strong> the genetie variance. 

fhe only other traits for which Ofr", was consistently large 

were percent plunrpness in the first two poputr-ations and test 

weight in populations C-?0-1 a.nd. t-?O-j. Rasmusson and 

Glass (1967) reported significantCfr" for percent plurnp- 

ness and heading date. 

ïn general, where no significant seeond order interaction 

existed, at least one <strong>of</strong> the first order interactions 

56

Table 7. con¡tonêlts <strong>of</strong> vÁrfancê f std. !r.ot dnd tl¿EltÁblltry E'ttrnáter i stil, Error, E rpà!¡.nont L 

Cor¡ponènts <strong>of</strong> Vârlsnce 

llcrlt¡blltrr: i? 

" cLT 

-cY 

då 

Chåractorl¡tlc ?oprn 

3.0 

89 I 

87t 

83r 

s.40 r 0.38 

4.19 f 0.2¿ 

/¡.70 + 0.52 

r 0,54 

r 0,35 

* 0.76 

0.95't 

-9.18 

1.30Âi * 0.51 

¡..32ñ,r r 0.39 

0.85. 

3.85*r t 1.27 

! 0,4t 

r 0,21 

r 0.47 

0.48 

-0,06 

-0.23 

Planr llel.ght c-70-l 7ß,t0 14,80** * j.40 

(cm.) c-10-2 76.02 7.90*¡r i 1.39 

c-70-3 68.35 12.95*È * 3,54 

327('.lO t 228,53 40 t 15.0 

2586,79 r 196,39 58 r 14.0 

2028.7O t 22t!.12 28 t 22.0 

t37.80 r t73.90 -25.00 { 253,13 

-65.15 É 227.00 879.¿0 r 3¿5.59 

601.,30*r r 269,44 -2t.15 r 248,89 

335.99r I 159.8t 81,65 r 167.99 

593.27k^ t 206.97 -t44.51 t 2tg,26 

313.05 ù 302.65 490,10'rr ! 247.00 

513.88 

540.40 

c-70-t 

Y{eld (g.lplor} 

5X2,83 

c-70-3 

63 ! 9.0 

58 r 1C.1 

67.88 0.58** ! o.tl -o.01 r o.l0 

67.88 0.55* ! 0,17 0.13** t 0.08 

67.67 0.51** ! q,22 0.13 10.17 

c-70-l 

c-70-2 

lest l.felgh È 

(kc. /hl. ) 

c- 70-3 

60 * 1.5.0 

1.36 i Lì.ÌO 

1.26 r 0,10 

1.10 + 0. 12 

0.22¡r É 0.13 

0,05 r 0.12 

o,35* ! 1.22 

0.02 * 0.10 

0.l5rr¡r I 0.12 

0.13 + 0.17 

48 ! t2,0 

72 t 8.0 

51 r l5,C 

,,t2 x o,54 

0.80* å 0.46 -0.12 + 0.59 

0.02 r 0.42 0.13 I 0.65 

2,14rttt ,0.84 -0.95 r 0,73 

* 0,40 

t o.hz 

r 0,60 

0.32 

0,0ê 

0,99 

1.40*'r t 0.49 

2.61r¡ ¿ 0.61 

2¡37Jt* ! l. 1l 

c-70-l 56.L1 

c-70-2 56.30 

c-70-3 54,61 

Rorncls per 

Sptka 

7 .47 *. O.S1 

7.29 * 0.8t 

78 r 5.0 

7t t 7,0 

t r 8.0 

-;ï"!: 

0.062 l0.004 

0,060 t 0,005 

-0,006 10,004 

-0,010 ! 0.00/' 

0,0l0in r 0.004 

0,010** t 0.00¿r 

0,038i'r I 0.00t -0.00t I ú.002 

0,030** É 0,010 0,000 a 0.000 

c-70- I 

c-70-2 

c-70-3 

?00 l(ernal 

llctBftt (8.) 

* f or F' 6l8nlf 

\¡

Táble 7. Contlnued 

Components <strong>of</strong> Várlånc€ 

nêrlr¿btttry z 

'a 

Characterlstlc Pop'rì ltêar 

" 3 

' CI.Y 

GY 

' ér. 

9,97 t O.70 69 ! 6.0 

7.t3 É 0.38 65 ! 9.0 

9.I5 ! l.0l 62 ! tz.o 

¿.80** r 1.34 2.91** r t.l6 

1.40,r* t l.t4 3.05r* r 0.38 

6,99*r: ! 2.36 1.63 ! 1.68 

0.63 ! 0.85 

-1.08 ! 0.61 

1.57** ! 1.25 

U P1unpne66 c-70-l 84.93 10.46** ! 2.25 

c-70-2 46.20 5,18** ! t.36 

c-70-l 83.58 9.33** r 3.ó3 

80 ! 4.0 

80 ! 5.0 

o.l4** ! o.05 

0. l Trt'r t 0.07 

0.03 ! 0,05 

o.7t*'r r 0.13 

0.87** I 0,17 

0.35** ! 0.1¿ 

54,99 

5ó.06 

63 r t2.O 

0.5¿ ! 0,03 

0.56 Ì 0,0â 

0.58 t 0.06 

0.07** ! o.03 0.02 I O.05 

o.05 r o.05 0,17*r r 0.0t 

0,26*!r ! 0,09 .-0.10 l0,07 

5¿.53 

Iay6 to Headlna c-70-l 

c-70-2 

c_70_3 

67 i 8.0 

83 ! ó.0 

0,19** r 0.08 -0.0t r o,o8 

o.02 r 0.0t 0.13 ! 0.u 

0.86*,1 1 0.32 0.26 ! 0.23 

-o,01 ! 0.06 

-0,12 r 0.06 

-0.18 r 0.13 

0.45** ! 0.tI 

0.54i* ! 0.ll 

0.89r* r 0,37 

44.23 

85.06 

8t-68 

c-70-l 

c-70-2 

c-70-3 

Daye to Ilatùriry 

60 ¡ 14.0 

l. t2 ! 0.08 

1.06 I 0,08 

l.¿0 ! 0.ll 

63 t 9,0 

62 l I1.0 

68 ! ll.0 

1.33 r 0.lo 

1.20 r 0,06 

1.77 I 0.20 

! o.l I 

! o.l3 

! o.23 

0.06 

o.23* 

0.07 

0. n** 1 0.08 

-0.17 i 0,08 

0.5/r*r t 0,25 

! 0.07 

! 0.09 

r 0.14 

-0.02 

0,05 

-0.09 

D€ys tn PoEÈ- C-70-l 29.15 0.38*'r ! O.l0 

ÂrtheslE c-7O-2 29.11 0.35** 10,10 

c-70-3 21.7.f 0.97** ! 0.35 

78 t l¡.0 

65 r 7.0 

c2 

t.13 1 0,09 

1,08 ! 0.09 

-GE 

! o,o8 

! 0.08 

o.08 

0.01 

-2 "c 

Dearee <strong>of</strong> C-70-l 3.36 0.75:t* ! 0.14 

LodslnE c-7O-2 2.06 0.34** ¿ o-08 

ol f 610¡1t1cánt et 

** F or r' stgnlftcânt at P=0.0t. 

oo

was significant" fhe only case in which these interactions 

t 

were larger than orõ was for yield in population Ç-?A4 in 

which genotype x year (Ofrr) ana genc.type x location (Cfr") 

were both significant anci larger tfranOf,. This led to no 

significant genotypic variance for yield in this population" 

t 

îhe Cõy was both more <strong>of</strong>ten significant and more con- 

s!-stently signíficant across populations than wasFfr", in 

agreernent with the results reported by Rasmusson and Glass 

(1967)" rheefr.,' *as inportant in all populations for <strong>plant</strong> 

<strong>height</strong>, 200 kernel weíght, and percent plunpness; and signíficant 

às well- ín populatioris one and three for kernels 

per spike, days to headÍng, days to maturity and Cays in 

post-ânthesis. fheOfr" was relatively important only for 

da¡'s tro heading in populations C-?0-1 anò, C-IO-Z. Rasmusson 

and Glass (196?) reported no significantOfr, for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

in agreement with the present study, whíle they did report 

a significant O[" for rlays to heading j-n one population. 

ïn no case vÍere any <strong>of</strong> the interaction variance 

components larger than the error component <strong>of</strong> variance (Of;). 

The6!'s for test weight, kernels per spike, kernel weight, 

days to maturity, and days in post-anthesis were two to 

three tines as Ìarge as were tfredfr estimates for these 

pârameters, and for yíeld, tire C!,s were four to nine times 

greater than were tfre Ofr's. These results again are in 

general agreernent wlth those reported by Rasmusson and Glass 

(196?) and Rutger et al. {f966), 

The heritabi-lity estirnates presented in Table ? are 

59

elatively high. With ¡ninor exceptions, they were <strong>of</strong> 

simílar magnitude rela.tive to each other, as had been the 

case for those prev5.ously reported (Table L). Esti.mates 

for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> (83 to 89%) and, far 2OO kernet weight 

(?f to ?B/") were high and consistent over a1l populatíons. 

the estinated heritabilities <strong>of</strong> test weight (58 ta 68%), 

percent plunpness (62 to 69/") anA days in post-anthesis 

{62 to 68/") were lower but also consistent over the populations 

studied. 0f these characteristic s, only the estinated 

heritability for <strong>plant</strong> heíght d.eviated from prevíous reports 

being higher in the present study, 

Contrary to the literature (gaUle 1), the heritability 

estinates for days to heading and to maturity were not 

consistent over the three populations. However, the inter- 

medíate to high magnitudes, 6) ta B0/" and 6o to 83ft 

respectively, were consistent with previous reports (?able l)" 

Rasmusson and ûlass OgAZ ) reported siailar variability 

between populations for days to heading. 

The literature surveyed gave no previous indication <strong>of</strong> 

an heritability estirnate for the parameter days in postanthesis. 

The result in the present study was moderately 

high heritability (62 to 68/"), co,nsisteni across populations. 

HeritabilÍties for kernels per spike were variable, with 

population C-7O-2 sho$/ing an estimate af ?2% as compared to 

48 and 5ly'" for the other populations. this variability also 

existed in previous reports (îable 1). 

Heritability estimates for yield in this study were low 

60

(28 to 5B/"), as reported by nost others (Ta¡le l-), and 

subject to large standard errôrs (I4 to ZZ/,), fhe estimate 

for population C-10-J (ZB + ZZ%j was essentially zero, since 

no genetic variance for yield $/as detected due io large 

2t 

¡¡['' ana ({" componenis cf va:'iance. TI-ie ver.y large oj's 

contributed to lowe:: heritabilities for yield in all 

popul-atiorrs. 

The heritability estimates for lodging were relatively 

high (63 to ?Bl") considering data were availabte from only 

three experinents. This is partly explained by the large 

t 

amount <strong>of</strong> Cr[ for this trait due to the strong relationship 

<strong>of</strong> lodging and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> ín these populations. 

Stan

Table 8, Population Means and Ranges for Agronomic and Quality 

Parameters, Experiment I. 

No, <strong>of</strong> 

Characteristic Poprn Lines Meân I Std. Error 

Plant Height 

(cr. ) 

Yield 

(e. /p1ot) 

Kernels per 

Spike 

200 Kernel 

!ùeíght 

Test tr{eight 

(ke. /hl . ) 

PercenÈ 

Plumpness 

Degree <strong>of</strong> 

Lodging 

c-70-1 

c-70-2 

c-70-3 

Borìanza 

c- 70- 1 

c-7 0-z 

c-70-3 


c- 70- r 

c-70-2 

c- 70-3 


c-70- I 

c-7 0-2 

c- 70- 3 

Bol\artza 

103 

87 

4l 

103 

87 

4l 

Range 

l-ornTest Line - Z 

tlíshest T-ine c,V - 

76.I0 ! 0.57 b 58.80-84.20:k'r 7.6 

76.02 ! 0.46 b 58.70-81.90** 5.6 

68.35 t 0.87 a 52.7O-76.7Oxx A-2 

79.40 ! O .09 

513.9 t 4.1 a 

540.4 ! 4.9 a 

532.8 ! 7.4 a 

533.2 L 2.2 

423.3-602,5* 8.0 

418.6-635.8** 8.4 

417.4-638.4 8.8 

103 56.17 ! O.24ab 49.6 -6L.6x* 

87 56.50 ! 0.29 b 50.8 -63.3rr* 

41 54.6L x 0.47a 46.8 -60.5** 

103 

87 

4L 

57.50 1 0. 10 

7 .01 ! 0. 03a 

7.04 1 0.03a 

6.99 10.06a 

6.93 r 0,01 

c-70-1 r03 67. 88 10.13a 

c-70-2 87 67.88 ! 0.14a 

c-70-3 41 67.67 ! O.27a 

Bonanza 66. 31 I 0.05 

c-70- I 

c-70-2 

c-7 0-3 


c-70-1 

c-70-2 

c- 70-3 

Bonafiza 

103 

87 

4t 

103 

87 

4I 

84.93 t 0.54a 

86.2O ! 0.43a 

83. 58 t 0.86a 

85.20 r 0. 14 

3.36 ! 0.10 b 

2.86 1 0.08a 

2.08 t 0.10ab 

4.46 t 0,04 

4.3 

4.8 

5.6 

6.27-7,gLx* 1.9 

5.98-7.73*x 2,O 

6. 1I-7.95** 2.O 

64.8 -70.4** 6.5 

61.2 -70.t** 4.6 

63 .7 _69 ,7 *¿\ 6 ,6 

69.7 -94.7** 4.5 

65.9 -92.2*x 3.8 

69.2 -94.8** 5.1 

1. 10-5 . 67r. 29 ,2 

r.oo-4.57* 25.2 

1.00-3.43*'r 32.2 

Values in one group followed by the same leLter are not significantly 

different, P=0.05. 

* Fr significant at P=0.05. 

** Fr significant at P=0.01,

Table 8. Continued 

Range 

Lor{est Line - 

Characteristic PoÞtn Lines Mean I Std. Ercror Hishest Line 

Days to 

Heading 

Days to 

Mâturíty 

Dâys in Post- 

AntheseF 

c-amylase 

Level (uníts ) 

Soluble Amínonitrogen 

(ng. /100 mg. 

-Bartey) 

c- 70- I 

c-70-2 

c-70-3 

B<strong>of</strong>|anza 

Saccharifying C- 70- 1 

Activity C-7O-2 

c-70-3 

No. <strong>of</strong> 7" 

I03 

87 

47 

54.99 t 0. 13a 

56.06 10.16 b 

54.33 t 0. 17a 

54.60 t O .O4 

c-70-I 103 84.23 ! O.t2 b 

c-70-2 87 85.06 I 0.12 b 

c-70-3 41 8l 68 L 0 ,27 a 

Boîaîza 82.95 I 0.05 

c-70-1 103 29.35 10.11 b 

c-70-2 87 29.11 r 0.11 b 

c-70-3 41 27.27 ! O.26a 

Bonanza 28.35 t 0.05 

C-70-I 103 27.59 ! 0.28a 

C-70-2 87 25.28 t 0.30a 

C-70-3 40 25.78 t 0.47a 

Bonanza 22.97 ! 0,I8 


Bârley Nitrogen C-70- 1 

7. c-70-2 

c- 70-3 


c- 70- 1 

c-70-2 

c- 70-3 

103 208 

87 220 

40 261 

103 

87 

40 

i03 

87 

40 

242 

! 2,9 ab 

! 2.0 a 

! 3.4 b 

t 3.0 

2.05 I 0.01a 

2.00 t 0.01a 

2.04 ! 0.02a 

2.07 t 0.01 

0. 147 t 0.001a 

0. 137 ! 0.001a 

0.141 t 0.002a 

0. 160 I 0.002 

52.6 -59.gt

plumpness, level- <strong>of</strong> alpha-any1ase, percent barley nitrogen 

and soluble aníno-nitrogen, 0f these traits cv. "Bonanza" 

differed only in that it was lower in kernef weight and 

alpha-amyl-ase, and higher in pereent ba!.ley nitrogen and 

soluble amino-nitrogen, than were the rneans <strong>of</strong> the experl- 

r'rental populations. 0n a mean basis, population C-7O-3 

was significantly shorter than the others, which were both 

slíghtLy shorter than the control. 0vera11 decreased 

<strong>height</strong> <strong>of</strong> population C-7O-3 was emphasized by the fact that 

its tallest line was shorter than Bonanza. The greater mean 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> <strong>of</strong> C-70-1 and, C-7O-2 reflected the fact that 

these populatíons had lines taller thån the eontrol, and 

had more taller llnes than shorter f.ines, re l-atíve to C-7o-3 

(ra¡re 9). 

Bonanza had more kernels per spike than any <strong>of</strong> the 

populations and C-70-3 had significantly fewer than the 

other populations. 

C-7A-2 had a greater mean number <strong>of</strong> days to heading 

than C-?0-1 and C-10-J, which did not differ from each other 

or the check. Population C-7O-j was earlier maturíng, with 

Banar.z,a next, followed by the other populations" Íhe same 

ranking occurred for days in post-anthesis. 

All populations were more resistant to lodging on a 

mean basis than was Bonanza. Differences between populations 

were difficult to determine due to large environmental 

influences but it seemed that C-7O-3 was most resÍstant 

followed by C-?A-Z and C-70-1, the Least resistant. 

64

the Highest Yielding l,ines within Ëhe Plânt Height Categoríés 

Eor each <strong>of</strong> the Three Populations <strong>of</strong> Experiment I. 

Table 9. Mean Yiel-ds over all Envlronments <strong>of</strong> 

(Tall, Intermediate and Semi-dwarf) 

Plant Hetght Category (Pi{C) Height (cm.) 

Tall 74 

InEermediate 68 to 74 

Semi-dwarf 68 

Control Genotype PITC Mean YieLd t std. err<strong>of</strong> No, <strong>of</strong> plots 

L1ínr64-62 Se¡ri-dwarf 465 ! 56 168 

No. <strong>of</strong> Lines in Sampl: 

Mean Yiel-d <strong>of</strong> Best Line 

* lø - /ol ot) 

Best Line 

PHC 

Population 

18 

L4 

11 

IUJ 

603 

573 

505 

c701031 

c701060 

c701030 

TalL 

Intermediate 

Semi-dwarf 

c-70-1 

6T 

23 

636 

596 

519 

c7 02024 

c702053 

c702068 

Ta11 

InLefinediate 

Serní-dwarf 

c-70-z 

ü 

1 

29 

11 

4I 

)23 

639 

s73 

c703041 

c703019 

c703011 

Ta11 

InLermediaie 

Semi-dv¡arf 

c- 70- 3 

140 

66 

25 

231 

636 

639 

573 

c702024 

c7030 i 9 

c703011 

Tal-1 

Intermediale 

Semi-drvarf 

0verall 

o.\ 

* l-l",:..:.s ol 2 replícales at eåch <strong>of</strong> 2 locations in each <strong>of</strong> 2 years.

Ðata for saccharifyi"ng âctivity was also subject to 

large errus and it seemed tìnat C-?O-Z, C-?A4 and Bonanza 

were at about the sãme leve1 with C-ZO-I sornewhat lower. 

the ranges presented in îab1e B showed that significant 

differences exísted betr¡,¡een rines within aì-l populations for 

a1l- traits studied except for yield in C-?O-l and soluble 

a¡nino-nitrogen in C-70-1 and C-?ô-3, 

Maxifirwyr line means ín each population exeeeded the 

control mean for all characteristics except <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

and degree <strong>of</strong> lodging in Õ-7O-3 and 1evel <strong>of</strong> soluble amino_ 

nitrogen in botþ C-?O-z and C-?O-j. In al1 cases population 

mínimuns v¡ere lower than the control rnean. 

The possibility <strong>of</strong> setecting for increased yielding 

ability, in particular high yielding short statu.r,ed material, 

was tabulated in fable 9" fn populations C-f0-t anð, C-IA-Z 

the tall class lines were the highest yielding, with the 

interr'rerliate <strong>height</strong> group close behind and above the control 

Bonanza, while the semi-dwarf class were lower yielding. 

For population C-70-J the highest yielding line was ín the 

interrnediate <strong>height</strong> class while the lotvest was the tall line. 

For the whole study the highest yielciers frorn the tall ancl 

intermediate gz'ollps were no different in yield and the best 

yielcling semi-dwarf was at least equal to BÕnanza. The 

highest yielding line fron each g:'oup <strong>of</strong> eaeh population 

was hiEçher yíeì-ding than the serni-d.war.f parent Minn64-62, 

66

Phenot:'¡pic Corre-Lations 

Sinpl-e phenot¡oic correlations for each population 

and pooled correlations between ten <strong>of</strong> the agronornic 

parameters, and between selected agronomíc characteristic s, 

lodgíng, and the four quality traits, are presented in 

îable 10. 

Plant heighi was significantly, positively and homo- 

geneously correlated with yield per p1ot, 200 kernel weight, 

test weight, percent plumpness, days in post-anthesis and 

degree <strong>of</strong> lodging" llhe relationship with )¡ield supÈorted 

reports <strong>of</strong> Konishi (19?6), Fiuzat and Atkins (I9fi) anð. 

Ðuwaryí (a9?l+), but ís in disagz'eement with resutts published 

by Na.sr et al. (Igfi), Kiesselbach et al. (1g40) and Rutger 

et a1. (tçøZ) - lhe association with kernel weight supported 

results <strong>of</strong> Konishi (L976) and Fiuzat and. Atkins (1951), but 

is not ln agreernent with those <strong>of</strong> Crook and poehlman (fg/t). 

Both Nasr et a1" (fg?3) and Rutger et â1, (196?) have reported 

sirnilar relationships for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> with test weight and 

percent plumpness, wbile Konishi (l-9?6), Duwaryi (Lg?4), 

and Nasr et al. (f973) all reported a sinilar relationsl¡ip 

<strong>of</strong> <strong>height</strong> wi.th lodging. These results a:'e in general 

agreenent with those fz'orn wheat studies ( Jol.rrson et al-. 

L966 (a.i) and rice work (Chandler, L)6p), 

Flant <strong>height</strong> showed heterogeneous relationships with 

three traits. llith kernels per spike none <strong>of</strong> tl¡e indlvidualpopulation 

values were significant and we ean eonclude, as 

67

Table I0. Phenotyplc correlaËions, ExperímenL L 


Characteristícs 

C-70-I C-70-2 C-70-3 Pooled 

Correlated n=103. n=87 n=41 Correlatíon 

PLant Height (cn. ) !,7ith: 

Yiêld (kg. /ha. ) 

Kernels/splke 

200 Kernel weight (g,) 

TesÈ weight (ke, /hl. ) 

Z Plunpness 

Days Èo heading 

Days to Daturity 

Days in post-aíthesis 

Degree <strong>of</strong> lodging 

Level <strong>of</strong> c-amylase 

Saccharifying acÊíviÈy 

7" Bati'ey nltrogen 

. Solublearnino-nitrogen 

Yíeld (kg. /ha. ) with: 

KerneLs/spike 

200 KerneL r,¡eight (g. ) 

Test r^'eight (kC. /h1. ) 

% Plumpness 

Days Èo heading 

Days to maturíty 

Days in post-ânLheais 


Level <strong>of</strong> a-amylase 

Saccharifying activíty 

"Á Baxley nitrogen 

Soluble arnino-nitrogen 

Kernel-s/spíke with: 

200 Kernel weíght (g. ) 

Test l,¡eighr (kg, /h1. ) 

Z Plumpness 

Ðays to heading 

Days to maturity 

Days in post-anthesis 

Degree <strong>of</strong> T,odging 

Level <strong>of</strong> q-amylase 

Saccharifying activiLy 

% Barley nitrogen 

Soluble amino-nitrogen 

* Sígnificant at P=0.05 

** Signifícant at P=0.01 

.35** . 3l?** 

.18 -,07 

.32*x ,46** 

,40,r* ,3I** 

.23* .40'k¡t 

-.55'k* -.16 . 

-" 31.rt* .O7 

.30** .32** 

.51**. .46¡t* 

.04 -.20* 

. 13 .16 

-.01 .20* 

=.07 -,zlx 

.22x .19 

.03 .t2 

-34** -12 

.10 

-.01 

-,38** -.16 

-.16 -.L2 

.31** .05 

.24** .30** 

-.08 -.18 

-.07 . . -.2r* 

-.40** -.2O* 

-.25* -.t6 

-.I9 -.25¿- 

-.04 -.29** 

-.33** -. 28x 

-.13 .13 

.r4 .20 

.30ii* -.01 

.33tr* .2Ix 

-.O7 -.23* 

-.08 -.24* 

-.27x* _.26* 

-.33** -.20 

.46*x 

.29 

.5lt* 

.54** 

.59** 

-.69f¡'* 

-.06 

.35* 

. 5 6,q* 

-, 09 

-.20 

-.2t . 

-.t2 

.32J. 

.04 

.11 

.15 

-. 39* 

.2! 

.41'r* 

-.13 

-.zL 

-,42** 

- .08 

-. 19 

.02 

- t?, 

.L7 

.30 

.LJ 

.06 

-. J.f ^ 

-. 36* 

- .11 

68 

.354** 

11+ 

.405** 

-397 ** 

.371** 

H 

lt 

' .319¡r* 

.500** 

-. 080 

- ,090 

.040 

-.L29 

..226* 

.070 

.2L6** 

.060 

-. 300** 

- ,080 

.236'\* 

. 291** 

- .rz9 

-.!49* 

-. 336** 

-.187** 

-.2L6*x 

- r 20 

-.219** 

-.050 

. 168* 

"187t *. 

.270** 

-.110 

- .190x* 

-. 280'!* 

-.250*,t 

Cont I d. 

H = Ileterogereous correlations, Èherefore could not coEpute pooJ-ed value.

Table 10. (Cortínued) 

Châracteristics 

Correlated 

200 Kernel r¡Teight (9. ) r^rirh : 

Test r,reight (kC. /h1, ) 

% Plumpness 

Days Ëo heading 

Days to maturíty 

Days ín post-anthesis 


Level <strong>of</strong> o-amylase 

Saccharífying activity 

"l Barley nitrogen 


Test \a'eight (kC. /hl, ) 

Z Plumpness 

Days to headíng 

Days to maËurity 

Days in post-anthesis 


Level <strong>of</strong> o,-amylase 

Saccharifying actíviÈy 

% Bar1ey nitrogen 


% Plumpness with: 

Dâys to heading 

Days to mâturíty 

Days in post-anthesís 


Level <strong>of</strong> c-amylase 

Saccharifying actívity 

% Barley nitrogen 

Soluble amÍno-nitrogen 

Days to heading with: 

Days to maturíËy 

Days in post-anthesís 

69 

PoDulation 

c-70-L Cliõi-----õ17õ-T- poore¿ 

n=103 n=87 n=41 Corre l ¡i-i on 

.25* .55r.'* 

.75'k* ,79*,\ 

-.41** -.50*'t 

-.07 -.20 

.41*'r .49*r. 

.28*x .41** 

-.26** -. 30r.r( 

-. 18 -. 09 

.13 .25x 

-.22x -.21x 

. 30*'{ .59** 

-.51'kr. -. 39** 

_. 48r.* _.28* 

.13 .22x 

.11 .20 

-.04 -.45rt* 

. 13 -.31** 

.02 .2t* 

-.t4 -,27* 

-.35'rrk _ .44*'\ 

-.20* -. 10 

.20* .44x* 

. 01 . 34rk* 

-. 05 - ,44,\* 

-.01 - ,25x 

.45'k* .2L* 

-.01 -,32** 

.61** .71** 

-.50*'e -.56rk* 

.60'l't 

.83,t* 

- .42** 

.05 

.32* 

- ,)^ 

-.00 

-.04 

-. 08 

.64iß* 

-. 35'k 

-.04 

.18 

-.2t 

-.11 

-.13 

-.10 

-.62x* 

-.01 

.38** 

.56r.'t 

-. 31'k 

.03 

.09 

-.12 

.29 

-. 31* 

ä 

.7 82** 

- .446** 

-. 100 

,422*x 

.345** 

-.264x* 

-.rt9 

. r49x 

- . 19 7.'.* 

H 

- .438/.* 

H 

. 178*'t 

Days to maturity r,rith: 

Dâys in post-anthesís .32** . 13 .82** .380'krk 

v. siàãi- 

** Sígnificant at P=0.01 

fH = Ileterogeneous correlations, therefore could not compute pooled value, 

H 

H 

.070 

-. 187** 

- .438't* 

-.r29 

,327 ** 

H 

H 

-.010 

. 310 r. r( 

- . r49* 

H 

-. 495**

Table 10. (ConÈinued) 

Characteristics 

Correlated 

Degree <strong>of</strong> lodging with: 

Level <strong>of</strong> a-amylase 

Saccharifying activity 

7" BarIey nitrogen 


Level <strong>of</strong> c-amylase r¡rj-th: 

Saccharifying activity 

7" BarLey nitrogen 

Soluble amino-nítrogen 

Saccharífying actívity \^rith : 

7. BarLey nítrogen 


7" BarLey nitrogen with: 

70 


bffi po"te¿ 

n=103 n=87 n=41 Correlation 

-.24x 

- .o4 

- ,20* 

-. 40*t" 

.36*'k 

.77 

. ooá^ 

.25* 

.24* 

-.26x -.37* 

-.22* -.09 

. 18 .08 

-.37* -,33* 

.7 Z** . 31r. 

.o2 -.42** 

.74x* .60** 

.29** .19 

. 64** .5 5:kit 

-.119 

H 

-.389** 

It 

H 

.686,r* 

.254x* 

H 

Soluble arnino-nitrogen .30¡t .05 -.09 .139* 

tr Significant at P=0,05 

x* Significant at ?=0.01 

fH = lleterogeneous correlations, therefore could not compuËe pooled value,

did Syme (f972), Fonseca and patterson (1968) and lebsock 

and Amaya (tgøg) in wheat studies, that no retationship 

existed" îhis was not surprising, since Rasmusson (Lg?3) 

indicated the original se¡ni-dwarf was selected for head. 

type. Height showed a sÍgnificant negative correlation 

with days to heading Ín C-?0-1 and t-?0-3 while the 

relationship was negative but non-signÍficant in C-?o-Z. 

fhis generally negative association was reported by 

Johnson et aI. (f966(a)) from wheat work while reports 

from barfey studies have been either <strong>of</strong> a positive (Barker 

et al., 1964), or a non-significant nature (Rutger et a1., 

L967). Days to rnaturity showed no associatÍon with <strong>height</strong> 

except in C-70-1 Ín whÍch there was a sÍgnifieant negative 

correlation. This correlatlon is in agreement with the 

report <strong>of</strong> Fíuzat and Atkins (tgSl), 

Plant <strong>height</strong> ehowed onLy homogeneous correlations with 

the quality tralts, a13. non-significant. 

Assoeiations with yieJ"d per plot showed no heterogeneous 

corre Lat j"on groups across the three populations" posit-ive, 

sígnificant correlations were obtained between yield and 

kernels per spike, test weight, days in post-anthêsis and 

degree <strong>of</strong> lodging. Significant negative relationships 

existed between yield and days to heading, saccharifylng 

activity, percent barley nitrogen and soluble amino-nitrogen. 

No significant assoej-ation was revealed between yield and 200 

kernel weight, percent plumpness, days to rnaturity or Level 

<strong>of</strong> alpha-amy1a se " 

77

lhe positive relationship <strong>of</strong> barley yield with kernels 

per spike had been reported by several workers ineluding 

Tap and Harvey (I9?2) and Rasmusson and Canne1l (Lg?O), 

îhe non-signlficant relationshíp wÍth kernel weight was 

previously reported only by Hayter and Riggs (l9|j) and 

in some crosses studied by lísi and Lambert (1954). In the 

present study the relationship <strong>of</strong> yield and kernels,/spike 

was significant at P=0.O5 and the retationship between 

yield and kernel weight was not signifÍcant. fhís is 

supportÍve <strong>of</strong> Quisenberry (tgZ9), who concluded that kernel 

weight was not as important a component <strong>of</strong> yield as was 

kernels per spike. 

The positive correlation <strong>of</strong> yie).d and test weight i.s 

ín agreement with the reports <strong>of</strong> Rutger et aL. (L96? ) and, 

DenHartog and Lambert (\953). On an individual basis only 

population C-70-1 showed a signifieant relationship. 

Contrary to reports in other erops involving semi-dwarf 

and tall- material (Chandler (1969) in ríce, and BriggLe and 

Voge1 (1968) in wheat) ånd the report by Sisler and Olsen 

(]-95f) from a barley stu

significant negative correlation with the yield component, 

kernel weight, in agreement wi-th yield component compensation 

ani distríbution <strong>of</strong> photosynthate theories (Adams, l)61), as 

well âs being in agr:eernent with reports by Grafius anC 

Okoli (19?4) ånd Rasmusson and Cannell (19?0). .{ significant 

negative association <strong>of</strong> kernels per. spÍke with percent 

plunpness was also shown in the present study" Test welght 

was negatively associated with kerneLs per spike in 

populati-on C-70-2 ¡ however, the pooled. correlation over 

populations was not significant " 

Kernels per spike showed no relationshÌp to days tô 

heading, whíie there were positíve associations bei;ween 

kernels per spike and Cays to maturity and days in postanthesis" 

Phese correlations were not significa;rt on an 

individual population basis except for kernels per spike 

and days in post-anthesis in population C-?0-1. 

Kernels per spike was positively related to the degree 

<strong>of</strong> lodging in the present study and generally negatively 

associated with the quality parãrûeters measured, although 

the relationship with the level <strong>of</strong> alpha-aroylase was not 

significant. 

As reported by Crook and poehlrnan (19?1), this study 

revealed a significant positive association <strong>of</strong> kernel weight 

with percent plurnpness, and as reported. by llsi and l,ambert 

(f954), there was a significant positive correlation 

between kernel we ight and test weight" Kerne 1 weight was 

negatively reLated to days io heading and positively rela.ted 

73

to days in post-anthesis and lodging. 

Significant negative relationships were fou¡d ín ihis 

study bêtween kernel weight and levels <strong>of</strong> alpha-amylase and 

<strong>of</strong> soLuble amino-nåtrogen. Â. sígnificant, but weak, 

positive correlation was revealed between kernel we ight 

and percent barley nitrogen. Such a relalionship was 

previously reported by Hayter and Riggs (Lg?3) and Metcalfe 

et al. (t96?). 

Although the correlations between test weight and 

percent plumpness were heterogeneous they were all positlve 

and signifícant" Similar relationships were reported by 

Crook and Poehlnan (Lg?!) and Rutger et a1. (196?), 

The significant negative association <strong>of</strong> test weight 

with days to headíng and the positive correlation with days 

in post-anthesis reflected the effect <strong>of</strong> these characters 

in deternining the grain filling period. t tthough previously 

reported as negative (Rutger et al., Lg6? ), in this study 

there was a posítive assocÍation between test weigl'rt and 

degree <strong>of</strong> lodging. 

The test weight - quality faetor correlations were 

notable in that the only population in which these v¿ere 

significant was C-IO-Z, which showed a positive correlation 

<strong>of</strong> test weÍght and percênt barley nitrogen, and negative 

relationships betr^'een test weight and the ottrer quality 

parameters. 

îhis study showed a posítive correlation <strong>of</strong> percent 

pLumpness with days ín post-anthesis and the accompanying

elãted negative association between p1u-ropne ss and days to 

heading" Significant positive correlations cccurred between 

plurnpness and degree <strong>of</strong> lodging ín C-7A-2 a'r.ð. C,-?t-3. 

Pereent plumpness showed generall.y ôegative refationships 

with leve1s <strong>of</strong> alpha-amylase, saceharífying activity 

and soluble amino-nitrogen, again particularly in ti.re case 

<strong>of</strong> populatian C-lO-7, A negative assoeiation <strong>of</strong> plumpne ss 

v¡ith diastatie power was prevS-ously reported (Rutger gI ef", 

L96?). 

lhere was a strong positive relationship between days 

to Ìreading and days to rrraturity in populations C-?O-l and 

C-?O-z, lhe association was not significant in C-7A4. 

Dâ)¡s to heading was negãtively associated wíth days in 

post-anthesis in all three populations" A strong positive 

corue lation existed between d-ays to rnaturity and days in 

post-anthesis ín populations C-70-1 e,Þd C-70-J. This 

relationship was particularly strong (r="82) for C-?0-J. 

The correlation for these pa.raneters wås not significant 

for C-7O-2, 

The generally negative correlations between degree <strong>of</strong> 

lodging and the four quality parameters, i.e. alpha-anylase, 

saccharifying activity, percent barley nitrogen and soluble 

amino-nitrogen, reflected the positive associatj-on <strong>of</strong> 

lodgi-ng witir the yield components and the negative associations 

between these quality parâmeters and the yield 

c omponents o 

The interre lationships amongst the quality pararneters 

75

tÌ'rerase 1ve s we!ìe generally positive" The positåve relation- 

ship <strong>of</strong> barley nitrogen and saccharifying activity was 

previously reported by Metcaife, et åL. e96?). Rutger 

et a1. (196?) reported a posi-tive correlatíon between 

saccharifying aetivity and level_s <strong>of</strong> alpha-aroylase. 

A signifieant negative relationship existed bet$,een 

alphra-amylase and percent barley nitrogen in population 

Ç-7O-3, while in the other populations no relationship was 

found" Hayter and Riggs (fg?3) reported no association 

between these characteristics ín their experíment" 

Analyses <strong>of</strong> 'uariance (ANOV¡, ) were computed to determine 

the significance <strong>of</strong> effects <strong>of</strong> rates <strong>of</strong> nítrogen (N) 

fertilízer on several agronomie and quality parameters in 

relation to genotypes representÍng a range <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>s. 

Slngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedom conparisons were used., when 

appropriate, to exarnine the significance <strong>of</strong> differences 

between ttre means <strong>of</strong>: (f) taff and seni-dwarf elasses, and 

(Z) the control, gy. Bonanza, and the other genot¡,pes. 

fhese -{NûVA and the relevant nean data are reported in 

fables 11 through 53" the information is reported for eaeh 

<strong>of</strong> the five environments individually due to the heterogeneity 

<strong>of</strong> error variances whj-ch existed. The results are 

presented on the basis <strong>of</strong> the individual charaeteristics 

neasured, 

76

Aglononie ChArae'qeri s! ic s 

Pl"ant lleight" fhe ANOVA (Tabl-e 11) indícated that signifi- 

cant d-ifferences were obtaíned due to N rates at three <strong>of</strong> 

the five locationso This was due to the first incrernent 

<strong>of</strong> N (lable 12C), except at Carman in I9?5, where a further 

increase in <strong>height</strong> occurred. with the second increment <strong>of</strong> N" 

No significant increase in <strong>height</strong> occurred at Carnan or 

Portage ín 7976, but there was a trend to this v¡ith the 

first ltr increment (Table 12C)" Increases in <strong>height</strong> with 

additional applications <strong>of</strong> N were previ.ously reported in 

barley by Pendleton et a1" (L953) " 

fhe genotypes showed significant <strong>height</strong> differences at 

all sites. Although significant

Table 11, Nitrogen ¡err1ll¿er ÂppllcåtLon Study, ANOVÀ for plaûr Hèighr. 

3 

ReplÍcate9 

26 .A4 

18.7I 

109,72 

64,7 5 

2982.53r.r. 

4 

Fêrttlizerê (F) 

67 .51 

191 .21 

242.86r.¿t 

884.31'r't 

107.82 

L2 

Error (a) 

35.29 

82,7 4 

31,29 

27 ,O8 

ISIl,13*'t 

' 7OL7,84ttl 

cerotypes (c) 

I426,49,r* 

I830.44!*'t 

2595.03*!r 

u54.69,r* 

4165.94** 

fTalLs vs se¡nL-dwa¡fs 

5040.20,r* 

. I98,03** 

6895.26,r,¡ 

957,6 .O2tttt 

3I3,60¡r,r 

42.03 

t3.23 

1.60 

. Bonáriza vs C7O2O24 

' Bonanzâ vs C7O3O11 

2265.00*'r 

3841.60rot 

2890,00!trr 

122I.03,r¡Ì 

3186,23'r't 

2088.05*'r 

3294,23*rt 

2528,I0*¡¡ 

L625,63ttt 

20t6.40¡r,r 

Bonanze vs C703032 

4622.s't tt 

. 5736.00¡t* 

3045.03¡r* 

347 PJzy.tt 

Bonanza vs ì{1nn64-62 

4264.25*rt 

14.29 

¡xc 

3.34 

t4.74 

11 .63 

?2,26r.r' 

Coefficie¡rt <strong>of</strong> varlabillty U 

(1) Erro¡(a) 

sj.gnlticaût ¿t P=0.05. 

** F signiflcênt at P=O.Ol. 

+ Slngle degree <strong>of</strong> f¡eêdou co¡¡parl,6ons are olthogonaL, but not Â11 fron ¡he Eà¡¡e mutually o!Èhogonal aet. 

\J 

oo

Table 12. N1Ërogen FertLlizer ÀppllcatÍon Study, Means foï <strong>plant</strong> Height (crn.) 

EnvíTonnents 

Height 

87.2 d 

T 

T 

72.r b 

72.7 b 

66,5a 

81.5 c 

75 .9 b 

6L9a 

63 .4a 

60. 0a 

92.9 c 

95.0 c 

75,9 b 

77 .O b 

69 .0a 

83.2 c 

82 .1" c 

72.2 b 

70.5 b 

65 .8a 

76.3' c 

76.7 c 

5 8 .5ab 

62,r b 

57,7a 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c70301 I 

c703032 

NIL¡I64-62 

Þ 

Height CLass 

84.9 b 

70.4a 

78.7 b 

61,8a 

93.9 b 

73.9a 

82.6 b 

69 ,5a 

76,5 b 

59 .4a 

Ta1ls (T) 

Semí-dwarfs (SD) 

c. 

Nitrogen Applied 

(ke. /ha. ) 

73.0a 

76.7a 

76.8a 

77.4a 

77 ,4a 

64.0a 

66.6a 

70.8a 

70.5a 

70.9a 

76,6a 

80.6 b 

83. I b 

84.4 b 

85 .2 b 

63. 1a 

75,9 b 

78.9 b 

76.6 b 

79 .2 b 

46 ,4a 

63,6 b 

69 .9 bc 

76.5 c 

74.9 c 

0 .00 

67 ,26 

L34.52 

201,78 

269.04 

tly different, 

Lter are noE sign 

ollowed by the same 

ín a, coluun

Tâble 13. Nitrogen Fertilizer Applicatton Srudy. 

Fertil-lzer X Genotype InÈeraction Means for Plant lleight (cm.) at Portage, 1975. 

Nltrogen ApplÍed (ke. /ha. ) 

86.8 c 

85.5 c 

78.0 b 

76 .8 b 

68. 8â 

83 .8 b 

82.8 b 

74.3a 

73.5a 

68. 5a 

86.5 c 

84.8 c 

78.3 b 

76 .8 b 

68.3a 

85.3 c 

83.8 c 

74.5 b 

69.5ab 

66.5a 

73.8' b 

73.5 b 

55.8a 

55,8a 

56.8a 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

Genotype 

Nitrogen AppJ"f ed 

56.8a 

66 ,5 b 

68.3 b 

68 .5 b 

68.8 r, 

55 .8a 

69.5 b 

76.8 b 

73.5 b 

76.8 b 

55.8a 

74,5 b 

78. 3 b 

74.3 b 

78.0 b 

73.5a 

83 .8 b 

84.8 b 

82.8 b 

85.5 b 

73.8a 

85,3 b 

86 .5 b 

83, 8 b 

86.8 b 

0. 00 

67.26 

r34,52 

201,7I 

269.04 

cantly dÍfferent, 

same letter are not slgn 

1n a colunn

Teble 14. NltrogeÍ FertLlLzêr ApPlLcatlon SÈudy' ¡iNOVA for Yte1d. 

2,542,631 

245,297 

3,380,561 

292,829 

354,543 

3 

Replicates 

6 '568 ' 348r' 

5 

22 '21O,736t"' 

5,319,532** 

14 ,L23 ,504rt* 

4 

Fertillze16 (1) 

L,359 ,482 

' 807 '980'r* 

362,885 

222,095 

638,591 

257 ,589 

T2 

Erro¡ (a) 

2r581,72i't't 

7 57 ,lr6t 

1,517 ,944r, 

645'458'r'b 

179,010 

Cêîotypes (G) 

429,7Or 

960,640** 

4'457 '195t't' 

809,970** 

I tâlIS VÉ Seîì1-dWârIS 

7,874 

59O '97 6t"t 

42a,449 

177,546 

. Boían¿a \rs c702024 

3' 307 '860'r* 

2 

355,323 

"845 '689'r* 

218,30i 

Bonanza vs c703011 

380,ot6 

7 44 '47 L")' 

2,705,144¿t 

889,531** 

Bonanza vs C703032 

1,687,156* 

251,381 

7 49 ,391 

93,799 

Bonanze vs Mf¡n64-62 

27 6 ,633 

55,643 

209 ,46r 

r93,034 

I13,520 

TxC 

Coeffici.ent <strong>of</strong> va¡tabllity Z 

(I) E¡!o!(a) 23.L 24.2 lO'5 19'l 27'5 

ìãi iii."i¡) tg.z tr.s ts.z g.t t¿'r 

* F signíficent at ?=0.05, 

rr* 'F sigíLfLcênt aË P-0,01. - co 

f Singie degree <strong>of</strong> f¡êedom conparlsona arê orthogotâl, but .'ot e1l f¡om t1'e sane mutually orthogonal 6et. H

(Table t5t) ind.icated that the first increroent gave a 

significant response at atl sites, whereas the seeond 

increment produced a further significant yield increase 

in onÌy the two tests at CarûÌan. 

Significant genotypic differences for yield vrere 

obtained in all" tests except the one at Carman ín L9?5 

( f a¡le 1¿{., ljiA ) , Àt three <strong>of</strong> the se f our locations the 

tall genotypes were higher yie ld.ing than the semí-dwarfs 

on a mean basis (Table 158). However, as shown in Table 

IJA, at no site was the yietd <strong>of</strong> Minn 64-62 signifieantly 

lower than that <strong>of</strong> the talls¡ in fact, síngle degree <strong>of</strong> 

freedom comparisons (faul"e 1&) indicated Minn 64-62 ta øe 

sígnificantly higher yielding than the tall control genotype 

cv. Bonanza at Portage in I)16, The lower semi-dwarf mean 

yield resulted from the overall lower yield.s <strong>of</strong> CfOl011 

and C7O3o32" 

ljnlike the report <strong>of</strong> Gardener and Rathjen (19?5), tfre 

present study showed no F x G j-nteraction at any site (fa¡le 

14). However, there was a trend. for the serni-dwarfs, C?03011 

anð. C?O3O32, to show a greater respo.rìse and./ or need for at 

least the first nitrogen increment. rt,t higher N 1evels this 

response did not continue, possibly d.ue to another 1ímiting 

factor, in this case moisture. Such lack <strong>of</strong> interaction 

was previously reported by Syme ftgAZ ) in wheat. The 

importance <strong>of</strong> moisture in the expression <strong>of</strong> nitrogen 

response was reported by Stanberry and Lowrey (tSøS), 

82

Table 15. NíËrogen ¡'ertil,izer AppJ.ication Study, Mearis for yield (ke,/ha.) 

Environnents 

Heíght 

A. 

4312 bc 

4340 bc 

3737a 

4Mab 

4723 c 

3399 b 

315 6 b 

2866a 

3t26 b 

3241 b 

4642ab 

4849 b 

4453ab 

4L22a 

4368ab 

3343ab 

3477 b 

3195ab 

3045a 

3440 b 

228AL 

2138a 

2067 a 

2236a 

1t9t- 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

Minn64-6 2 

B. 

Height CLass 

4326a 

4192a 

3778 b 

3078a 

4746 b 

4248a 

3410 b 

3227 a 

2209 a 

2L95a 

Talls (T) 

Semí-dwarfs (SD) 

Nitrogen Applted 

(ke . /ha. ) 

3363a 

4O78ab 

4798 b 

4300ab 

469r b 

2339 a 

2998ab 

317 3 bc 

3610 c 

3668 c 

2691a 

4408 b 

5048 b 

5015 b 

5272 b 

2392a 

3433 b 

3464 b 

3535 b 

3674 b 

98sh 

l7I4 b 

2457 c 

2935 c 

29II c 

0 ,00 

67 ,26 

734.52 

20L.78 

269,04 

lcantl-y different, 

tter are not signi 

by the same 

f Vai-ues Ín a columl

$pikei: pqr llnii Area. The ANOY¡, (fable 16) indica-ted that 

inc::easing N significantly increased the nurnber <strong>of</strong> spikes 

per unit area as previou.sly reported by several workers 

including Konishi (f9?6) and Gardener and RathjerL (I9?Ð" 

This increase wâs primaril¡r lirniied to the initial inerement 

<strong>of</strong> N, except ai Carroan in Ig?S where the response continued_ 

throughout al.L N increments and at Sanford in 1pf6 where 

there was a sign.if icant response to the finai N increment 

(ta¡re r?c ) . 

the AtiûVA (îabl_e 16) indicated signåficant d j_fferences 

among genotypes for spíkes per unit area existed, and that 

no F x G interaction óccut:red. 

Further analysis (fable 16) indicated significant 

differences between the talls and semi-dwarfs at al-1 sites 

in 3-976, This difference was in favour <strong>of</strong> the se¡ní-dwarfs 

(ta¡re r?n). 

Further single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparisons (Iabie l_6) 

and the data <strong>of</strong> Table 174 show that most <strong>of</strong> the advantage 

<strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs came from Mir:lf. 64-62, Õ?o3o3z showed 

an advantage over the talls at the lpf6 sites, but semi- 

dwarf C703011 was, in fact, lower in spÍkes per unit area 

than the ta11s in three <strong>of</strong> the five experinents" 

lhe di.sagreement between the analysis <strong>of</strong> Tabl_e 16 and 

the lack <strong>of</strong> significant differences ind.icated at Carman, 

:..975 in Table 174 arose because the test used in the latter 

case was less sensitive tlran the single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom 

comparison eraployed Ín îable 16. This si-ngle Cegree <strong>of</strong> 

84

lable 16. Nltrogen Fertlllzer Appllcatlon Srudy, À:IOVA for Sp{kes/unLr areâ. 

2365.72 

t5r3.32 

566.s7 

1309, s6 

467.72 

3135 ,56'r'r 

2736.06t tt 

4 

Replicates 

¡ertilizers (F) 

t5¡0.¿3¡.i 

1587.52'r't 

9719,93r,¿. 

418,37 

240,29 

l2 

E¡ror (a) 

344.07 

274.52 

94.10 

521.32ri 

. 205,34 

cenorypes (G) 

L68L 26'r'r 

t312.05't'r 

1550,48¡¡* 

1822.6Y.* 

tÎa11s vs se¡nl-dlra¡fg 

932,5r* 

2242.67*rt 

4320 ,17** 

82, L4 

202,50 

7 .23 

Bona¡^za vs C7O2O24 

o.40 

108.90 

40.00 

7 48.23 

9 31 .2 3't 

18.23 

Bolrânza vs C7030I1 

230.48 

697 .23 

270,40 

,40 

Bonanzã vs C703032 

220.90 

15 75.03*¡r 

1768.90** 

4100.63*¡t 

2805.63r.¡r 

1254,44tt 

Bonan¿a vs Mlflr64-62 

3648.I0¡r* 

.!xLi 

I12.89 

318.46 

196,54 

Coefficj.ent <strong>of</strong> vårfåbllLty 7, , 

r8.2 20.5 8.8 22.4 re.3 

Ílì å::::Í;ì 

@ 

** F sigr¡ificant ar p-0.01. 

t singte degree <strong>of</strong> f,¡eedo¡r cornPa!16o¡t6 ate orÈhogor¡ál, but not â11 ftoñ the sår¡e nutually orthogo¡ral aet.

Table 17. Nitfogen tr'ertLlLzer ApplicaÈlon Study, Meane fot SpÍkes/unír area. 

Envir<strong>of</strong>illents 

tieíght 

A. 

92 .5a 

ot 'r- 

87,7a 

97.2a 

111.6 b 

69.9a 

66.6a 

68. 1a 

82.5 b 

83 .2 b 

103.1a 

101 . la 

111.7ab 

111.4ab 

123.3 b 

96.6ab 

101.1 b 

86,9a 

101.8 b 

113.3 c 

83,1a 

83 ,9a 

81.7a 

83. 3a 

94,3a 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c70301 1 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

lleight Class 

92.6a 

98.8 b 

68.8a 

77 .9 b 

102 .La 

118.8 b 

98.8a 

100.7a 

83.5a 

86.4a 

TalLs (T) 

Semi-dwarfs ( SD) 

c, 

NiÈrogen ApplÍed 

(ke . /ha. ) 

Q' 1^ 

96.3ab 

106.9 b 

95 . 3ab 

100.4ab 

59 .3a 

72.9ab 

77.4 b 

82.3 b 

78,6 b 

72.3a 

111.9 b 

lr7 .9 b 

119,1 b 

I29.4 c 

78.3a 

100.2 b 

LO7 ,4 b 

108.5 b 

r05 .2 b 

69.0a 

80. 7ab 

88.0 bc 

87,5 bc 

101.1 c 

0.00 

67 ,26 

ß4.52 

201,78 

269 "O4 

rent, P=0. 

antLy di 

same Letter are not 

s ín a colurrr fo1lor,¡e

freedom comparison indicated lqínn 6U-62 had significantly 

more spikes per unit areâ than Bonanza at thís site as we1l, 

Kernels pqr_Þpike. As was the caee in experiments reported 

by Gardener and Rathjen (Lg?S) and Schreiber and Stanberry 

QgAl) the results <strong>of</strong> this study (fãble lB) showed. inereased 

kernels per spike with Ínereased fertilizer N. lhe increase 

was signifícant at three <strong>of</strong> five locatíons and the means in 

Table 19C indicate the major effect to be fron the fírst N 

inerement. However, at Carman lplJ, tìne response continued 

to the third N 1eveL. Again no F x G interaction was 

indicated (Table 18). 

Single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom cornparisons (ga¡fe fB) 

revealed significant differenees between genotypes and 

between <strong>height</strong> classes for kernels per spíke. The data <strong>of</strong> 

table 198 showed this to be in favour <strong>of</strong> the ta1ls. In view 

<strong>of</strong> the higher spíke nunber per unit area <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs, 

and the negative relationships between yield conponents 

(Davis, Lg6?), this would be expected" 

At aI1 sÍtes C703032 and Minn 64-62 had significantty 

fewer kernels per spike than did the tall genotypes 

(fanfe f9e.). 0n the other hand, the semi-dwarf C2030]1 

had as many or rnore kernels per head than the tal1s. fn 

fact, i.t had significantly more than Bonanza at portage in 

1975. this genotype, in general, had the lowest nunber <strong>of</strong> 

spikes per unit area among the lines in thÍs test (Table WA). 

It is worth noting that, at Portage lg?6, Mirull 64-62 

87

Tåblê 18, NÍtrogen Ferrr.lizêr Appll.catlon Study, Æ{OVA for Rernels/6pike. 

191.13 

53.72 

42,57 

18.64 

¡80.33 

3 

Repllcates 

92.80¡t 

66.51 

1I5,76*'r 

13.38 

1547 .46*rt 

4 

FeÌÈ111zers (F) 

26.30 

24,13 

15.74 

23,l1 

36.57 

L2 

Er¡or (a) 

180,22*'¡ 132,35'r* 408.03,r,r 66.12,r¡r 

145,04*,1 226.44**. 696,82*r, 6l,82rrrr 

160.62r,1t 

313,93*'r 

Ge¡lotypes (c) 

iTal.ls ve sernL-ch¡arfs 

gg,23t r. 7:.2gt. 25.92 21.03 

2,50 

. Bonanza ve C7O2O24 

96.10*¡t 8.28 B.2g iO.t S 

75.63** 53.82¡t 571.54¡r* 76,73*tt 

gO.OO¡t¡r 144.40¡r,¡ 504.10'r,r 16.90 

4.23 

8onånza vs C703011 

372.10¡rrr 

Bonân¿â vs C703032 

235,23).]. 

Bonanza vs Mim64-62 

12.70 9.73 15,11 13.55 9.05 

¡xc 

t9.87 8.44 

Coeffíclent <strong>of</strong> veriability "Å 

(1) Erro¡(a) 12,9 9.3 7.g g.g g.2 

= = , (?ì,""o"(b)= 6.8 

= =. 

5,3 6,9 9.0 ;.; 

'* f ** ! slgnific¿nt "ignitiòãn at P=0.01, 

t slngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedom co¡lparlsoíê are orthggotral! but not all f,¡oE the sane Dutually orthogonal set,

lab1e 19. Nftrogen trertÍlizer ÁpÞl1cáÈion Study, Means for Kernèls/spíke. 

Environments 

Itelght 

56.3 b 

57 .l b 

57 .7 b 

53 ,5a 

55 .Oab 

52,r b 

53. 8 b 

53. 1 b 

44.6a 

45.0a 

51,5 bc 

54.I c 

52.4 bc 

49.Iab 

47,7a 

51.5 b 

54.7 c 

54,6 c 

48.8a 

48.5a 

49 .2 b 

48.7 b 

48, s b 

43 .1. a 

44.3a 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c7 0301 I 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

Helght Class 

57.0 b 

55 .3a 

53.0 b 

47,6a 

52.8 b 

49.7a 

53.1b 

50.6a 

48.9 b 

45,3a 

Tal-1s (T) 

Seni-dwarfs ( SÐ) 

c. Nitrogen Applled 

(ke. /ha. ) 

52,8a 

55.zab 

56 .9ab 

56 .9ab 

58.5 b 

47.0a 

48.9a 

5r,6a 

51,0a 

50. 1a 

47.0a 

53.1 b 

52.5 b 

57.7 b 

50 . 4ab 

50. 3a 

51.5a 

51 ,9a 

52 .la 

52.3a 

32,6a 

'43.9 b 

50.8 c 

53.0 c 

53.5 c 

0 ,00 

67 .26 

L34.52 

2dr.78 

269.04 

erenE, P=0 ,05 , 

sa.me l-eÈter are noÈ s 

ína column foll 

oo 

\o

did not have significantty fewer ker.nels per spike than 

Bonanza (fable 194.), but did have nore spikes per unit 

area (fabte 1?). At this site Minn 64-62 cíð. show yield 

superiority over Bonanza, though not by a significant 

margín (îable 14). 

2Q0 Kernel Weieht. Kernel weight responses to fertilizer 

were signlficant at only three locations, whereas significant 

line differences were shown at all locations (TabLe 20, ZI). 

the study showed increased kernel weight at the inÍtial 

increments <strong>of</strong> N, followed by decreased kernel weight as the 

applied N increased. this general reaction has been reported 

in barley by Gardener and Rathjen (fg? S) and Reisenauer and 

Ðickson (1960). 

At Carnan, IplJ, thøre was an íncrease in kernel Ìveight 

with N increment one, and. no ehange thereafter. At portage, 

L975, the first increment <strong>of</strong> N gave the heaviest kernels, 

but in this test there rvas a slgnificant deerease in kernel 

weight at the hÍgher N levels. At Sanford 19?6, there was 

a progreesive deerease in kernel weight as N was increased 

above the ccntrol leve 1. 

At all sitesn the talls had signíficantly heavier 

kerne'ls than did the semi-dwarts (fabte Zt¡). 

Significant F x G interactions were detected at Carman 

1975 and Sanford 19?6 (Tabte Zo). fhe lnteraction at Carman, 

signifieant response to N whí1e the other genotypes responded 

90

Tâble 20, Nltrogei¡ FeltLltzêr ApplLcatton Study, ANOVA for 200 Kernê1 l,¡eighr. 

0, 19 

1.16 

0, 18 

0,09 

0.05 

4 

RePlicates 

¡erttllzèrs (F) 

0.05 

1.08't* 

0.77rt* 

1.68*¡t 

0.06 

12 

lrror (a) 

0,21 

0.06 

0.06 

0. 13 

3.26ttt 

ceûotype6 (c) 

I.35,r* 

2,36tttt 

L29r.rt 

1 ,61,rrr 

L.22r,r, 

lTa11s vs seri¡i-dwårfs 

2,I6ttt 

6,20,r'r 

3.94,r* 

3.38r,,r 

0.84,r* 

2.40t t 

. Bonanzâ vè C702024 

0.90,r,r 

1,09*,r 

0.03 

5.93,r* 

1O,20rr¡r 

Bonanze vs C703011 

5.33** 

8.84,r¡r 

3.03,rr. 

t,44*tt 

2.50t rl 

.05 

Bonanz¿ vs C703032 

0.96,r,r 

3.14't't 

0.84*¡+ 

1.09,rr 

Bonanza v6 Minû64-62 

0.96rrrt 

2,7Ottrt 

0,44*'t 

0.09'.r 

0.10 

0,19¡+r. 

CoefficÍent <strong>of</strong> varlabiLlty Z 

(1) Erro¡(a) 4.0 5.6 3.5 3.4 6.9 

- - . (?) Error(b)_ 

* _ _ 4.4 3.8 

¡ sigÍ¡lficant 

2.8_ 

át 

2,4 3,7 

** ¡ slgníffcanr ar P=0,01, 

I singl'e degree <strong>of</strong>, freedon comparisons are orthogonal, but ûot ¿11 from the aane llutually orthogonål set. 

\o

lable 21. Nltrogen lertLlizer Applícatlon sÈudy, Means for 200 Kernel I,Jeíght, 


Height 

^ 

7.05 c 

6.75 b 

6,32a 

6,74 b 

6.74 b 

7.48 d 

7.I5 c 

6,54a 

6,92 b 

6.96 b 

7.IO c 

7.I5 c 

6.55a 

6.7Zab 

6.89 b 

6.79 c 

6 .50 b 

6.02a 

6,29 b 

6 .50 b 

6..37 c 

5 .88 b 

5. 36a 

6,30 c 

6.04 b 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c703011 

Ç703032 

Minn64-62 

Heighr Class 

6 .90 b 

6 .60a 

7 .32 b 

6.9La 

7.13 b 

6.72a 

6.65 1, 

6.27a 

6.13 b 

5,90a 

Tal1s (T) 

Semi-dwarfs (SD) 

Nitrogen AppLied 

(ke. /ha . ) 

6.65a 

6.72a 

6,86a 

6.67a 

6 ,69a 

6,95a 

7.00a 

7.09a 

7 .OLa 

7 .01a 

7.24 c 

6.97 b 

6 .82ab 

6,75ab 

6.64a 

6 .47 ab 

6 ,7t b 

6.46ab 

6,22a 

6 .25a 

5.49a 

6.07 b 

6 ,22 b 

6.16 b 

6 ,02 b 

0.00 

67 .26 

t34.52 

201.7a 

269,04 

icanËly dl 

same letter are not signi 

s ín a columr fo

TabIe 22, Nltrogen Fertillzer ApplicaÈion Study. 

Fertlr-izer x Genotype rnteraction Means for 200 Kernel weight at carur,an, 1g75. 

Nftrogen App3"led (kg. /ha. ) 

6 .45 b 

5.67a 

5 .65a 

6.35 b 

6 .67 b 

5.75a 

5.72a 

6 ,42 b 

6.25ab 

6,72 b 

6,20 b 

5 .55a 

6 ,25 b 

6.37 b 

6.35 b 

6.02 b 

5 .30a 

6.57 b 

6 .12 b 

5.67'b 

5 .77 b 

4.60a 

5 .92 b 

5 .50 b 


c702024 

c7030l l 

c703032 

Minn6 4- 6 2 

Genotype 


0.00 5.67a 5.77a 

67.26 

4.60a 5.92a 

6.35 b 5.50a 

6.02a 5.30 

134-52 b 6.57 

6.72 b b 6.tZ b 

6.20a 

20I.78 

s,ls ¡ 6.25ab 6.67 b 6.37 b 

5.75a 5.72 

269,04 

b 6.42ab 

6.45 b 6.25 b 

5.67a s.65 b 6.3s;b 5.97ab

significantl)' to the fÍ¡'st N increment" Bonanza and CZO3011 

¡aaj"ntained this increased kernel weight at the higher N 

levels, while C703O32 anò. ltlir:r:' 64-62 showed a decrease at 

the very highest N level. 

At Sanford, l.9?6, tl¡¡e interaetion (fable 23) ârose 

because C703011 and Bonanza shov¡ed no significant response 

to N, while the other genotypes all showed a negative 

resporÌse to the first incrernent <strong>of</strong> N, with Minn 64-62 

showing thi.s negative response through to the highest N 

leve I . 

C701011 was consistently 1owest in kernel weight and. 

Bonanza was highest (ga¡te e:_¡,). The other genotypes were 

intermediate, with CTAZaZ\+ having ker.ne 1 weight not 

significantly different fron tsonanzao fhe very l-ov¡ error 

j-n ¡neasure¡nent <strong>of</strong> kernel weight ena.bled detection <strong>of</strong> the 

F x G i-nteractions. 

Ðegree sf l,odeitg. Lcdging occurred only in the two 19?5 

trials. ANOVÀ and treatment mearrs are reported j-n lables 

24 and 25, 

,Applied N had a sÍgnifica.nt effect on}-y at portage, 

and lociging increased as did the rate <strong>of</strong>, applied N (fable 

25C). Eaeh N incremen* gave significantly rnore l-odging. 

No significant effect <strong>of</strong> N was found at Carman due to the 

very 1ow lodgíng leve1s ¡ however, a trend toward more 

lodging as N increased existed (faufe z5C). Ä similar 

effect <strong>of</strong> N was previously reported by Pendleton e$. Al.. 

94

Table 23. Nitrogen Fertilizer Applícation Study. 

Fertll-lzer x Genotype rnteraetíon Means for 200 Kernel l^reight ât sanford, 1976. 

Nitrogen AppJ-ted (kg. /ha. ) 

6 .92 b 

6.95 b 

6 .42a 

6.47 a 

6.42a 

7.15 c 

6.97 I>c 

6,47a 

6.50a 

6.65ab 

7 .72 b 

6.97 b 

6 ,55a 

6 .50a 

6.97 1, 

7.O7 bc 

7.35 c 

6 .55a 

6 .87 ab 

7 ,00 bc 

+ 

7 .25' b 

7 .52 b 

6.77a 

7 .25 b 

7.40 b 


c702024 

c703011 

c7 03032 

Mlnn64-62 

Genotypê 

Nitrogen Applted 

' (kg./ha.) Bonanza C702024 C70301 C7O3O32 _ Minn64_62 

0.00 L25a 7.52 b 6.77a 

67 ,26 7,25 b 7.4O c 

7 .07 a 7 .35ab 6 .55a 6 

134 .52 .87 ab 7 .00 bc 

7 .I2a 6 .97 a 6 

201.78 ,55a 6. 50a 6 .97 bc 

7.t5a 6.97a 

269.04 

6-.¡1" 

6.92a 

6.50a 6.65ab 

6.95a 6.42a 6.47a 6.42a

Table 24. Nirtogên lertlllzer Applic¿tlon Study, ANOVA lor Degree <strong>of</strong> Lodgtrig. 

Replicâtes 

NO DAÎA 

4.80 

L79 

30.42*r. 

4 

¡erEilizers (F) 

,38 

r.78 

L2 

Error (a) 

29,62t tt 

8,14,r¡r 

cenotypes (c) 

96.30'r't 

20,91,r,r 

I ratt6 vs seml-dwarfs 

4.23 

10,00t¡r 


12.10'f 

.63 

' 3onen¿â vs C703011 

24,03t * 

1.60 

Bonâfl¿¿ vs c703032 

, 57,60¡r,¡ 

4.28,{¡t 

¡onânza vs Mlfir64-ó2 

1-ltllttt 

¡xC 

4.IO¡+'r 

Coefflcienr <strong>of</strong> variabl:Llry Z 

(1) Brror(a) 79.9 zz.7 

(2) Erroï(b) 44.7 46.4 

** ! s1eûlficanr âË p=0.0i: 

f single de8¡ee <strong>of</strong> freedor¡ comParfêons âre orthogoûai, but riot all fron Èhe Earíe nutuarly orthogonâl 6êt. 

'\o 

,o\

TabLe 25. Nltrogen Fefttlizef Appllcåtlon Study, Means for T-oclging. 


Heieht 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

3.60 cd 

4.25 d 

2.50 bc 

2 ,05 ab 

I.20a 

I.75al 

2.7 5 b 

1 .50a 

1.35a 

1.10a 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

l4í¡n64-62 

HeighÈ CLass 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

3.93 b 

I.92a 

2.25 b 

I .32a 

TaLLs (T) 


Nitrogen Applíed 

(kg 

" /ha. ) 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

1.00a 

2.!0 b 

2,80 c 

3.55 d 

4.r5 

1.10a 

1.15a 

2.00a 

1.90a 

2,30a 

0 .00 

67 ,26 

r34 .52 

20I .7I 

269,04 

rent, P=0. 

e aame tter are not signlfícantly d 

t 

oLLo¡¡ed 

f Values ína colunm

(,tssl) . 

As ín the reports by Chandle:' (1969) for riee, and 

Briggle and Yoge1 (a968) for wheãt, the present str.rdy 

indj-cated there was significantly more lodging in the tall 

genotypes than the semi-dwarfs at both sites (îable Z5B), 

Sígnificant F x G interaction occurred at both sites 

(ta¡fe Z4). At CarrÂan the interaction (Table 26) resulted 

from Cf02O24 showing increased lodging with more applied N 

while the other genctypes showed no significant responseo 

At Portage the interaction (Tabl-e 2?) arose due to tr¡¡o 

seni-dwarfs, C7O3O32 and lllinn 64-62, showing no r.esponse to 

applied N while the other genot;4>es, in particular th€ tal-ls, 

responded positively to the first tv¡o N increments. 

C|O3O)Z and Minn 64-62 were the most lodging resistant 

and ÇfO2O24 the rnost susceptibie genotypes 3.n this study 

( raul-e z5¡. ) " 

Test We igLt. This character was significantly affected by 

applíed N at onty the two t9Z5 siies (ta¡fe eA)" At both 

sites the initial N increment gave increased test weight, 

while further increinents gave no change at Carnran, but 

resulted in a decrease to original 'levels at portage (table 

29C). Si"rnilar results were reported by Reisenauer and. 

Diekson (ryøA) for ihe closely related character <strong>of</strong> kernel 

plurnpne s s in barley. 

As indicated. by data in lable 2pB, differences ån 

favou:' <strong>of</strong> the talls existed between <strong>height</strong> classes at only 

98

itable 26. Nitrogen Fertfllzer Application Stucly. 

!'ertlllzer X Genotype Interactíon Means for Lodging at Carman, 1975. 

Nitrogen Appl.led (kg. /ha. ) 

2 . 00ab 

4 ,50 b 

7 .7 5ab 

2 . 00ab 

I.25a 

2.25a 

3.25a 

7.75a 

1.25a 

1.00a 

2.5Oa 

3.50a 

L.25a 

I .50a 

|,25a 

1.00a 

1 .50a 

I .25a 

1.00a 

1,00a 

+ 

1.00â 

1.00a 

I .50a 

1 .00a 

1.00a 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

Genotype 

1.00a 

1.00a 

1.25a 

I .00a 

1.25a 

1.00a 

1 ,00a 

1.50a 

7.25a 

2.00a 

1.50a 

1 .25a 

I .25a 

!.7 5a 

I.75a 

1 ,00a 

1.50a 

3.50 b 

3.25 b 

4 .50 b 

1.00a 

1,00a 

2.50a 

2.25a 

2.00a 

0. 00 

67 .26 

r34.52 

201.78 

269.04 

tter are not signlflcant 

\o 

\o

Table 27, Nitrogen Feïtilizer AppLícatíon Studv. 

Fertilizer X cenotype Interaction Meäns for Lodging at portage, 1975. 

Nitrogen Appl-ied (ke. /ha. ) 

5,50 bc 

6.50 c 

4.50 bc 

3 . 00ab 

I.25a 

5.00 bc 

6.00 c 

2.00a 

3.25ab 

1.50a 

3.00ab 

5 .25 b 

2 .7 5ab 

2.00a 

I .00a 

3.50a 

2 .50a 

2.25a 

1.00a 

1.00a 

1.00a 

1.00a 

1.00a 

1.00a 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

l"lLnn 64-62 

Genotype 


1.00a 

7.25a 

1.00a 

1.50a 

1,00a 

1. 00a 

2.QOa 

3 .25a 

3.00a 

1.00a 

2.25ab 

2.7 5ab 

2 . 00ab 

4 .50 b 

1,00a 

2 .50a 

5 .25 b 

6.00 b 

6.50 b 

1.00a 

3. 5Oab 

3. 00ab 

5.00 b 

5.50 b 

0. 00 

67 .26 

L34 . 52 

201.78 

269.04 

erent, P=0.05. 

y the saDe letter are not signi 

Values in a eolurur

latlê 28. Nltrogen ¡'ertlllrer Appllcatlon Study, ANOVA for Tesr lJetghr. 

Repllcates 

13.53 

3,58 

1.16 

8.20 

3.04 

8.05 

0.48 

0.19 

¡.5.67** 

54.l2ttr. 

4 

5.19 

l2 

¡ertÍ1lu erê (¡) 

lrro¡ (a) 

9.38 

1.34 

1. 3l 

1.76 

7.48*t 

L1 .94r,). 

28.17'rir 

4.46* 

51.16¡t* 

. 0.49 

Cenotypes (G) 

0.48 

I rarl6 vs se¡Ì.1-clq7ârts 

0.34 

40.87ti* 

74.90** 

0.36 

L7 .42 

4 ,49 

10,20,r* 

31.24r,tt 

. Bonerza vs C702O24 

8,10!¡ 

2.03 

5.78¡t 

I06.28¡r¡t 

Bonênzâ vs C703011 

r.60 

I 67.08** 

. 27.89** 

16,13:r¡i 

t.94 

6.40 

3onånza vs C703032 

4.23 

t6.77** 

8,84.*'t 

2.40 

0.03 

Bonanza vs Miû¡64-62 

3.39*¡t 

10,38* 

Fxc 

0,67 

0,44 

0.5 7 

Coefficlent <strong>of</strong> varlablllty 7, 

(1) Error(a) 3.8 

(2) Error(b) 

2,2 1.8 1.8 4,7 

3.6 

x F signifÍcant at ?=0.05. 

** I¿ signlficånt at p-0.01. 

f slngl-e degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparf6on5 are orthogonal, but not all fÌo¡n the ssûê Eutuâlly orthogonal set.

fable 29. Nltrogen tr'ertl-lizer Appllcatlon SÈudy, Means for Tesr Weight (kg./hl.) 


HeíghÈ 

65 .5ab 

64.8ab 

64.6a 

65,lab 

66 .2 1) 

64.4 d 

63.4 c 

61,8a 

62.7 b 

63 ,2 be 

65.5 c 

67.2 d 

65 .0 bc 

64,2a 

64.5ab 

60 ,9ab 

60 . 8ab 

60.2a 

60.5ab 

61.4 b 

6O .2 be 

58.9 b 

56.9a 

61.0 e 

60 .2 bc 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c70301 1 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

HeighÈ Class 

65.2a 

65,3a 

63.9 b 

62.6a 

66. 3 b 

64.6a 

60 .9a 

60,7a 

59.5a 

59.4a 

Ta11s (T) 


NÍtrogen Applled 

(ke 

' /ha. ) 

64.9a 

65.2a 

66.2a 

64,5a 

65 .5a 

62.8a 

63.0a 

63.1a 

63.2a 

63,2a 

65.2a 

65.3a 

65 .4a 

65.2a 

65,3a 

61.lab 

62.0 b 

60.9ab 

59.9a 

59.9a 

56.6a 

59.8 b 

60,6 b 

60.3 b 

60,0 b 

0.00 

67.26 

r34.52 

20L.78 

269.04 

cantly d 

tter are not s 

f Values in a columr foL

Sanford â.nd Carnan, 1926, Since N had no effect at these 

locations, these dlfferences were genotypic. 

Significant F x G interaction occ.ürred at both i-975 

sites. [he interaction at Carman, 1925 (fable JO) rvas due 

to C7030tl and Minn 64-62 shov¡ing sign.ificant positive 

response to applied N, while the renaining genotype s did 

not. Àt Portage, L97 5 (fabl.e 31) tfre F x G interaction 

occurred as CIA2O24 showed a negative response to N, while 

CTOSOIL showed an initial positive response followed by a 

negative response to higher N rates. The other genotypes 

exhibíted no significant response. 

0vera11, C703011 was the lowest in test weight, while 

the other genotypes did not differ consistently over 

locations (fa¡fe e9¡.). The smalt error (Table 28), gave 

rise to a highly sensitj-ve test for statistical significance. 

These sorts <strong>of</strong> differences would not 1ike1y be crítieaL fron 

a practical productíon viewpoint. 

Days to_Headins" Applied N affected days to heading at both 

sites in Ig75 and at Sanford, 19?6 (Iã.bl€ 32). This effect 

was due to the fírst N inerement at al.l sites (Table 33); 

however, the effect at the 1!/J sites was to cause heading 

to be earlj-er, while at Sanford, 1926, heading was del_ayed" 

Results similar to the I9?5 data were reported by Stanberry 

and lowrey \ryô1). 

At all sites, the sernj--dwarfs headed sooner than the 

taus (labl-e 3lB) . However, it i s evident (fable 3 jÀ ) thât 

103

Table 30. Nitrogen Fertilízer Applicatlon SÈudy. 

Fertllizer X cenotype Interactíon Means for Test Weighr (ke,/hl.) ar Carmân, 1975. 

Nitrogen Appj.ied (ke. /ha. ) 

60, 8a 

58.0a 

59 .0a 

61.1a 

60. 8a 

61.1a 

59 .0a 

58.0a 

61.la 

62,4a 

60.5a 

59.6a 

60.2a 

61.8a 

61. 1a 

60.5a 

58. 9a 

57.7a 

61.7 a 

60.2a 

58. o' b 

s9.0 b 

49.9a 

59 ,2 b 

56,8 b 


a7 02024 

c7030I1 

c703032 

llinní4-62 

Genotype 

56.8a 

60.2ab 

61.1ab 

62,4 b 

60.8ab 

59 .2a 

6L.7a 

61.8a 

6L.7a 

61.1a 

49.9a 

57 .7 b 

60.2 b 

58.0 b 

59.0 b 

59.0a 

58.9a 

59.6a 

59. 0a 

58. 0a 

58. 0a 

60.5a 

60.5a 

6L.la 

60. 8a 

0.00 

67 ,26 

134 .52 

20t.78 

269 ,04 

f Values t" " "ã

Tabl-e 31 . Nítrogen Fertilizer Applicatlon Study. 

Fertillzer x cenotype rnteraction Means for Tesr weight (kg./h1,) ar portage, 1975. 

Nitrogen Applted (kg. /ha. ) 

59.9a 

59 .0a 

60.5a 

59.6a 

60. 8a 

60.5a 

59 .0a 

59.9a 

59.0a 

61.1a 

60. 8a 

60. 5a 

60 .2a 

61.5a 

61.8a 

62 .4a 

62.4a 

61.8a 

6l .4a 

62 .la 

61.1âb 

63.0 b 

58 .6a 

61.1ab 

6l.4ab 


cv02024 

c703011 

c7 03032 

l4Lnrt64-62 

GenoÈype 

Nítrogen Applied 

(ke, /ha. ) Bonanza 

0.00 6t.la 63.0 

67.26 

b 

62.4a 

58,6a 61.1a 6L.4a 

62.4 

134.52 

b ãi.à 

60.8a 

r 6r.4a 62.ta 

z0L.7B 

60.5ab 

60.5a 

áo.z"u 61.5; 61.8a 

59.0 

" ié-.g"a 269 ,04 59.0a 59 .9a 61. 

59. 0a ta 

60.5ab 59 .6; 60. 8a 

: ial';es :Ê e 3ó

Table 32. Nltrogen Fertlllzer Àppllcatlor¡ Study, A¡IOVA fo! Dåys ro lleå¿tfns. 

57.98 

8.39 

1,50 

2.04 

3 

RepllcaÈes 

2.89 

0.22 

Lt2 

17,2ltttt 

I3.63,¡* 

30.37t* 

4 

FertiLizers (F) 

4.82 

1.45 

1.46 

0.96 

t2 

E¡ror (a) 

69,56't't 

lL 02** 

41,94titt 

52,6I¡r!+ 

29.34rttt 

' 60,80*'r 

Genotypes (c) 

fTa11s vs seûl-dr,rarf6 

15l.OO¡* 

12. 33¡t 

91.26r.¡+ 

23,21ttt 

12, 1o¡rtr 

57.60'+'¡ 

115.60rrr. 

50.63,r,r 

Bon^íza va C702024 

1.60 

. 9.03¡¡rr 

Bonanza vg C703011 

7 2.94*t 

11 .03!t,i 

8.10't 

4.90*'r 

18.23*:t 

1.23 

3.60 

Bonanza v6 C703032 

o.23 

42.03'+¡r 

0.00 

48.40¡r!+ 

0,23 

Bonan¿â vs Minr64-62 

I.40* 

2.53* 

¡xC 

2.11 

0.82 

1.65 

Coefficlent <strong>of</strong> variabílfry Z 

(I) Error(a) 3.5 1.9 t.9 2.2 3.I 

, _ . (?L.Er¡or(b)". _ __ 2,1 r.6 I.7 

* 1.3 2:.6 

Fsig"i 

** F s1Ëniflcant at P=0,01, 

f Stngie degree <strong>of</strong>, freedo¡r¡ compårisons are olthogo¡¡alr but not å11 frolr the êa¡le ¡¡r¡tua11y orthogonal set, 

H 

3

Îable33. Nítrogen Fertllizer Applicatlon Study, Means for Days ro Heading. 


Height 

58.0 b 

59.8 c 

55.3a 

55.7a 

58.2 b 

53.2a 

54,3 b 

54.2 b 

53.9 b 

55,2 c 

62 .4 b 

64.8 c 

61 . 5ab 

61.0a 

62 .4 b 

51.1a 

54,5 c 

50.7a 

51.5a 

53. 3 b 

54 ,Zab 

56.5 c 

53.3a 

53.9ab 

54 ,4 b 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

sl) 


c702024 

c70301 1 

c703032 

Mlnn(:1r-62 

Iteight Class 

58.9 b 

56.4a 

53.7 b 

54.4a 

63.6 b 

6l .6a 

52.8 b 

51.8a 

55, 3 b 

53.8a 

Ta1ls (T) 


N1Èrogeû AppLied 

(ke. /ha. ) 

57 .3a 

57.Ia 

57 .la 

5t ,4a 

58.0a 

54.0a 

54,2a 

54.5a 

53.9a 

54.2a 

60.9a 

62 .3 b 

62.5 b 

63.3 b 

63.0 b 

53.7 b 

5L.9a 

5l 7 a 

52.2a 

5L.7 a 

56,6 b 

54 .0a 

53.9a 

53.6a 

54 .Ia 

0.00 

67 .26 

L34,52 

201-78 

269.04 

antl-y dlfferent, 

same leÈter are not s 

ues in a columl 

o\l

this resulted primarily frorn the generally earlier heading 

<strong>of</strong> C70301ì and C?A3o32 and the Late headÍng <strong>of</strong> C/Õ2û24. 

Mín:n 64-62 headed later, and Bonanza headed early, as 

conpared to their respective <strong>plant</strong> heíght category ñeârrs¡ 

F x G interaction was significant at ioatin l9?S sites, 

and the means are presented Ín fables 3U anrj 35, Ât tarnan 

(fable 3þ) tire interaetion was due to Bonanza and C?o3011 

exhibitíng significantly earlíer heading due to increased 

N while the other genotypes showed no signifícant response. 

fhe F x G interaction at Portage (Table lJ) was eaused by 

a sinj"Lar situation, wítt1 C?OZO24r C?03011 and. C?O3O3Z 

showing the response to N. 

Days to lvlaturity" Datâ for this character were not taken 

at, Canre;n, 19?6, Applied N signífieantly affeeted rnaturity 

only at Carman, L975 and Sanford, 19?6 (Tab:e 36), The 

effect <strong>of</strong> N was to delay maturity (faUte j?C). lhe delay 

at Sanford came with the first N l_ncrement, but the effect 

at Car¡ran 1975 did not occur untiL the second N increment. 

fhe se¡ni-dwarf group, in this study, natured earli.er 

than the tal1 genotypes at al1 sites (Table 3?B), However, 

C7O3011 and C7O3O32 were consistently the earliest, C?OZOZ4 

and Minn 64-6e consistently the latest and Bonanza inter- 

mediate for days to maturity (fabte 3Z¿). 

lhe Carman, A9Z5 F x G interaetion (Table 16) is 

explained by the resuLts presented in Table l8B" Bonanza

Table 34. Nitrogen Fertilfzer Applicårlon Study. 

Fertilizet x Genotype rnteraction Means fot Days to Iteading at carrnan, 1975. 

Nltrogen Applied (kS. /ha. ) 

54.3a 

56.8 b 

52 .3a 

53.3a 

54.0a 

52 .3a 

55.8 b 

52.8a 

53.8ab 

53 .5ab 

>3.3a 

55 .8 b 

52.0a 

54. 3ab 

54.Oab 

53. 8ab 

56.0 b 

52,5a 

53. 3ab 

54,3a 

57.5 b 

58. 0 b 

56 ,8ab 

54.8a 

56.Oab 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

l4inn64-62 

GenoÈype 

NÍtrogen AppLied 

56 .0a 

54.3a 

54.0a 

53.5a 

54.Oa 

54.8a 

53.3a 

54.3a 

53.8a 

53. 3a 

56 .8 b 

52.5a 

52.0a 

52.8a 

52 ,3a 

0, 00 57.5 b 58.0a 

67,26 53.8ab 56.0a 

L34,52 53.3ab 55.8a 

20L,7I 52.3a 55.8a 

269.04 54.3ab 56.8a 

same Letter are not signí 

Lowed by t 

in a colulrr

Table 35. Nitrogen I'ertilizer zlppllcarion Study. 

FertÍl1zer X Genotype Interaction Means for Days to Heailing at portage, 1"975, 

Nitrogen Applied (ke. /ha. ) 

A. 

50.8a 

54 .0 b 

49.8a 

50. 8a 

53.3 b 

51.0a 

54 .8 b 

51.0a 

50.8a 

53 .3 b 

51.3a 

s3.8 b 

49 .8a 

50. 5a 

53.3 b 

50. 8a 

54.0 c 

50 .0a 

51 . 5ab 

53.0 bc 

+ 

51.8ä 

56,0 c 

53.Oab 

s3.8 b 

53.8 b 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

Yünn64-.62 

Genotype 

B. 


(ke./ha.) Bonanza 

0.00 51.8a 56.0 b 53.0 

67.26 

b 

50.8a 

53.8 b 53,8a 

54.0a 

134,52 

50.0a 

51.3a 

51.5a 53.0a 

53.8a 

20t.78 

49.8a 

51.0a 

50.5; 53.3a 

54.8ab Sf.Oa 

269.A4 50.8a 

50,8a 53.3a 

54.0a 49.8a 50.8; 53.3a

îab1ê 36. NLtrogeî Fertl,LLzer Appllcåtlon Study, ANOVÀ forDaye to Marurtty. 

Repllcâtes 

9,90 

9.72 

2.81 

3 

29.06!t't 

4 

¡errí11zers (¡,) 

10.66 

34,54r1t! 

1.86 

2.05 

L2 

Error (a) 

5.20 

r.99 

4,63 

r32,411,* 

Cenotypes (c) 

46.89*!t 

50.57t tt 

159.56*,r 

'tTa11s vs 6eñ1-d!,¡arfs 

.41,08,*rr 

64.O3t tt 

58.91:t* 

143.08*:r 

102.40'r'r 

24,03** 

Bonanzs vs C702024 

27 ,231t* 

22.50*1, 

52.90!+¡t 

16 8. 10¡r/. 

Sonenzå vs C703011 

27.23** 

' 24.03r.x 

25,60rtt 

67.60*'t 

¡onânzå vs C703032 

16.90&r 

46.23tttl 

28.90,r!r 

Bonanzâ vs Miü¡64-62 

22,s'ttr, 

Fxc 

16 4.89,r)r 2.g3 0.78 

Drror (b) o.6t 

60 1.24 1.71 t.O3 

ll,03,r* 

160.00r.rr 

-'-- 0.81 

Coefficl.ent <strong>of</strong> vartablltty Z 

(l) Error(a) 1.8 2.7 1,5 

i:¡ i'å i.l 2'7 

'¡; =ÍÍìfåii"il)=¡:¡s: 

** F sigr¡íficant at ?-0.01. 

t slngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedom coû¡patlooris Ere orthogonal, but not all f¡om the eame nutualLy orthogonal Bet: 

P 

H

Table37. NiÈrogen Fertllizer Application study, Means for Days ro Maruïiry. 


Height 

84.3 b 

86 ,0 c 

82.8a 

83 .0a 

85 .8 c 

NO DATA 

9t .9 b 

93 ,4 c 

90 .4a 

89 .8a 

93.0 c 

79.8 b 

83.2 c 

77.7a 

7 8.4a 

84.0 c 

81.8 c 

83.3 d 

77.7a 

70tL 

83.5 d 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

ltli.nn64-62 

Heighr Class 

85. 1 b 

83 .8a 

NO DATA 

92.7 b 

91.0a 

81.5 b 

80. 0a 

82.5 b 

80,1a 

Tal1s (T) 


Nitrogen ApplÍed 

(ke . /ha. ) 

83.2a 

84. 1a 

84.9a 

84.5a 

85.0a 

NO DATA 

89 .5a 

91.8 b 

91,9 b 

92.8 b 

92.6 b 

81,0a 

80.5a 

80.2a 

80.6a 

80.8a 

80.1a 

79.6a 

81.4 b 

82.L b 

82.3 b 

0.00 

67 .26 

I34,52 

20r.78 

269.04 

same letter are not signifÍcantly

Table 38. Nitrogen Fertllizer Application Stuily. 

Fertillzer x Genotype rntefactiÒn Meâns for Days to Maturity at caïnan, 1975. 

Nítrogen Applíed (ke. /ha. ) 

82.0 bc 

84.0 cd 

79.0a 

81 .3 b 

8s .0 d 

82.0 b 

83 .5 bc 

79.5a 

81 .5ab 

84.7 c 

82.3 c 

83.5 c 

77,3a 

79.8 b 

84.3 c 

81,0 b 

81 .3 b 

76,0a 

77.8a 

81.8 b 

+ 

81.5'b 

84.3 c 

76.5a 

75.5a 

82.5 bc 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

ÌIinn64-62 

Genotype 

82.5ab 

81.8a 

84 .3ab 

84 ,7 b 

85 .0 b 

75,5a 

7I .9ab 

79.8 bc 

81 .5 c 

81.3 c 

76.5a 

76,Oa 

77 .3ab 

79 .5 b 

79.0 b 

84.3 b 

81.3a 

83.5ab 

83. 5ab 

84.0 b 

81.5a 

81.0a 

82.3a 

82.0a 

82.0a 

0. 00 

67.26 

r34,52 

201 .7I 

269.04 

t Values i" " cql_"

showed no response to N, while C?AZOZ4 anð. Minn 64_62 

showed earlier maturity in response to ttre first N increrner:t 

but delayed rnaturity at highrer N levels. 0n the o.bher hando 

C?O3OI.L â.^d C?O3O3Z showed only a delay in maturity as N 

increased " 

Ða¡¿s in Pos!--A.ntÌre s-Ls. No data were calculated for thÍs 

characteristic at Carnøn 79?6, N affected this pararne ter 

only at Carman I)lJ and Sanford l_926 (Table 39). At both 

sítes, the lower increments <strong>of</strong> N lengthened the pcst_ 

anthesis period, prinarily via delayed rnaturity (fa¡te 3?); 

howevern the effect <strong>of</strong> earl_ier heading at higher N levels 

at Carman t9Z5 (lable ll) was also j-nvolved " 

At both 1925 sites the tall genotypes had longer post_ 

anthesis periods than the semi-dwarfs, while i:n I)16 there 

ìirere no sígnificant dífferences at sanford and a cifferenee 

in favour <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs at portage (table O0B). 

In general CZo3O]I a:nd C?O3O3Z had the shortest post_ 

anthesis periods and Minn 64-62 tøa the longest (fable 4oe¡, 

reflecting their differences in maturity. At portage, a9?6, 

although not demonstrated by the Duncanrs Multiple Range 

test (Table 4OA), the single degree <strong>of</strong> fr.eeriom comparison 

(rable 39) indicated thåt \Iinn 64-62 had a signÍficantly 

longer post-anthesis period than Bonanza. 

the F x G interaetion at Car¡na ^ Lg?s was due t,o Õ?OZAZ4 

showing no significant response to nitrogen, while the other 

genotypes did (fable ¿llB), Differences between genotype s 

LT4

lab1e 39,. NLtrogen Fertllf¿er Appllcatlon Study, À¡¡OVA for Days tn post-Anrhesis. 

source <strong>of</strong> varlatlon df carinån 1975 ?orrage 1975 lanfo¡d 1976 carman 1976 portaÂe 1976 

Replicates - .3 3,L7 8.45 3,50 NO DATA 22.4i 

FertillzerÊ (¡) 4 88.2I*'r 8,32 3.49ir* g,2g 

Errot (a) 12 s.66 7 J4 0,49 5.54 

68.68** 48.40*'t l3.lg*'r 8,97¡r* 

20,91,t:* 8,l?¡t 2.4L 34.56*:r 

4.90 0.40 8, to,r* o,to 

gg.z3tttt 36.10'r* 4,23* I I.O3¡r 

cenotypes (C) 4 

fTalls vs eeml-dr,7årf6 

Bona¡¿a vs C702024 

Bonarizå vs C703011 

50.63¡+'t 38.03,r,r 6,40,r Il.O3,r 

24.03*r. 32.40,+¡1 11.03*:t I8,23*¡t 


Bonênza vs Minn64-62 

! xG 

3.60'r 

1.60 

Coefffcíent <strong>of</strong> våriabl.llËy Z . 

(l) Error(a) 8.9 9.5 2,4 A.l 

, ,, 

(2) Error(b) 5.0 4.5 3.4 

* s,7 

¡ 

"1i" 

** i siÀnlflcant at ?=0,01. 

.+ slngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedon coûÞarlsons áre orthogori¿l, but not ê11 fro¡n the.sar¡e nutually orthogonål set, 

H 

!t1

Table 40. Nitrogen FertLlizer .Appllcatlon study, Means for Days in posr-anrhesis. 


tteight 

A 

26.3a 

26.2a 

27.4a 

27.4a 

NO DATA 

29.6a 

28.7 a 

28.9a 

28.8a 

30.6 b 

28.9 b 

28.7 b 

27.0a 

26 ,9a 

30.7 c 

27 .6 b 

26 .9 b 

24 .4a 

25,3a 

29.I c 

.L 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c70301 I 

c703032 

MÍnn64-62 

Heighr class 

26.3a 

27 .5 b 

NO DATA 

29.|a 

29.4a 

28,8 b 

28.2a 

27 .2 b 

26.3a 

Tal1s (T) 



(ke. /ha. ) 

25.9a 

2l ,La 

2l .8a 

27.|a 

27.0a 

NO DATA 

28.6a 

29 ,5 b 

29.4 b 

29.5 b 

29,6 b 

27.4a 

28.7 a 

28.5 a 

28 .4a 

29 .1-a 

23.5a 

25 .6 b 

27 ,6 bc 

28.5 c 

,,Q . 

0 .00 

67 .26 

134 ,52 

20I.78 

269.04 

same LetÈer are not

Table 41. Nitïogen Iertillzer Applieation Study. 

Fertilizer X cenotype Intefaction Means for Days in poàt_Anthesis at Carman, 1975. 

Nftrogen Applied (ke. /ha. ) 

Á. 

27.8ab 

27 .3al> 

26 ,8a 

28.Oab 

31 .0 b 

29,8 b 

27 ,8ab 

26.8a 

27.8ab 

30.3 b 

29.0 b 

27 .8ab 

z),3a 

25 ,5a 

30.3 b 

27 .3 bc 

25.3abc 

23.5a 

24,5ab 

27,5 c 

24.0t b 

26,3 b 

19 .8a 

20.8a 

26.5 b 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

Itírn64-62 

Genotype 

26,5a 

27 .5ab 

30.3 b 

30.3 b 

31.0 b 

20 .8a 

24 .s b 

25 .5 b 

27,8b 

28.0 b 

19. 8a 

23.s b 

25.3 b 

26 .8 b 

26 .8. b 

26.3a 

25.3a 

27 ,8a 

27 ,8a 

27.3a 

24.0a 

27 .3 b 

29,0 b 

29.8 b 

27 .8 b 

0. 00 

67 ,26 

L34 ,52 

201,7 8 

269,04

f or this parameter dir¡rinished as i{ increaeed (fab1e 4l-4 ) . 

1ng a re sponse to applied N while r-Ìo Õther genotype did 

(îable &28). Again we see the trend toward equalÍt1, 6¡ 

genotypes as N increased (Table bZn ). 

fsscent Barley t:¡itrqs . The .{NOVA (fable 4l) indicated 

that applied N significantly affeeÌ;ed this parameter at al-l 

sites except Portage, 1pf6. The lack <strong>of</strong> response at that 

síte was probabry due to roid to late season moisture stress, 

It will be noted that, at the Carman site, where the inj_tial 

soil nitrogen level was low in both years, barley nitrogen 

increased progressivel-y with higher fertilizer l{ increraents 

(Table 44C). .A,t Portage in Ig?5, on the other hand, the 

grain nitrogen was rel"atively high, probably reflecting 

higher ínitial fertålity, and there was little response to 

added fertilizer (Tabte 44Á.)" Sirnilar results vrere reported 

by Gardener and Rathjen (ISZS) and Kirby (1968). 

Á.lthough significant differences between genotypes 

were shown for all locations, the data (Ta¡1e &4A) in¿icate 

these differences were inconsistent across locations. 

A significant F x G interaction was shown at Carman, 

!9?6" This resulted from the fâct that the differences 

between genotype s at u ero N appl-ied, n r^,,ere mininized through 

additions <strong>of</strong> fertilizer, indicatíng that the initially 1ow 

genotypes showed a greater response to N than did the 

others (TabLe tr5A ) . 

118

Table 42. Nitrogen Fertllizer Applicatton Stutly. 

FertiLlzer x GenoÈype rnteraction Meâns for Dâys in post-Anthesis at portage, 1975. 

Nitrogen Applied (ke. /ha. ) 

28.8a 

29 .5a 

28 ,5a 

28,5a 

30.3a 

28 .9ab 

28 .0a 

27 .Oa 

27,Oa 

31.3 b 

27.5a 

28.8a 

26 .8a 

27,8a 

31.8 b 

30.0 b 

28 .5 ab 

27.0a 

26 .8a 

31.0 b 

zg :3t a 

28.5 b 

25.5a 

24.5a 

29 ,0 b 


c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

Genotype 

Nítrogen Appl-ied 

(ke./ha.) Bonanza 

îr 

29 '3a 28.5a 25 .5a 24 .5a 29 ,oa 

L34.52 30'0a 28.5a 27,0a Ze .áÂ 27 3r.0a 

zot.7g '5a 28.8a 26.8a 27.8-b 31.8a 

0. 00 

67 ,26 

26s.04 i3:3å trï:iz îl:i1 \l:i"", 3i:;; 

t Values ín " ";

Tåble 43, Nlrrogen ¡errLLt zer. ApplLcatfon Srudy, ÀNOVA f,or Bårley Nirrogen. 

0, 113 

0.065 

RepLlcate6 

0.589 

0.0t0 

0.013 

¡ertl1lze16 (F) 

0,361'rrr 

1 .201!rr. 

4 

0.117 

1.093** 

0.968¡r'r 

0.007 

t2 

Error (a) 

0.118 

0.005 

0,005 

0,052 

0,030t * 

0,026** 

0.016't 

0.058trtr 

0.056li¡r 

Genotypes (c) 

fÎaLls vs seml-¿lwårfa 

0.202,¡¡+ 

0.004 

0.004 

0.019 

0,073* 

0.004 


0.009 

0,.036¡r 

0,025¡t 

0,049 

0.196!t't 

0,016 

Bonanza vs C7ô3OII 

0.001 

0.000 

0.016 

0.049:r'r 

Boriaîza vs C703032 

o,004 

0,004 

0.049 

0.081¡r!+ 

0.081,r,r 

0.016 

Bonanza vs. Mlnn64-62 

0.036't 

0,00I 

0,009 

FxG 

0.010 

0.010 

0.008 

9'8 3.8 3.s 16.2 

ã,o ilã ... 

Coefflcient <strong>of</strong> veriability Z 

(1) Error(a) 

(2) 

4.t 

ErroÌ(b) i:å 

** F signlfican! ¿t p=O.Ol, 

f slngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedon conparLson6 Lrê orthdgonal, but not ê11 fro¡ the bà¡¡e r¡utuålly orthogoía1 set, 

NJ 

Õ

'IabLe 44. Nítrogen ¡'ertilizer Appllcatlon stúdy, Means for Barley Nirrogen (mg./100 e.) 

Environmenta 

A, Height I 

Bonanza 'I 2.O6ab 2.4I b L,94ab 

C702OZ4 T 2,08ab 

2.Olab 2.I5ab 

2.38 b 

C703011 

L.B7a 

sD 2.02a 

2.O2a 2.O9a 

2.27a t.90ab 

C703032 sD 

2,O7ab 

2.13 

2.74ab 

b 2.32ab Z.Or 

MÍnn64-62 

b 2.O9ab z.L7 b 

sD 2.IOab 2.3àab L.gjÃ 2.O6ab 2,09a 

HeighÊ Class 

2.I2a 

2.13a 

2.05a 

2,07 a 

1.92a 

L .96 b 

2 ,40 b 

2.30a 

2.07 a 

2.08a 

TalLs (T) 

SemÍ-dwarfs (SD) 

c. Nitrogen Applted 

(ke. l]na.) 

2.QIa 

2.09 a 

2 ,I5a 

2,L7a 

2.21a 

I.70a 

|.97 l) 

2.12 c 

2.25 d 

t )'7 Ã 

1.63a 

1,78 b 

2.04 c 

2.08 c 

¿. t+ c 

2 .I3a 

2 . 30ab 

2.36 b 

2.45 b 

2.45 b 

L,76a 

r .92 b 

2,IO c 

2,28 d 

2 ,34 d 

0.00 

67.26 

I34 ,52 

201.78 

269 

"04 

erent, P=0, 

same Letter are not signl 

Values in a colu¡nn fo1

Tab1e45. Nítrogen Fertilizer Appl{caÈion Study. 

Fertilizef x Genotype rnteractíon Meàns for Barrey Nrtrogen at caïman, 1976. 

Nltrogen Applied (kg. /ha. ) 

2.28a 

2.26a 

2 .25a 

I 'r'7 ^ 

z.¿ta 

2.25a 

2.L7a 

2.25a 

, to- 

2L.5a 

2,O9a 

2 ,I3a 

2 .76a 

2.O6a 

2.OLa 

1. 87a 

2 .02a 

2.03a 

1,94a 

+ 

t .63ä 

1.6la 

1 ,79 b 

1. ,7 4ab 

l 73ab 

Bonanzâ 

c702024 

c703011 

c703032 

l4Ltn64-62 

Genotype 

I.73a 

7 ,94 1, 

2.06 b 

z.z9 c 

L74a 

2.03 b 

2 .76 bc 

2,25 c 

2.27 c 

2,02 b 

2.13 bc 

2 .17 bc 

2.25 c 

1.61a 

r.87 b 

2.08 c 

2 ,25 d 

2,26 d 

1,63a 

2.O7 b 

2,1-5 bc 

t t1 

2.28 c 

0.00 

67.26 

134.52 

20t.7 8 

269,04 

f values in " ""t

Q UAT,TTY Cltq.RÀcTER rsrf ts 

Q uality deter¡ninations rlere nr¿de on onl-y three para_ 

meters on samples fz.orn the I9?5 trial_s. 

T.,eve lj: <strong>of</strong> Alpha-alnylase. Applied N had no effect on this 

character (fables 46 and 47C), contrary to the report <strong>of</strong> 

Rei-senauer and Díckson (1960). 

The taIl genotypes were si-gnificantly and substantially 

superior ín alpha-arnylase to the serni-dwarfs at both 

IocatÍons (fables 4Z-4 anA 4?B). Bonânza was the highest 

and Minn 64-62 tlne iowest <strong>of</strong> the genotypes" 

the F x G interaction at portage (îable ¿t6) reflected. 

the significant response <strong>of</strong> C?O]OJ2 to appliecl N in compari_ 

son with a minimal response <strong>of</strong> the other lines (Table 4BB)" 

Saccharift¡inq Actívitv. ÀNOVA (gable &9) in¿icated sÍgnifi_ 

eant fertiiizer effects at both sites* lhe response was 

positive, and continued. to the highest level <strong>of</strong> applied N 

(fa¡le 5OC). These results are in general agreement with 

those reported by Reisenauer and Ðickson (1960)" 

ANoVA (Table 49) indicated signifieant d.ifferences 

between the <strong>plant</strong> heÍght classes, but the difference was 

opposite in direetion at the two sites (îatle 508). lhis 

was nainly due (lable 50A) to a major shift in the value 

foz' Bonanza between sites" 0veral3-, C?OZOZ4 and C?03011 

were high in saccharifying activity, while Minn 64-62 was 

l-ow "

lab1e 46. Ntrrogen lertLlL¿er Appllcatton Study, ÂNOVA for o_arry1åee. 

134.5 t 

NO DÀTA NO DATA 

250.53 

Repllcates 

¡errllizer€ (¡) 

18.4!. 

66.06 

4 

18.36 

23,10 

l2 

Error (a) 

295.90¡r* 

352.02*t< 

Ceûotypes (c) 

fTalls vs se¡ni-¿h¡arf6 

451 ,01/.r, 

1247.62*t1 

24,96 

8onân¿a v6 C7O2O24 

136. t6¡r¡k 

378,23rtt 

Sonanza vs C703Ol1 

189 ,23ttrt 

644.81*'* 

Bonån¿å vs C703032 

t27 ,45t t 

It27.8Þt* 

964.32],¿t 

Bonanzâ vs Minn64-62 

Fxc 

IT,2g 

Coefficier¡t <strong>of</strong> va¡1ebiIi.ty Z 

(1) Error(a) 14,8 ts.7 

-';;#íàH*P;ãõ 

** ! signlflcant at ?=0.01, 

t slngre degree <strong>of</strong> freedorû comPa¡lgona. êre orthogonêl, but not all flon the sat¡te Dutually orthogonal Eet. 

I 

NJ

lable 47. Nitrogen ¡'ertilLzer Appllcation Study, Means for o_amylase, 

Environrnents 

A. lteighr 

Bonanza ,Í 37..6 c 31.8 c NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA 

C702024 T 36.0 c 28.1 b 

c703011 sD 31 .4 b 27.s b 

c703032 sD 29.6ab 28,3 b 

Minn64-62 SD 27 .8a 2I ,2a 

B. 

Height Cl-ass 

NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA 

30.0 b 

25 .6a 

36.8 b 

20.6a 

TalLs (T) 

SemÍ-dwarfs (SD) 

Nítrogen Applied 

(ke. /ha. ) 

0.00 30,2a 26.7a No DATA NO DATA No DATA 

67,26 32.0a 26.5a 

134.52 33.1a 27 .0a 

20L.78 31 .9a 28,Ia 

269 ,04 35 . Ia 28.7 a

Table 48. ñitrogen Fertilizet Ap?lication. Stu

Table 49. Nltrogen ferrlllzer AppLlcatlo¡¡ Study, ANOyA for Seccarifyfng Acttvtry. 

1528.42 

388.69 

12816,64t t 

21652,86t 1 

4 

Repllcare6 

Fertillze¡s (F) 

roL4.26 

776.98 

l2 

Error (â) 

15042,O4ttt 

1I175.00t * 

12549.23rttt 

cenotypes (c) 

rrâtrs va se¡Ri-d\¿a?fa 

9I18.20:rrr 

11.03 

8294.40t rt 

Êonan¿a vs C702024 

902.50 

3496,90*!t 


540.23 

2402.50t 

Bonåûza vs C703032 

34869.03rr¡t 

8179.60*tr 

¡onan¿a ve M1nn64-62 

¡:rc 

t 62,29** 

787,28 

Coefffcient <strong>of</strong> vâriabílity U 

(I) E¡ror(a) 

at 

** F slgnifLcant ât P=0,01. 

t single degree <strong>of</strong> freedou cor¡PÂr16ona are orthggonaL, but noÈ å1I from the Eane mutually orthogonal Eet,

Table 50. Nitrogen rerttlizer Applicatíon study, Means for sacchari"fyinS Acríviry. 

Envíronmenta 

A. Heíghr 

portaze 1976 

19 76 

Bonanza T 273,2 bc Zt9.3a NO a7O20Z4 DATA NO T DATA NO DATA 

302.0 d 2s2,4 b 

C703011 SD 2gt.g ccl 300.8 b 

C703032 SD Z57.7ab 2A4.O b 

I'{:lnn64-62 SD 244,6a 232.3a 

B. 

Height Class 

NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA 

355.8a 

272.3 b 

287 .6 b 

264 ,7 a 

Ta1ls (T) 

Seml-drsarfs ( SD) 


(ke . /ha. ) 

0.00 2I8.Ba 244.2a NO DATA NO 67.26 256,8 DATA NO DATA 

b 269,7ab 

L34"52 284.7 c 279.6 bc 

20ï.78 294.1 cd 298.4 bc 

269.04 374.9 d 308.9 c 

* r.'aiu=s i... col

îhe F x G i.nteraction at portage (fable l'L9) was caused 

by Minn 64-62 sbawLng no significant response to N ì¡¡hile 

the other genotypes showed a positive anC signifi.cant 

response (raure 5:"e). 

soluble Auino-l$i-trogen. Fertilizer significantly increased 

soluble amino-N at both sites (rable 52) a...d, added increnents 

<strong>of</strong> N led to progressively higher level_s (Sable J3) " Iritinn 

64-62 was consistently lower than ttre other genotypes in 

soluble anino-N by a significant margin. 

Experiment fII:_ Bow_gpecins and Seedins 

Rate Study 

ANOYA were used to determíne the significance <strong>of</strong> 

differences between genotypes, seeding rates, row spacings 

and interactions <strong>of</strong> these for each <strong>of</strong> the seven parameters 

measured. Single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparisons were used 

to elucidate differences between the factor levels when 

ANOVA indicated these to be significant " 

Plan"b Heieht 

Genotypíe hei.ght differences were significant at all 

sites (Tab1e 54), as expected based on the choice <strong>of</strong> lines. 

Seeding rate effects were not significant, but :.ow_spacings 

effects were at irvo <strong>of</strong> the three locations (faUfe 5&). 

lhe row-spacing effects were opposite, in that at 

Carman the <strong>plant</strong>s vrere significantly shorter aÈ the wj"dest 

129

TabLe 51. NiÈrogen Fertllfzer Applicaríon Study. 

I'ertlLlzer x Genotypê InteractÍon Means for Saccharifying Activíty at portage, 1975. 

Nitrogen Applíed (kg. /ha. ) 

311,0 b 

333.3 b 

323.0 b 

339.0 b 

238.3a 

304.8 b 

314.8 b 

315.0 b 

308.0 b 

249 ,3a 

293.8 b 

291.8 b 

307.0 b 

279 .8 b 

225.5a 

289 .0 b 

270.3 b 

,oo a L 

262,Oab 

228,0a 

258;0à 

251 .8a 

259 .8a 

23I.0a 

220 .3a 

ßonanza 

c702024 

c70301I 

c703032 

Minn64-62 

Genotype 

220 ,3a 

228 .Oa 

225.5a 

249 ,3a 

238.3a 

237,0a 

262,0ab 

279 .8 b 

308.0 bc 

339.0 c 

259.8a 

299.3ab 

307.0 b 

315.0 b 

323.0 b 

25L.8a 

27O,3ab 

291. 8 bc 

314.8 be 

333.3 c 

258 ,0a 

289.Oab 

293 ,9ab 

304 . 8ab 

311.0 b 

0. 00 

67 ,26 

134.52 

20r.78 

269.04 

y the same Lerrer are not srgnräcanttyìirtãrããt, 

a columr fol

fable 52, Nltrogen Fertfllze¡ Applfcåtlo¡t Study, ANOVA for Soluble A¡lûo_nl.trogen. 

ReplLcate6 

NO D¡.TA 

0.039 

9.0?8 

3 

0.056* 

0,108** 

4 

0,011 

0. oo5 

T2 

¡errl.lizel6 (¡) 

Elror (a) 

0,127t tt 

0,046,r,r 

cenocypes (C) 

0.056*rr 

0.082'r* 

¡ fållg vs seml-d$tarfs 

0.025¡r¡* 

0.00 i 

Boû¿nzä v6 C702024 

0.001 

0.001 

tsonanza vÊ C7030l l 

o. o 16* 

0.016 

Bona¡rza vs C703032 

0,361¡r'r 

O. 121¡tr. 

Bonanza vs ¡{lnn64-62 

0.006 

Fxc 

0.001 

Coefflcient <strong>of</strong> varlâbtllty 7, 

(1) Error(a) I3.1 21.2 

(2) Error(b) 14.0 9,9 

** F signlflcant at p=0,01. 

i single degree <strong>of</strong> fleedom coúparLaoos åre o¡thqgoral, but ¡rot å11 from the aalne hutually orthoggnal 5et.

Table s¡. Nltrogen l'értllizer Appllcatlon study, Means for solubl"e AmÍno-nirrogen. 

Envl.ronmenÈs 

lteighÈ 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

0,55 b 

0. 50 b 

0.56 b 

0.51 b 

0. 36a 

0..58 b 

0.59 b 

0.57 b 

0.54 b 

0.47a 

T 

T 

SD 

SD 

SD 


c702024 

c70301 i 

c703032 

Mlnn64-62 

lleíghr Class 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

0. s3 b 

0.48a 

0.58 b 

0.52a 

Ta1ls (T) 


Nitrogen AppJ.ied 

(hg. /ha. ) 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

NO DATA 

O .44a 

0 .46ab 

0 .49 ab 

0,56 b 

0 ,54 b 

0.44a 

0. s3 b 

0.56 b 

0. s7 b 

0.64 c 

0,00 

67 .26 

r34 .52 

20i.78 

269,04 

cantly di 

tteÏ are not 

a colur¡¡r follo¡¿ed

'labLe 54- Seedlng Råte - Row Spaclng Study, ANOVA for planr Heighr. 

9,19 

8919. 19,r* 

10. 13 

91.35 

7776,00¿.x 

5.63 

0. 90 

6913.35r.* 

24.80 

2 

I 

2 

I 

1 

28.07* 

26,07* 

51.84t* 

4.41 

t9 .02* 

9.85 

1.30 

3.69 

5.50 

96.07* 

5.76 

110. 25't 

L66 .47x tl 

6 .22 

0, 89 

22 .60 

23.36 

19.65 

2 

I 

I 

1 

0.91 

7 ,35 

12.07 

2.07 

17.38 

2 

2 

4 

4 

34 

Replicates (R) 

Genotypes (c) 

Seeding Rates (SR) 

'f SRI vs SR2 

SRl vs gR3 

SR2 vs SR3 

Row SpacÍng (RS ) 

RS1 vs RS2 

RSI vs RS3 

RS2 vs RS3 

GxSR 

GxIìS 

SRxRS 

GxSRxRS 

Error 

Coefficient <strong>of</strong> VariabLl.lty Z 

** F slgnifÍcant P=0.01 . 

t single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparísons are orthogonal, but not all fron the sane mutuaLly orthogonal set.

oui spâe j-ng! while at b¡innipeg the ptants were signifieantly 

shortêr at the narrowest row spacing (faUfe 55). 

A significant genotype by see

Table 55. Seeding Rate - Ror'7 Spacing Study, Means for pLant Height (cn.). 

Genotypes * 

Bonanza 95.1 b 79.2 b 105.2 b 

Mínn64-62 72.5a 55.2a 79.5a 

(1) 56.0 84.8a 66.7a 93. ra 

(2) 84.0 83.9a 61 .!a 92.4a 

(3) 112.0 82.6a 67 .Ba 9t,6a 

(1) 15.0 83,3a 68.1b 9L0a 

(2) 30.5 84.1a 68.9 b gz.t b 

(3) 61.0 83.9a 64,6a g3.4 b 

80.6 

78.8 

54.4 

56.2 

7 2.7 

7 L.O 

OE 

' 

94,L 

Seedlng Rate (2) 

Seeding Rate (3) 

llalLza 

80.0 

79,8 

105.3 

107.1 

57 .1 

80.7 

76.8 

73.4 

7 2.O 

94.8 

95 .8 

Rornr cing 

Row Spacing (2) 


ot a 

92.8 

92.3 

93.5 

93.3 

94.0 

69 .2 

65.3 

70.2 

62.2 

67.3 

66.2 

82.7 

84.0 

84,3 8s.3 

85 . 3 82.5 

Row SpacÍng (1) 

Row Spacíng (2) 


* Valuesin a colufnÐ followed by the same letter are not significantly different, p=0.05,

Tabl-e 56. Seeding Rate - RoaT Spaclng Study, A¡loiÀ for yield. 

47,937 

8, 394 , 884?r* 

4, 108 

267,246 

963,897 

488,s30 

2 

1 

2 

I 

1 

3'890'740*'t 

22 ,500 

5 ,46r ,s69** 

6,185,169*,t 

lot ,57 4 

4r,693 

772,r7t 

t52 ,!63 

I05 ,252 

1,183,900 

r ,293,849*x 

1 ,007 , 190* 

236,196 

7,954,404xx 

83t ,7 44 

6 ,650 ,258** 

335 ,24r 

17 ,6L4 ,464** 

8,003,241** 

735 ,7 62 

t67 ,7 43 

517,r87 

662 ,66r* 

)t) to\ 

9 876 , 339't,t 

' 

81 

L4 ,797.,761*¿. 

14,861,025*r. 

168,294 

228 ,206 

254 ,057 

195 ,930 

482 ,082 

I 

I 

I 

2 

2 

2 

4 

34 

Replicates (R) 

Genctypes (G) 

SeedÍng Rates (SR) 

t SRl vs SR2 

SRI vs SR3 

SR2 vs SR3 

Roû Spacing (RS) 

RS1 vs RS2 

RSl vs RS3 

I{S2 vs RS3 

GxSR 

GxRS 

SRxRS 

GxSRxRS 

Error 

5.4 

Coeffícient <strong>of</strong> VarfabiJ"lty Z 

* F signifícant 

** F signifÍcant P=0.01. 

f Síngle degree <strong>of</strong> freedom conPaÌísons are orthogonal, but not aLl from the same mutually orthogonal set.

Table 57. Seeding Rate - Roúr Spaclng Study, Means foï yleld (ke./ha.). 

*"?::2i.1""' 44ssâ 2733 b 5628a 

Genotypes 

4725a 2423a 64t6 b 

Mínn64-62 

(1) 56.0 443!a 

(2) 84.0 

2369a 6024a 

4584a Z53Lab (3) rr2.0 6035a 

4760a 2s3s; äòou, 

(1) 15.0 

(2) 

sot8 b 3o2t 30.5,, b 6265 b 

s02t 

(3) b 2BzB 61.0 b 6316 b 

3736a 1885a 5486a 

4509 2527 2211 5?ß 6333 

4829 :, 277t Z2gt 56lt 6459 

4838 2907 2769 ss56 6456 

Seedlng Rare (2) 433g 

Seeding Rate (3) 4682 

Rowspacing(if ffi- ffi 

Row spacing (2) 4823 szLg 3ot2 Row spacing (3) z5g5 5965 6664 

3734 3740 .2055 

1.716 5041 5931 

6092 

6476 

s448 

6278 

6332 

5497 

642s 

6r36 

5512 

3083 3311 

3001 3063 

1510 2r3L 

242r 

2016 

5243 

37 89 

5139 

5030 

3582 

47 91 

3838 

Row Spacíng 

Row Spaclng (2) 


* Values Lna coLumn foLlowed by the sarne Lêtter are not s{gnlffcantly diffèrènt, p=0.05.

esults are in agreement rvith previous reports by Gu_itard 

et a!, (196i") ¡ however, as has been the case in yei other 

studíes (¡'i-nfay et a!. 1!lO and Woodward, 1956) t}re seedlng 

rates used did not cover a wide enough range to give 

significant differences at two <strong>of</strong> the sites. fhe result 

at Carrnan, where seedj-ng was delayed, supportecl the r.eport 

<strong>of</strong> Day and Thompson (l-97O) who found thaÈ as seeding was 

delayed the seedång rate needed to be increased. 

Row spacing affected yield at all sites (ta¡le 56). 

fhe significant effect at all sites was due to lower yield 

at tiìe widest row spacíng (fanfe 57¡" Similar results were 

reported by Holliday (tg6l). The results (natfe 57¡ 

indicated no ad,¡antage <strong>of</strong> the narrowest row spacing 

compared to the interroediate, contrary to the findings <strong>of</strong> 

Holliday (tgSl). llowever, at Carma¡ n under ad.verse growing 

conditions with heavy weed infestations, there was a trend 

toward the narrov¡est spacing yielding rnore. 

No significant first order interactions occu_rred 

(lable -(6). $owever, the resuLts <strong>of</strong> Table 52 indicated a 

trend towards the somÍ-dwarf being more responsive to seeding 

rate increases, particularly under the near-optimal 

condåtions at Winnipeg, in which the tall variety shorÀ'ed 

a negative response to increased seeding rateo Such trends 

wer€ reported by Si;icklez' and younis (Ig66) with sorghun 

genotypes Ciffering in <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>" fhe genotype x row 

spaeing rneans (Table 5?), fcr Carman, also showed a trend 

to hígher seini-dwarf yield at the narrowest row spacing, 

138

while the tall sho\^/ed virtually no yield difference between 

]-39 

the narrowest and the intermediate spacings" Similar 

results v,¡ere reported from a wheat study b¡, Stoskopf (Lg6?) " 

Ä significant genotype x seeding rate x row spacing 

interaction occurred at Õarman (ra¡re 56). This interaction 

wâs due to Bonanza consistently outyielding the semi_dwarf 

at al-Ì levels <strong>of</strong> al_l seeding-rate - rovr'_spacing combinations 

except for the combination <strong>of</strong> the narrowe st row space and 

the highest seedíng rate. At this treatment co¡nbination 

Minn 64-62 outyierded Bonanza by an amount equal to that by 

which the reverse had Õccurred at all other treatment 

co¡nbinations. This effect was probably due to the adverse 

growth conditions at this site, resulting in particular 

stress on the seni-dwarf due to earty weed competition. At 

the narrow row spacing and higher seeding rate the semi_ 

dwarf was able to compete with the weeds as well as the 

tal1 genotJrpe and thu.s yielded rnore grain at thât treatrnent 

combination. Similar results were reported from a ,¡rheat 

study (You.ng and Bauer, Ig?3), 

Spikes ner ünit Area 

At Sanford and lfinnipeg the semi-dwarf had significantly 

more spikes per unit area than the tall (Table 5B), 

In agreement with the findings <strong>of</strong> Guitar.d et q!. (]961) 

a positive effect on spikes per unit area resulted from 

íncreased seedì-ng rates (fable 59), atthough the ehange was

Tábl-e 58. Seedlng Rate - Row Spacing SÈudy, ANOVA for Spike/unít area, 

5,790.2 

22 ,489 .0** 

7 ,248.2** 

77 ,728.9x* 

9 

'920 ' 2r' 

76,7 

34 ,646 ,9** 

13,584.4,t't 

69'063.8*,t 

2I .0*tÊ 

795 .9 

'433 

2,I25.4 

4 ,840 ,4** 

2,378.0 

I ,2L5 .0 

1 ,983.7 

93 .4 

3,674.1 

2 

I 

2 

I I 

50,424,4** 

15 ,277 .0r1* 

99 ,225 .Otc¿. 

36 ,634 . 0,t* 

394.7 

'7) \ 

809.9 

8, 387 . 6*rb 

27 ,690.O** 

14,616.8*x 

42,97 3 .3** 

7 ,465 .0'\ 

40 ,992.1** 

12 ,454 .6** 

80 , 883. 4** 

29,756.3*x 

1 ,886 .8 

745.2 

3 ,256 .9 

931 .0 

1,399.0 

2 

1 

I 

I 

300 .2 

1,817.9 

2 

2 

4 

4 

34 

Repl-icates (R) 

Genotypes (G) 


f SRI vs SR2 

SRI vs SR3 

SR2 vs SR3 

Row Spacing (RS) 

RSI vs RS2 

RSI vs RS3 

RS2 vs RS3 

GxSR 

GxRS 

SRxRS 

GxSRxRS 

Error 

1, ,422 .4 

Coefficienr <strong>of</strong> VariabtlÍty Z 

* F slgnifÍcant 

** F significanÈ P=0.01 , 

from the same mutually orthogonal set. 

t Single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparlsons are orthogonal, but not all

Table 59. Seedlûg Rate - Row Spaclng Study, lleans for Spíkes/unir area (L.22 I0Z). 

245.8ä t5o. 7a z9o ,3a 

270.7 t I53.4a 331.i b 

GenoÈypes 


14inn64-62 

(1) 56,0 22L.8a 

(2) I36.7a 84.0 . 287.6a 

262.I 

(3)112.0 

b 154.8a 3n.7 b 

2g\.g s I64.7a 320.8 b 

(t) 15.0 302.2 c 

(2) 200.8 

30.5 c 352.8 c 

265.0 b 

(3) 159,6 

61.0 b 314.0 b 

207,5a 95.8a 265.2a 

270.4 

295,8 

253,7 

286.0 

Seeding Rate (l 

Seeding Rare (2) 



161,6 

98.7 

NlLnn6h-62 

321- .8 

272.0 

218.3 

258.0 

196.7 

clng (1 

Row Spaelng (2) 


346.0 

34L.7 

274,7 

254,0 29 

227,0 292.0 282.0 138.0 168.0 

190.3 

L72.7 267.3 333.0 

198.8 233.3 88.8 s4.5 104.0 22s.3 t;i'.; 

Row Spacing 

Ror+ Spacing (2) 


* values ùn ar cor-urrr f,¡llorsed by the same letter are not signifieantly dlfferenË, p=0.05"

not significani at Carman " 

At all sites decreased row spacing gave rise to 

significantly nore spikes per unit area. Finlay e! A]. 

{79?L) reported a si¡nilar resu,lt. 

i{o significant genotype by treatrnent interactions 

occurred (qla¡te 58), but the first incremen-b in seeding 

rate showed a greater response than the second for both 

genotypes at all sites, particularly at V{ínnipeg (Table 5g). 

The resulte also inclicated â greater nega_tive response to 

incr.easeci row width at the second increraent âs cor,lpared to 

the first. fhese t:'ends indicated no,¡ernents tovrard and 

away from the optima respectiveiy. 

At both Sanford. and Carrnan the combination <strong>of</strong> highest 

seeding rate ând narrowest row width gave the greatest 

nunber <strong>of</strong> spikes per u.rit area. I{owever, a significant 

seeding rate X row spacing interaction occurred at Winnipeg 

(fable 58)" The interaction resul-ted from seeding rate 

having a negative effect at the nanowest spacing but a 

positive effect at wider spacingsa lhis resulted. frorn the 

ideal conditíons elir¡inating much <strong>of</strong> the differenee due to 

the seeding rates at this site. tillering was suffici.ent 

to compensate for fev/er <strong>plant</strong>sn particularly at the narrowest 

row spacing in whieh there would also be less intra_row 

crorvding <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s " 

Kernels Þer SÐike 

Table 60 contains i;he .q"NOvA for kernels per spike " 

L42

Table 60. Seedlng Rate - Row Spacing SÈudy, ANoVA for Kernels/spike. 

9 .27 

.60 

19 . 04'r 

77 .41 

4,92 

255 .88** 

262 .44x.t 

479.6I*1\ 

, 32.49 

t7 .I7 

2 

I 

2 

5.76 

27.69* 

75.2t 

4,8s 

15.39 

5 71 . 68'tik 

729.97* 

I72,78 

?qn ot>rr< 

t7 tq 

66..7 4 

1.55 

7,20 

1.84 

L7 .52* 

5.24 

39 .24 

1 ,00 

27.73 

12.77 

30 .23 

58 . 91,r 

62 .43* 

18.06 

5.s4 

t2 .52 

2 

2 

4 

4 

34 

Repltcares (R) 

Genotypes (G) 

SeedÍng Rar.es (SR) 

f SRI vs SR2 

SRI vs SR3 

SR2 vs SR3 

Row Spacíng (RS) 

RSL vs RS2 

RSl vs RS3 

RS2 vs RS3 

GxSR 

GxRS 

SRxRS 

GxSRxRS 

Error 

Coefficient <strong>of</strong> Variabtlity % 

** F sígnificant P=0.01 . 

t single degree <strong>of</strong> freedon comparisons are orthogonal, but not all frorn the same mutualry orthogonal set. 

signlflcant P=0.05.

Genotype s differed sågnificantly only at Carman, where 

Bonanza averaged approximate ly six more kernels per spike 

than the semi-dwarf (fable 61). This behaviouro different 

fron that at the other sites, as well as the laek <strong>of</strong> inter* 

actions at Carman, can be attributed to the inabiJ.ity <strong>of</strong> 

the semi-dwarf to cope with the high l-evels <strong>of</strong> stress at 

this site. 

Significant reductions in kernels per spike occurred 

at all sites as seeding rates irìcreased (Table 61). A 

sínílar result was previously reported by Guitard et at. 

( 1961). 

Row spac ing did not significantly affect kerneJ-s/spike 

in this study (fable 6o). 

Sígnificant genotype by seedÍng rate and genotype by 

row spacing interactions occurred at Sanford (faefe 6O¡. 

The first <strong>of</strong> these oceurred due to the tall genotype r s 

kernel nurcber per spike declining significantly with each 

seeding rate increase, while the seni-dwarf.s declined only 

with the first increment, and did not drop as rnuch (Table 

61). îhe second interaction occurred because the sem,i.- 

Cwarf showed fewer kernels per spike as row spacing narrowed., 

while the ta]1 genotype showed the reverse (fable 61). 

A second order genotype by seeding rate by row spacing 

interaction occurred at ïfinnipeg (fable 60). The semi-dwarf 

had more kernels per spike at the narrowest row spacing and 

lowest seeding rate, and as the seeding rate increased at 

that spacing the tall genotype beca¡ne superior in kernels 

L44

Table 61. Seedlng Rate - RotT Spaci.ng Study, Means for Kernels/splke. 

51.1a 4g.O b 5!.2a 

5l .7 a 42.5a 51 . 0a 

Genotypes 


Minn64-62 

(2) 84.0 5O.Za 

(3) 112.0 

45.1ab 51.3ab 

48.3a 43.4a 50.0a 

(1) 15,0 50.3a 

(2) 30.5 

46.5a 50,1a 

52.ta 

(3) 6t.0 

47.2a 51.0a 

51.8a 43.5a 5r.ta 

----EÎF- +o.o 5z.o ___Br:t _ 

seedins Rare (1) 

seedtng Rate (2) --l;iì--r¿.+ 50.4 50.0 

Seeding 

50. 

Rate (3) i 4o,2 5r,7 s0.8 

46 .O 50. 6 45 .6 4I .Z 50. 0 sO. 1 



Ror^7 Spacing 



- 

48.1 4s.o s1.8 

40 .3 41 . 8 53.2 

48,4 

48 .5 

48.5 

47 .8 

52,7 

50. 8 

55.1 

56.7 

* val-ues rn a cor.usn'f orlowed by the same letter are not sígníficantly dr.fferent, p=0.05.

per spike. There was little Cifference at the 

row spacing. At the widest row width the tall_ 

more kernels per spike ai the lowest seed rate 

seni-dwarf had. the nost at the highest seeding 

this row width. 

200 Kernel Vi e icht 

Significant differences occurred. between genotypes and 

seeding rates at Carman and Sanford (fable 62). No other 

significant differences or interactions resutted. 

At both sites where differences were found, the ta1l 

genotype had heavier kernel-s (fa¡fe 6j). This was expeeted 

from previous results with these genotypes (Experiments I 

and II). Under more ideal growing conditions at Vùinnipeg 

no differences occurred. The absence <strong>of</strong> any effect <strong>of</strong> row 

spacing on seed weight was previously reported by Finlay 

et at (1921). 

îhe decreased kernel weight wÍth increased seed.ing rãte 

at Sanford and Carman (Table 63) in the present study is in 

agreement with the report <strong>of</strong> Guitard g! al (1961). Although 

not signif icant, a similar trend existed at -v,iínnipeg ( Table 

63), 

Test lieisht 

interme d iate 

ge notype had 

while the 

rate at 

AN0VA (îable 64) indicated no significant effect <strong>of</strong> 

either row spacing or seed.ing rate on this parameter as was 

the case in reports by Sienens (f9$) and lvliddleton et al_. 

146

Table 62, SeedLng Rate - Rorar Spacing Study, Æ{oVA for 200 Kernel l{eight. 

2.426 

0.031 

0.418 

2 

I 

2 

I 

I 

1 

0.335 

0 .079 

6 .545*¡s 

1.147*rr 

0, 960** 

2.250** 

0. 320 

0.042 

0.026 

0.427*x 

O.2I4¿

Table 63. Seedlng Rate - Row Spaclng Study, Means f<strong>of</strong>, 200 KerneL weighr (g.). 

976 

GenotvDes 

6.9s*b 

þÍín¡64-62 6.77 a 

---Êänãnrr 

7 .3L b 7,O5a 

6.61a 7 .I}a 

(1) 56.0 6,99 

(2) b 

94.0 7.23 b 

6.80a 7.25a 

(3) 112.0 6.92a 

6.80a 7.0Ia 

6.73a 6.97a 

( 1) 15 .0 6 .B2a 7 (2) 30.5 .O2a 6 6,86a .sga 

(3) 61.0 6.92a 

6.92a t.Ooa 

6.95a 7.23a 

7,24 6 .60 6.89 7.r3 

6.98 6 .49 6 .96 6.93 

6.76 

6.76 

6 .84 

6 ,84 

SeedÍng 

SeedÍng Rate 

Seeding Rate 

% 

-==--a: RowspacÍng (r) æ -ffi.20- -et#¡ä---¡;02_- 

Row spaclng .(2) 6.94 6,77 . t.3r Row spacrng (3) 6.e7 

6.53 

6.s7 

6.99 t,gL 

i'.;; 6.61 7.23 7.23 

6.72 

6.98 

Row SpacÍng 


Row SpacÍng (3) 

* vaLues in a- colunn for-r-owed by the same r-etter are not slgnlficanÈly differenÈ, p=0.05.

?áble 64. Seedlng Rare - Ror.r Spaclng Study,. ANOVA for Test trIeighr. 

27,337 

29 ,630** 

9 .546 

1 .437 

25.764'\* 

0.007 

2.001 

0.012 

0.797 

2 

1 

2 

2,630 

7.175 

0. 565 

5.902 

2.568 

2.688 

3.295 

3.507 

0. 118 

0,459 

o,286 

r .97 4* 

0.528 

1. L56 

0.128 

0 .369 

0. i95 

0. 876 

Repllcates (R) 

cenorypes (c) 


f SRI vs SR2 

SRI vs SR3 

SR2 vs SR3 

Row Spacing (RS) 

RSl vs RS2 

RSI vs RS3 

RS2 vs RS3 

GxSR 

GxRS 

SRxRS 

GxSRxRS 

Error 

Coefficient <strong>of</strong> Varlability 2( 

* F significanr p=¡.õt 

fron the same mutuall-y otthogonal set. 

** F sígnifÍcant P=0.01 . 

f SingJ"e degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparlsons are orthogonal, but not all

(I963j. fhe genotypes differed significantly for test 

weight at Carman and Winnipeg (fabLe 6b), in favour <strong>of</strong> 

Bonanza at Õarman and. in favour <strong>of</strong> Minn 6U_62 at Winnipeg 

(Table 65). This contradictory result is explained again 

by the ta1l genotype being rnore tolerant <strong>of</strong> the stresses at 

Carman while the ideal conditions at Winnipeg alLorved the 

later-maturing seni-dwarf to contínue growth and eomplete 

its grain filling period there. 

The significant second order interaction at Carman 

(fable 64) occurred because differences were consistent 

over seeding rates at row spacing one, but variable over 

seeding rates at the other row spacings. 

Percent Barley Nitroeen 

Signíficant differences occurred 'oetween genotypes at 

all locations (Table 66), with Bona;nze- having more grain 

nitrogen at trlinnipeg and less at the other locations (TabLe 

6?). 0f particular interest are the higher protein leve1s 

at ltlinnipeg despite the high yields at this site, indicative 

<strong>of</strong> the more ideal eonditions and higher fertility levels 

there . 

No differences attributabLe to eíther row spaci.ng or 

seeding rate for percent barley nitrogen were found, as was 

the case in a report by young and. Bauer egel) from a wheat 

st udy. 

A significant genotype by seedj-ng rate interaetion 

oceurred at Carman because percent barley nitrogen for 

150

Table 65. SeedÍng Rate - Row Spacing Stucly, Meàns for Tesr tleighr (ke./hl.), 

64.9a 

66.3 b 

62 .9 b 

6L.6a 

* 

63.9a 

63,9a 

GenotyÞes 


llinní4-62 

64,Ia 62.3a 66.4a 

64.0a 62.3a 65,4a 

63.7 a 62.2a 65.0a 

(2) 84.0 

(3) 112.0 

(1) r5,0 63,9a 

(2) 30.5 

62.5a 65.7a 

63.7a 

(3) 61.0 

62.2a 65.2a 

64.Ia 62.0a 65.9a 

64.0 62.9 61.7 64.0 66.8 

63,9 63.0 61,5 64,s 65.5 

64.0 

63.4 

SeedÍng Rate (2) 

Seedlng Rate (3) 

Rowspacing(t)- ffifuffi 

Row spaclns (2) 63.s 63.6 63.0 6t.5 Ro¡¿ spacing (3) 64.8 65.6 

64.t 64,1 62.5 61.5 64.7 67,t 

64.2 63.s 63.s 6;'.; ¿;'.; "r;'.2 åå:i 

64,0 64.3 63.9 62.3 62,0 61.8 67.0 


Row Spaclng (2) 

Ro¡¡ Spacíng (3) 

* values ina ¿61¡*, followed by the same r"eËter are not srgnfficantly drfferent, p=0.05.

Table 66, Seedfng Rate - Row Spaclng Study, ANOVA for Z Barley Nirrogen, 

0.110 

0,247** 

0.001 

0. 094 

0.073* 

0 ,033 

0.015 

0 . 170** 

0.018 

2 

I 

2 

0 .007 

0. 039 

0 .007 

0.001 

0.003 

0.004 

0.022 

0. 011 

0 .083t 

0.0i4 

0.025 

0.007 

0.021 

0.000 

0,014 

0.018 

0,016 

0. 009 

2 

2 

4 

4 

34 

Repllcates (R) 

Genotypes (G) 

Seedlng Rates (SR) 

f SRI vs SR2 

SRI vs SR3 

SR2 vs SR3 

Row Spacíng (RS) 

RSI vs RS2 

RS l. vs RS3 

RS2 vs RS3 

GxSR 

GxRS 

SRxRS 

GxSRxRS 

Error 

are orthogonal, buÈ not al1 frorn the same rnutual-J.y orthogonal set. 

Coefflcient <strong>of</strong> VartabÍlity Z 

sÍgnificant 

F slgnificant P=0.01, 

Single degree <strong>of</strong> freedom comparisons 

trrk 

t

Table 67. Seedfng Rate - Row Spacíng Stud.y, Means fot % Barley Nirrogen. 

7.92a" 

2.03 b 

Genotypes 


NIinná4-62 

¿,¿óa 

2,29a 

2.28a 

2,I9a 

2.L7 a 

2.LLa 

2.00a 

L.94a 

1.98a 

(2) 84.0 

(3)i12.0 

2 .26a 

,, ,a^ 

2.30a 

2.ZOa 

2 .16a 

2.10a 

I.96a 

I.97 a 

2,00a 

(2) 30.s 

(3) 6i.0 

2 .22 

2.12 

2.Ol 

I .95 

I .88 

1".92 

ding Rate 


Seedfng Rate (3) 

2.22 

2 .22 

2.09 2.23 

2.07 2. 13 

Spaclng 



2.26 

2 .26 

2.3r 

\.s6 r.s7 t'.éi ;'.;i 2.08 ;";3 t'Åz L.96 

3.iz 

L.96 2.19 2.O4 z.oa 2,2g 

Row Spacing (1 



* values Ín a eol'mn fo1L0wed by the same r-etter are not srgnÍfícanti-y dffferent, p=0.05,

Bonanza dropped consistently as seeding rate increased, 

while for Mínn 64-62, it went up witìr the firs.ù seed rate 

increment and remained constant thereafter. 

u 

The AN0V1, presented in iables 68 through fl, i_nd icate 

that significant differences existed. between the genotypes 

studied for coleoptile length, root nurnber, root score and 

shoot length. significant differences existed between the 

means <strong>of</strong> the two <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> groups (tall and serni_dwarf ) 

for coleoptile length and root number. the talls had longer 

coleoptiles and more roots (table ?Z)" However, one taII 

genotype, C7O3O|9, contributed greatly to the signlficant 

differences betweên <strong>height</strong> groups in this experiment (fable 

?2), îakahashi (A946) previously reponted a positive 

association <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and coleoptile length in barley. 

Correlations (Table 23) indicated that, for the geno_ 

*ypes studied, coleoptile length was significantly and 

positively related to root number, kernel weight and pereent 

pJ.umpness. Contrary to fakahashi's (1946) report, no 

significant correlation was detectêd between <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

and coleoptile length in the present study. However, as 

previously stated, there was a significant difference between 

<strong>height</strong> classes in favour <strong>of</strong> the talls. 

Rank correlation also indÍcated that no reÌationship 

exj.sted between coleoptile length and yield or energence

Table 68. AN0VA for Coleoptile Length, Expêriment IV. 

Source <strong>of</strong> VarÍatÍon df Mean Souare 

Replícates (R) 

Genotyp es (G) 

Tal1 vs Semi-dwarf 

RxG 

Error 

3 

6 

I8 

!12 

Total 139 

coefficíent <strong>of</strong> v".Í"bffi 

* Signíflcant ar P=0.05. 

** SignifÍcant ar ?=0.01. 

I 

298 .5 

662,0*r, 

2695.5** 

81.6 

67 .2 

Table 69, ANOVA for Root Numbeï, Experinent IV. 

Source <strong>of</strong> Varlation Mean Square 

ReplÍcates (R) 

Genotypes (G) 

Tal1 vs semf-drnrarf 

RxG 

Error 

3 

6 

t8 

1t2 

Totâ1 139 

Coefficient <strong>of</strong> Vart 

* Signiflcant ar p=0. 05. 

** Significanr at p=0.01. 

1 

0. 56 

1.46it* 

I . 10'l 

0.53¡k 

0.25 

155

Table 70. ANOVA for Root Score, Experiment IV. 

Source <strong>of</strong> Variation df Mean Square 

Replicates (R) 3 lf .38 

Genotypes (G) 6 32.7 6x¿< 

Tal1 vs Serni-dwarf 1 ll.5 

RxG t8 5.32 

Error fl2 3.49 

Total 139 

Coefficient <strong>of</strong> Vartabtlffi 

* SÍgnfficânt ar ?=0. 05. 

** Sfgnifícant aÈ P=0.01 . 

Table 71. ANOVA for Shoot Lengrh, Experiment IV. 


ReplÍcates (R) 3 t6I4.4 

Genotypes (G) 6 2364.4** 

Tall- vs Senri-dwarf I 1246.3 

RxG 18 605.6 

Error Il2 456.0 

ToÈa1 139 

* Signiflcant at P=0.05. 

** SígnificanÈ ar P=0.01 . 

L56

'Iable 72. Means for Experíment IV. 

Coleoptile 

Genotypes 1-ength (mm. ) 


c 70101 3 

c703019 

l¡iínn 64-62 

c703032 

c703029 

c703011 

+ 

52.Oab 

57 .4ab 

62.8 b 

48, 3a 

50,2a 

49 .2a 

46.6a 

Plant Height Class 

Ta11 57.4 b 

Semí-drvarf 48.6a 

Nurnber Root Shoot 

<strong>of</strong> RooËs Score Length (mn.) 

5.85ab 77.2a 117 . 1ab 

5.95ab 11. la t25.6ab 

6.55 b 14.8 b 139.0 b 

5.90ab 12.8ab 132.Oab 

6.2Oab 13. 2ab 118. 8ab 

5 .85ab 72,7 ab 128. lab 

5.80a 13.Oab 105.9a 

6 ,72 b 1.2.3a 727.2a 

5.94a 72.9 a 1-2L.2a 

fValues in one group followed by the sâme letËer aïe not 

signíficantly dÍfferenr at p=0.05.

Table 73. Correlation Coefficients (r) and Rânk Correlatíon 

CoefficienËs (r") for Coleoprile Length Study, 

Experíment IV, 

A. Variables Correlated 

Coleoptile Length r^'ith: 

Number <strong>of</strong> roots 

Root Score 

Shoot Length 

Number <strong>of</strong> Roots rrTlth: 

Root Score 

Shoot Length 

Root Score rarith: 

ShooÈ Length 

.7 65t< 

.256 

.63I 

.7 28 

.589 

.389 

B. Variables Correlatêd rs 

Coleoptile Lengrh with: 

?lant lleight 

YÍe1d 

200 Kernel r,r'eighË 

Z ?lumpness 

Emergence Rate Index 

Root Number. hrith: 

PlanË Height 

Yield 

200 Kernel raTeÍght 

% Plumpness 


RooË Score r^7ith: 

Plant Height 

Yield 

200 Kernel weight 

% Plumpness 


.536 

.743 

,8g3** 

.857* 

. r43 

,045 

.49 | 

.652 

-. 080 

-.357 

.786* 

-./,to 

-.L43 

- .286 

* Significãn , 

** Significant at P=0.01.

Table 73. (Continued ) 

B Variables Correlated r^ 

Shoot Length with: 

Plant Heighr 

Yield 


Z Plumpness 


Energence Rate Index lrith: 

Plant Height 

Yield 


% Plumpness 

Plant Height r,rith: 

Yíe1d 


Z Plumpness 

Yíeld r^ríth: 


% Plumpness 

200 Kernel i\reight i,zirh: 

Z Plumpness 

x Significant 

x* Significant 

at P=0.05 

at P=0.01. 

-.2I4 

-.107 

. t07 

.179 

.395 

-.107 

.07 7 

- . 071- 

.250 

,643 

.750t 

-.143 

.274 

. 85 7*tr 

159

ate index (ÊRI ) , 

The resul_ts tabulated in Íable Zj indicated that 

coleoptile length was strongly and positively associated 

with both kernel weight and percent plunpness, and that 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> was positively associated with plumpness. A 

positive significant relationship also exÍsted between root 

score and yield for these genotypes and between the two 

kernel size parameters, kernel weight and plumpness. 

Although no significant rank correlation was i',dicated. 

between coleoptile length and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, a posi.tive 

relationship did occur between these traits i"n terms <strong>of</strong> the 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> classes, as evidenced by the ranking data <strong>of</strong> 

fable f4. Thê rank correlation was non-signif j_cant due to 

within <strong>height</strong>-class variation. Ihe talls did have longer 

coleoptiles. Note also the demarcation <strong>of</strong> the he Íght groups 

as regards kernel weight and plumpness, the tal1s having 

heavier, plurnper kernels. (fable ?ll). 

ANoVA for root dry weight (fable lJ) and, root growth 

rate (Table ??) indicated that líttle or no difference 

existed between the genotypes studied for these traits. 

îhe error involved in these experirnents was very high as 

evídenced by the coefficients <strong>of</strong> variability (fables 25 and 

?7), Even where a difference was shown to exist at week 

nine for root weight (lable fJ), t:ne range test employed in 

160

'IabLe 74' Ranks <strong>of</strong> Genotypes used in coleoptile Length stutly, Experiment rv,, and seedíng Depth stualy, 

Experíment VI. 

Emergence 

Rate Index 

Kernel 

Yield lteighr ZPLumpness 

Root Shoot Plant 

Score Length Heíght 

Number 

<strong>of</strong> Roots 

Plant Coleoptile 

Genotype Height Class Length 

Ta11 


6 

3 

3 

I 

2 

Ta11 

c7 010 13 

2 

1 

674 

426 

131 

I 

Ta1l" 

c703019 

3 

2 

5 

5 

4 

4 

7 

7 

6442s 

42256 

5 5.5 5 3 7 

77374 

Nlinn 64-62 Semi-dwarf 

C703032 Semi-dr,zarf 

C703029 Semi-dr¡arf 

C703011 Semi-dr¿arf 

6 

6

Table 75. ANOVA for Root Dry trIeight, Root Síze Study, Expeïiment V. 

Mean Squares for Weeks from pLanting 

df 

Source <strong>of</strong> Variati,on 

.0647 .0725 

.0468'k .0150 

.0183 .0747 

.07 48 

.0656 

. 0004 

.0003 

. 0002 

4 

Replicates 

.0143 

.0095 

.0019 

.0018 

.0002 

.0003 

6 

.0247 

,0380 

.0018 

. 0010 

Genotypes 

Error 

ïoÈal 34 

25 ,O 30. 3 

TIñ A 

23 .5 

t, o 

24 .2 

Coefficient <strong>of</strong> Variability % 

* Sígnífícant at P= 0.05

Table 76. cenotype Means for Root Dry l,reight (mg,), Root size study, ExperímenË v. 

l{eeks from Plantíns 

Maxinum 

Root Weight 

t0 

Plant 

Genotype Height Class 

.6986 


.87 49 

,1s30 ,1706 .4616 

.1055 .176r .5033 

.1s86 .1904 .4836 

.133s .L977 .4039 

.1432 .1729 .502r 

.1507 .2067 .5306 

.t230 . 1491 .5239 

Tall ,0768 

Tal1 .0703 

Tall ,072I 

Tall .0698 

Semi-Dwarf ,0810 

Semi-Dr,ra.rf .0697 

Serni-Dwarf .0614 

c701013 

.6766 

I 

.57 48 ,6986å .4749 

,699I .8749a .5228 

.6766 .6328a .5891 

.6L25 .7665a .5805 

.6075 .6OL6a ,5470 

.6135 .65I6a .461,4 

.62L5 .6305a .4615 

c702024 

816507-55 

.7 665 

.607 5 

.65r6 

l4Lnn 64-62 

c703011 

.6305 

c7 03029 

dífferent at ?=0.05, by Duncanrs 

did exíst. 

! Values followed by the same letËer are not significantly 

Multíple Range Test, although ANoVA indicated dÍfferences

TabLe 77, ANoVA for Root cïol,¡th Rates from Root Size Study, 

Experiment V. 

Source <strong>of</strong> Vâriation df Meân Squaïes 

Time intervals 5 I .57 2** 

Genotypes 6 0. 003 

Error 30 0.027 

Total 4f 

Coefficíent <strong>of</strong> Variabílity = 4h.3il. 

** Sígnificant at P=0.01

fabTe ?6 Cid not indicate this difference. Similar results 

have been reported in wheat ( Lupton et al. l9?4 and OrBrien, 

197 5) . 

Nevertheless, the means in Table ?6 and, ?g along with 

the ranking data <strong>of</strong> Tabte ?9 indicated that a trend existed 

for the taII genotypes to have larger and faster growing 

roots than did the semi-dwarfs. 

Further support for this association existe

Table 78. Root crowth Rates (rng./wk.) for Root Size Study, Expeïiment V. 

plânt 

Genotype Heighr class 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-g g-9 9-10 Mean 


.3955 

.6396 

Ta11 

c701013 

.4100 

.587 4 

.4572 

.2L12 

Ta11 

fa11 

.3834 

. 5190 

.3822 

Ta11 

c702024 

B¡6507-55 

.37 93 

.2476 -.2237 

.3516 -.352t 

-.0856 -.0437 

.3080 - . 1860 

.5790 

.6258 

.0880 1 . 1640 

.3530 1,3088 

.1590 7.77 28 

.3210 .8248 

.3t6Z 

.2487 

, 1485 1.3168 

.2800 L2956 

.130s 1. .4992 

.37 32 

Semí-Dwarf 

Semí-Dwarf 

viínn 64-62 

.3481 

.366t 

- . 01 18 - .0546 

.0762 -.1902 

.0180 -.1690 

.4860 

.3696 

c703011 

.3s69 

.2928 

Semí-Dwarf 

c703029 

H 

o\ 

o\

Table 79. Ranks <strong>of</strong> Genotypes used in Root Size Study, Experiment V. 

Plant Root 

Genotype Height Clnss Gror4Tth Rate 

ZPlumpness 

Kernel 

laleight 

Mâximum Dry Plant 

trIeight <strong>of</strong> Roors tleighË yield 

2 

2 

I 

1 

1 

3 

r32 

Jb1 

2t4 

443 

4 

3 

2 

4 

Bonar'za Tall 

C701013 Tal1 

C7O2024 Tal1 

816507-55 Tatl 

4 

5 

6s6 

527 

775 

7 

7 

6 

6 

6 

tlínn 64-62 Semi-dwarf 

C703011 Semi-dwarf 

C7O3O29 Semi-dwarf 

7

Table 80, Rank Correlations - (rr) 

Rate Study, Experimeñt 

Variables Correlâted 

Root Growth Rate r{ith: 

Maximum root dry hreíght 

Plant <strong>height</strong> 

Yield 

200 Kernel r^reight 

% Plumpness 

Maximum Root Dry l,teíght \^rith: 

Plant heíght 

Yíeld 


Z Plumpness 

Plant Heíght r^'ith: 

Yield 


% Plurnpness 

Yield wiËh: 

200 Kernel h'eight 

% Plumpness 

200 Kernel i¡etght h'ith: 

Z Plunpness 

* Signíficant at P=0.05 

** SiÀnificant at P=0.01. 

for Root Size and Root Gro!¡th 

V. 

.943x* 

,857'k 

.2t4 

.857* 

,893** 

.679 

.07 r 

.857't 

.786* 

.571 

.679 

.857* 

-.t79 

. 018 

.857* 

168

Tabl"e 81. ANOVA for Number <strong>of</strong> Seedlíngs Emerged, Seeding 

Depth Study, Experíment VI. 


Replícates (R) 2 

Depths (cm) (D) 3 

2 .54 vs 5.08 

2.54 vs 7.62 

2.54 vs 10.16 

5.08 vs 7 .62 

5.08 vs 10.16 

7 .62 vs I0 .16 

Error(a) 6 

Genotypes (G) 6 

Talls vs Semi-dwarfs 

Ðxc 

Error (b) 

Total 

18 

48 

x:t SignÍficant at p=0. 0l 

I 

1 

I 

1 

I 

t 

2.48 

17.95x* 

0, 03 

1.21 

40. 34,r* 

0. 88 

38, 31** 

27 .56*rt 

r.94 

0. 55** 

o.L7 

0.68** 

0. 06

Table 82, ANOVA for Ernergence Rate, Seedíng Depth Study, 

Experíment VI. 


Repltcates (R) 

Depths(cn) (D) 

2.54 vs 5.08 

2.54 ve 7.62 

2,54 vs 10. 16 

5.08 vs 7.62 

5.08 vs 10.16 

7.62 vs !O.16 

Error (a) 

Genotypes (G) 

DxG 

Error (b) 

Total 

6 

6 

18 

48 

83 

* Sl-gnificant aÈ P=0. 05 

** Significant aÈ P=0, 01 

LO428.0 

261512.3t * 

71,0 

109456.3't 

588779.5** 

I039s2.6 

57 5921 .2*ì< 

190512.9* 

18120.2 

3558.7 

5488.6 

5327.3 

TabLe 83, Mean Number <strong>of</strong> Seedlíngs Emerged and Mean 

Emergence Rate for êach Seedlng Depth, 

Experinent VI. 

Number <strong>of</strong> Energence 

Seeding Depth(crn) Seedlíngs Emerged Rate lndex 

2.54 

5. 08 

7.62 

I0. 16 

9.86 b 

9.81 b 

I .52 b 

7.9Oa 

436.9 c 

434.3 bc 

334.8 b 

200. 1a 

Values in a group fo11or¡ed by the same letter ãre not 

significantly dífferenr, p=0.05. 

L70

the second v¡as not significant (fable Bl). 

Significant differences existed betvreen genotypes for 

number <strong>of</strong> seedlings emerged (fable 81). These differences 

were not sueh as to give rise to a significant cìifference 

between the <strong>plant</strong> he ight groups (Tab1e B4). 

No differences existed for ERI betweên genotypes or 

<strong>plant</strong> he ighi groups, contrary to results reported by A1lan 

et- al. (L962) and Burleigh et at. (J?6q) from wheat 

experiments. 

A significant genotype by seeding depth interaction 

occurred for number <strong>of</strong> seedlings emerged (rable 81). The 

neans (Table 85) indieated the interaction occurrêd because 

genotype s Bonanza, C|O3oLg, and Minn 64_62 showed fewer 

numbers emerged from the thÍrd than from the second <strong>plant</strong>ing 

depth while the other genotype s did not. 

C7O3OL3 showed an inereased nunber <strong>of</strong> seedlings emerged 

as it was <strong>plant</strong>ed progressively deeper, to the third depth 

(laUfe 85¡. This probably resulted frorn inadequate watering 

or viability problerns rather than a genuine depth effecto 

Contrary to reported studies with wheat (ÀLlan et ê.L., 

1962), in the present study energence rate was not significantly 

correlated with eoleoptile length (gab1e Z3B). 

177

Table 84. Genotype Means for Number <strong>of</strong> 

Genotype 


c701013 

c703019 . 

ltIínn 64-62 

c703032 

c7 03029 

c70 3011 

Emergence Rate, Seeding Depth 

Plant Numbe¡ 

Height Class Seedlings 

Ta11 

Ta11 

Ta11 

S emi- dr,¡ar f 

Semi-dwarf 

Semi-dwarf 

Semi-dwarf 

Mean <strong>of</strong> Tall Genotypes 

Mean <strong>of</strong> Semi-dwarf Genotypes 

Values ín a group followed by the 

different, P=0.05 . 

Seedlings Ernerged and 

Study, Experiment VI. 

<strong>of</strong> Emergence 

Emerged Rate Index 

9 .25 ab 

9.67 c 

9.08ab 

9.33 b 

9.00a 

9.25ab 

9.33 b 

9. 33a 

9 .23a 

340.5a 

366.2a 

365.4a 

341.0a 

326.3a 

373.6a 

347 .8a 

357.4a 

347.2a 

same letter are not significantly 

L72

Table 85. Mean Numbers <strong>of</strong> seedlíngs Emerged for cenotype x seeding Depth rnteractíon, 

Seeding Depth Study, Experiment VI. 

seeding Depth(crn) Bonanza c701013 c703019 !rinn64-62 c703032 c703029 c703011 

10,00 b 10.00 c 10.00 b 

9 .67 be 

2 .54 

5.08 

9 .67 ab . 9 .67'bc g ,67 I) 

9,67ab 9.33 b 10.00 b 

9.33a 7.33a 7.33a 

9.33 b 10.00 c 10.00 c 

9.67 bc 10.00 c 10.00 c 

10.00 c 9.00 b 9.33 b 

8,33a 7.00a 8.00a 

10. 00 c 

9.33 b 

7 .62 

8.00a 

10. 16 

vâlues in a column followed by the same letter aïe not significantly different, p=0.05.

DISCUSSTON 

C.onponents <strong>of</strong> Variance and. Heritability Estimates 

These values were determined to establish whether 

hybrids involving <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> would lead to changes 

in the breeding behavj-our <strong>of</strong> other agronornic parameters, 

since previ_ous i¡vestigations have deal-t primarily with 

standard <strong>height</strong> materiafs. Furthermore, a desire existed 

to determine the heritability <strong>of</strong> the neasured characters, 

in order to speculâte upon the optimum testing procedures 

required to select genotJ¡pes with desired revels <strong>of</strong> these 

traits fron barley populatÍons. 

fhe signiflcance <strong>of</strong> the various genotype by environment 

interaction components and the magnitudes <strong>of</strong> the herítability 

estimates for the traits studied are in general agreenent 

wíth previous reports, in particular those <strong>of</strong> Rasmusson and 

GLass (1962) and Rutger et at. (1966). Invotving <strong>reduced</strong> 

plani <strong>height</strong> apparently did not appreciably alter the overall 

breeding behaviour <strong>of</strong> the other characteristics in the 

present study. 

The design <strong>of</strong> this study had two replications at each 

774

<strong>of</strong> two locations for two years. Except for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, 

percent plumpness and days to heading, tnee! (error) 

variance eomponents were very 1arge relative to their 

respective C! (SenotVpic) and genotype by environment 

interaction components, indicatíng one naJor drawback <strong>of</strong> 

the design. emproyed may have been insufficient replication 

and./or sampì"ing. 

High herÍtabílíty estímates for most <strong>of</strong> the parameters 

examined in this study were not unexpected since¡ one, the 

rnaterials involved were in advanced generations i two, ample 

geneti.c variation exlsted for. these traits¡ three, variance 

eonponents were used to calculate the estimates; and. four, 

the experiment was grown at more than one location for more 

than one year. Àccording to the I!.terature, these eircum_ 

stances shourd combine to give rnaximum heritabirlty estirnates 

(Grafius et aL., Lg56¡ Frey and Horner, L955t ana Rasmusson 

and Glass, L96?). 

ileritability estimates for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, kernel weight, 

test weight, and percent pLumpness were consistent across 

populations since these parameters can be measured accurately 

and deviatíons between years or Ìocations were devi_ations 

in nagnitude rather than ranking. 

The following discusslon <strong>of</strong> genotJæe by environment 

interactions, heritabilities and testing proced.ures is 

grouped by eharacter or characters which behaved in a 

sinílar fasl:ion. 

P_lant <strong>height</strong>. Ehe very high heritability estimates 

L75

plus the fowCf! values relative to respectiveelâ values for 

all populations suggested. the design employed was more than 

adequate in characterizing these l"ínes for <strong>height</strong>, despite 

the significant afr" in all cases. This interaction arose 

due to dífferences in magnitude, trot Ín rank, between years, 

caused by the less than ideal growing conditions in l9Z4 

giving rise to shorter <strong>plant</strong>s. The lack <strong>of</strong> any sígnificant 

) 

6-[¡ conbined with the readily explainable cfr, further suegested 

that one year <strong>of</strong> testing at one location with two 

replicates would have been suffieient to determine the 

relative <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>s <strong>of</strong> these genotypes. 

the heritability estímates were 1arger than ¡¡6str 

reported 1n the literature. This oceurred. because, one, 

pl,ant <strong>height</strong> in barley is simply inherited; and two, since 

the populations ínvolved were derived from parents differing 

widely for <strong>height</strong>, both the waria-nc e and absolute <strong>height</strong> 

range were larger than in most other studies. Such high 

heritabllity for <strong>height</strong> cou1d, then, alter the breeding 

behaviour <strong>of</strong> other closely related characters" 

KexneL weiEht. DespÍte sígnificant levets o¡Ofrf, 

again the result <strong>of</strong> differences in magnÍtude rather than 

rankihg between years, kernel weight was highly heritable. 

These factors, plus the Lack <strong>of</strong> signif icant level"s <strong>of</strong> 4f 

) 

and o[1yr indieated that the procedure used in thís study 

was adequate in determining genotypic 1eve1s <strong>of</strong> this para_ 

meter. ÌIowever, it appears from the relative sÍze <strong>of</strong> the 

.) 

O! rralues that larger samples and./or more replication would 

776

have increased the precision <strong>of</strong> the estimates. 

Degree qf lodEinE. îhe data indicated that the design, 

two replicates and three station-years, was aalequate for 

ì-odging estimation, gíving relatively hígh heritability and 

no significant genotype by environment i.nteractions. However, 

this nay be reLated to the nature <strong>of</strong> the material_s 

lnvo1ved, since <strong>plant</strong> heÍght was a major variable and 

dl"ffer.ences ln lodging were closely assocÍatett wíth <strong>height</strong> 

differences. It would therefore be unwise to assume that 

the conclusions derived from these data would be widely 

applícable. Àgain the6j was larger than the respective 

6ã ín al"1 cases sugge sting a more precise neasurement 

and/or more replication was needed. 

Test weLght and percent plumpne ss. Although these 

traits were moderately to highLy her5.tabJ_e, the results 

suggested that testing for them required more than one year 

and locatÍon. SignificantAfr., tor test weight ín Ç_?A_Z 

and for percent plumpness ln all crosses, along with the 

2D 

6ãf, leveLs 

".dorãr,V 

for plumpness, <strong>reduced</strong> heritabÍlities 

and Íncreased the respective standard errors. The inabirity 

<strong>of</strong> C-7O-3 to eope with the drought and heat stress <strong>of</strong> I)14, 

relative to C-20-1 and. C-IO-Z, in part accourits for the 

a 

greater 6ifr" for that populatíon. 

Days to headinE. The signÍficance <strong>of</strong> the various geno_ 

type by envíronment interaction components indicated a need 

for testing for this trait at more than one location and year, 

despÍte the high heritability estimates in C_/O_t and. C_IO_Z; 

177

in these populatíons two locations for tv,ro years were 

sufficient. Less genetic variance and a strons Af , Save 

rise to lower herítability in e-?O-3, fhe6Êy again reflect_ 

ed the effects <strong>of</strong> the stress conditions <strong>of</strong> Jg?4 on C_?O_3, 

Generall-y l-ow levels <strong>of</strong> o! ínaicated the replication used 

was suffic ient. 

. Heritabillty 

was lower in C-?O-l and C-?0-3 than in C-?O_Z, ín 

which it was very high. This difference reflected a large 

, 

ff,y in both C-?0-1 and C-?O-3, probabty a result <strong>of</strong> response 

to environmêntar- stress Ín 1924. rlhe more íntense effects 

<strong>of</strong> drought on C-?0-3 were further indicated by the larger 

) 

S component for that population. 

The heritabiLity <strong>of</strong> days in post-anthesis will be 

governed by the effects <strong>of</strong> the environment on both days to 

heading and maturity, since these components were used to 

caLculate this pararneter. 

over the three populations studied, the general lack 

D 

<strong>of</strong> C[" significance comblned with the generally sígnificant 

a 

levels <strong>of</strong>6!y, suggested that testing for rîore than one year 

was necessary to evaluate days to naturity and days in post_ 

anthesÍs, while the need for more than one locatíon was 

doubtful. More replication should be used when the cal_cu_ 

lation <strong>of</strong> days ín post-anthesís is to be carried out since 

it's{ can be ínflated by errors in the esti.mation <strong>of</strong> both 

days to heading and maturity. 

Kernel-s per spike. This trait was highly heritable and 

L78

showed no environmental interaction in C_?O_Z, However, in 

C-70-1 and C-?O-3 heritabilities were low and subject to 

l-arge standard errors¡ in C-fo-I the low level <strong>of</strong>{ corn_ 

bined with the large øfr" *as primarily responsible. A very 

-) 

rargeO¡õy was the culpr5.t in C-IO-J, This again pointed to 

the effects <strong>of</strong> stress on C_IO_J; a similarly high genotype 

by year interaction was found in that cross for days to 

heading. Ln I9Z4 C-?O-j headed earlier and had fewer kernel"s 

per spike than in IgZ3, 

the significant levels <strong>of</strong>Aåf in C_lo_2 and C-?o_j 

indicated that testing for kernels per spike required more 

than one year <strong>of</strong> data, while the lack <strong>of</strong> significant levels 

, 

o¡Ofrf, suggested that one locatlon was sufficient. The un- 

desirably farge Oi! may have resuLted from Lack <strong>of</strong> adequate 

repll-cation, sanplÍng size, or a combination <strong>of</strong> these. 

Tield. Genotype by environment interaction has <strong>of</strong>ten 

been implicated in difficulties in differentiatl_ng among 

yield 1eve1s in various crops. Neverthel-ess, the results 

<strong>of</strong> the present study tended to agree with those <strong>of</strong> Rasmusson 

and class (L96?). In all three popuJ.ations the error 

t 

component Ç) <strong>of</strong> variance was larger than the genotype by 

environnent interaction components, suggestÍng that nore 

replication and/or rârger ptot size would have beer¡ a rnore 

efficient way to increase the heritabílity <strong>of</strong> yield than the 

utilization <strong>of</strong> more locations and./or years <strong>of</strong> testing. fhis 

was parti.eularly the case in C-?0_j.. 

Heritability was relatively hlgh (58 + 14.0) ana6f"" 

179

was significant for Ç-?A_2, indícating a need. to test for 

yield at more than one locatíon and for more than one year. 

Signíficant levels orAfr" anoufr, for Ç-?o-3 led to a 

sinilar conclusÍon. In thís case these interactions, com_ 

bined with the large error conponent, in fact gave rise to 

a heritability (28 + ZZ,O) essentially equal to zero, despite 

the fact that this population had the largest yield range 

(îable 9) " 

The overâIl result suggests that, with the possible 

exception <strong>of</strong> A-lO-2, the rnethodology enployed was inad.equate 

for a precise assessment <strong>of</strong> the yieLding ability <strong>of</strong> these 

l1nes. îo overcome this probJ.em, ways <strong>of</strong> reducing the error 

varíance would havê to be found" In view <strong>of</strong> the very large 

numbers <strong>of</strong> 1i.ne s involved a design utilizíng bJ"ocking within 

replications, as weI)- as increased plot size and number <strong>of</strong> 

repLicatÍons, mlght arso have aided in reducing this error. 

ft also appeared from the significance <strong>of</strong> the various 

genotype by environnent interactions in C_?O_Z and C-?0_3 

that the utility <strong>of</strong> more environments increased as the 

number <strong>of</strong> lines tested decreased, Thís may be largely the 

effect <strong>of</strong> redueed range <strong>of</strong> varlability concurrent with the 

deerease in Llne numbers, thus increasing the impact <strong>of</strong> a 

large error term in distinguishång differences. 

The results <strong>of</strong> this experíment nay have limited 

application with respect to general yield testing in barley, 

because the genetic varÍances and ranges <strong>of</strong> yield obtained 

were greater than those normally encountered in eritieaL 

180

yield testlng experiments. Furthermore, ít is quite probable 

that, were the improvements suggesteC to reduce the levels 

<strong>of</strong>Ç ' suceessful, the 1eveLs <strong>of</strong> the genoilæe by environment 

interactÍon components míght inerease, motre strongly in_ 

dicating a need for testing over more environments " This 

experiment díd not give sufficient evidence to indicate 

whether the number <strong>of</strong> years and locations used were suffi_ 

cient to accurate).y meâ.sure the yieliting ability <strong>of</strong> these 

genotJrpes, and in fact, the low heritability estimates and 

their large standard errors indicate that the resurts were 

not as good as might have been expected in view <strong>of</strong> the make_ 

up <strong>of</strong> the naterials involved. 

.Tra it ComÞarisons 

Plant breeders produce segregatlng populations in an 

attempt not only to select the superior índlviduals, but 

also to select those which are in some way superÍor to the 

best available cultivar, <strong>of</strong>ten used as a control. 

In the present study lines were identÍfied as superíor 

to the control variety Bonanza for each <strong>of</strong> kernels per 

spike, kernelweight, test weight, plurnpness, degree <strong>of</strong> 

lodging, days to heading, days to rnaturity, days in post_ 

anthesis, yie1d, levels <strong>of</strong> alpha-amylase, saccharifying 

activity, percent barley nitrogen and soluble aroino-nitrogen. 

WÍth <strong>plant</strong> treight, since selection would be for shortêr 

lines, again, all three poputations contained superi.or 

( shorter ) individuaLs. 

181

fhe possibility <strong>of</strong> obtaining singLe genotJrpes wíth 

siÌnultaneous inprovements in two or more characters was not 

examined . 

Selection <strong>of</strong> higher yielding lines should have been 

possíb1e in C-70-1 aîd, C-?O-2, fieritabitlty for yietd was 

moderatel-y high in C-?O-Z, $ras at a useful level in e-?O-L, 

and in both there was significant genetÍc variance. The low 

level <strong>of</strong> heritabil_íty in C-lO-j lndicated that, through the 

experimental procedure used, improvernent over Bonanza could 

not be made. However, despÍte C-?O-3 having the snaLlest 

sample size (4I lines compared to lOj and. B?), the range <strong>of</strong> 

lÍne mean yieLds was the greatest. In fact C-?O-3 contained 

the highest yielding line in the study on a nean basís" 

Therefore, lt appears reasonable that more thorough testing 

<strong>of</strong> this population would be justified to ascertaín itrs 

potential despite the low heritabllÍty estirnated for yie1d. 

A.n underlying objective <strong>of</strong> this study was to determine 

L82 

whether high yietding short strawed genotype s could be select- 

ed fron these populatl_ons. The results showed trends in_ 

dicating that yield improvements could be made in all <strong>height</strong> 

clâsses within each populatl_on. fhe highest yielding llnes 

were in the ta1l and intermediate <strong>height</strong> categories. Never_ 

theless, as evidenced by CZO3O11, the possibility <strong>of</strong> prod- 

uclng significantly shorter material apparently equal Ín 

yietd to the control diti exist. 

îhe low number <strong>of</strong> semi-dwarf lines involved was a draw- 

back Ín the present study. This, particularly in C-lO-2,

could in part account for the poor showing <strong>of</strong> the semi_ 

dwarfs. 0n the other hand, a símilar argument holds for 

the low yield <strong>of</strong> the best ta1l line ín C_?O-), 

0vera11, it appears reasonable that intensÍve serection 

<strong>of</strong> short types, thereby provi.d.lng Larger numbers <strong>of</strong> lines to 

test for yie1d, would greatly enhance progress toward short, 

htgh yielding genotype s, since the small sample obtaÍned 

randoml-y in the present study contained. some good materiar. 

Statistically, since both Bonanza and Minn6 4_62 are 

homozygous and their mean yields were calculated from large 

nurnbers <strong>of</strong> pLots at each site, their standard errors should 

be a good estirnate <strong>of</strong> the envÍronmental error for yield over 

the whole study. With this standard error a least signífi- 

cant difference for yieJ-d could be computed. Such computa_ 

tion gave a least significant difference equal to 1l_0 grans 

per plot. 0n this basis, there were no significant differ- 

ences between the hlghest yielding lines: among the <strong>height</strong> 

categories, among the populations, or across the whole experinent. 

This result again stresses the need for further, 

more effective' yield testing <strong>of</strong> this rnaterial and indicates 

the inadequacy <strong>of</strong> the techniques used to characterize the 

true yieldíng ability <strong>of</strong> these genotypes. 

The population nean ptant <strong>height</strong>s and yietds ind.ícated 

the possibility <strong>of</strong> yíetd potential in the short strawed 

materiaL. Although the mean <strong>height</strong> <strong>of</strong> e-?O-3 was signifi_ 

cantly shorter than for C-ZO-L, C-?O-Z and Bonanza (ín fact 

C-7O-3 contained. no line as talL as Bonanza), it's mean 

183

yield was essentially the sane. îhís resul-t is partic ularJ"y 

noteworthy in view <strong>of</strong> the fact that C_?O_j was earlier naturing 

on a mean basis, a character normally associated with 

lower yield. 

Phenotypic Correlations 

Due to the sample sÍzes ínvol_ved, the absolute values 

<strong>of</strong> correlations required to be significant were srnal_l. The 

values required to be significantl_y different from zero 

ranged from 0.1J0 to 0.104 and from 0.I?1 to O,]¡93 at t]ne 

five and one percent probability levels respeetively. A1- 

though signifieant, such relatively snarl correlations are 

<strong>of</strong> ]ittle dj"rect importance to a breeder. Even with r = 0.50r 

the coeffícient <strong>of</strong> determination (r2) is only 0.2J, indic_ 

ating that twenty-five percent <strong>of</strong> the variation in the 

characters in question j-s coneonitant. on the other hand, 

discussion <strong>of</strong> the inter-relationships expressed by these 

correlations ís valuable Ín ldentåfying the intricacy and 

background <strong>of</strong> character associations in regard to the aelec_ 

tion <strong>of</strong> improved and ad.apted short-strawed barley, as well 

as the selection <strong>of</strong> inproved taller genotypes frorn crosses 

involving short-strawed types as a parent. 

The following rs a discussion <strong>of</strong> some <strong>of</strong> the character 

relationshlps which were reveaLed in the present study. 

Plant heilght. îhe positÍve assocr.ations <strong>of</strong> <strong>height</strong> with 

yie1d, kernel weight, test weight, plumpness and dâys in 

post-anthesis are not encouraging. However, although 

184

signlficant, the correl_ations were generally small, result_ 

ing in small r2 values. Further¡nore, the relationships were 

strongest in C-IO-J, where all the genotypes were shorter 

than standard <strong>height</strong>, indieating thât the very short material 

was lacking in these traits but that moderate <strong>height</strong> reduc_ 

tion did not adversely affect important agronomic characteristics. 

The absence <strong>of</strong> any significant correlatLons <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> 

<strong>height</strong> with kerneLs per spike may have resul"ted from the 

faet that selection for large spikes was emphasl_zed in 

developing the semi-dwarf parent used (Rasmusson, L)IJ), 

Nevertheless, a rarge amount <strong>of</strong> variatíon existed for this 

parameter, and the error in determíning its vaLues rnay in 

part account for the lack <strong>of</strong> relationship. 

Reduced <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> did effectively reduce lodging. 

This positive eorrelatÌ.on may be partially due to the fact 

that the lodging encountered was the late season type caused 

by the straw not being strong enough to support the heavier 

spikes <strong>of</strong> the higher yieldlng lines. The positive <strong>height</strong> 

to yield and yield to ).odging relationships may have con_ 

tributed to the <strong>height</strong> to lodging association. The relati_on_ 

ship was stronger in C-ZO-1 and C-20-3r both <strong>of</strong> which had 

more very short types than t-?O-2. 

According to the correlations, the shorter material in 

C-7O-1 and C-20-j headed later. fhe <strong>height</strong> to heading 

assocíation was also negative, but non-signifieant, ín 

ë-7A-2. The lack <strong>of</strong> significance may have been due to the 

18s

sma1l number <strong>of</strong> short lines j.n that population, fhe overal_L 

negative association was one <strong>of</strong> the results <strong>of</strong> the observed 

slower, prostrate early growth and generaLly slower d.evelop_ 

ment <strong>of</strong> the shorter 1ines. 

îhe negative corelation between helght and naturity in 

c-70-1 represented a eontinuation <strong>of</strong> the sl.wer devel0pment 

<strong>of</strong> the short statured segregates. The tendency for most <strong>of</strong> 

the genotype s ín c-?0-3 to ripen <strong>of</strong>f early despite heading 

at about the same time as C-ZO_I gave ríse to the Lack <strong>of</strong> a 

signifieant relationship in C-?O-3, The correlation for 

C-7O-Z was non-significant, indicating that the dlfferences 

in naturity in that population were not reÌated to <strong>height</strong> 

differences. 

The generalty negative relatíonshíps <strong>of</strong> <strong>height</strong> with 

heading and maturity, as well as the observed slower develop_ 

ment <strong>of</strong> the short statured lines, combined wlth the fact 

that the sení-dwarf parent headed and matured ì.ater, suggested 

linkage between these p4¡¿¡¡sters arld <strong>height</strong> in this 

naterial. Followíng ín the same rrein, the tendency for much 

af C-7O-3 to ripen <strong>of</strong>f under stress was the habit <strong>of</strong> the 

taller parent in that cross. 

The conslstent posl-tíve association <strong>of</strong> <strong>height</strong> with days 

in post-anthesis resulted primariry from the late heading <strong>of</strong> 

the shorter materials wÍthout proportionate delays in maturity. 

The ímportance <strong>of</strong> this association nay be in the 

association <strong>of</strong> short stature with <strong>reduced</strong>. kernel size. 

The absence <strong>of</strong> any signifícant eoruelations between 

L86

<strong>height</strong> and the qualÍty parameters studied indicated that 

reducing <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> ín barley shoul_d not adversely affect 

the attainment <strong>of</strong> malting quality. However, the physical 

aspects <strong>of</strong> malting quality, kernel size, plumpness and test 

weíght, appear to be adverseLy affected in these semi_dwarf 

genotJæe s . 

The effects <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> on the breed.ing behaviour 

<strong>of</strong> the populations in questlon nay now be more c1ear. Since 

the populations are struetured to give high and consistent 

heritability estlmates for <strong>plant</strong> heÍght, it folLows that 

any traits strongty correLatêd with <strong>height</strong> would also tend 

to be highly and/or consistently heritable. such was the 

case for kernel weight, test weight, plumpness, days in 

post-anthesis and degree <strong>of</strong> loclging in the present study. 

Tield. In the fÍnal analysis, yiel"d Ís the crltical 

trait in any breeding program, and a primary eriterion ln 

evaluating materiaLs for use as germplasrû. 

The relationship with pLant hetght in this study Ìras 

been discussed. 

lhe positive association between yield and kernels per 

spike is not unexpected sínce the latter is one <strong>of</strong> the 

components <strong>of</strong> yie1d. yield equals the total_ weight <strong>of</strong> 

kernels per unit area <strong>of</strong> crop. Therefore, if the average 

welght <strong>of</strong> the kernels and the nurnber <strong>of</strong> spikes per unj.t area 

remain relatively stabre, changes in the number <strong>of</strong> kerners 

per spike wlll give correspondlng changes Ín yield. 

In view <strong>of</strong> the positive <strong>height</strong> to yieLd. and <strong>height</strong> to 

187

kez'ne 1 weight associations, as werf as the association <strong>of</strong> 

post-anthesis period with both yield and kernel weight, the 

laek <strong>of</strong> signifícant correlatíon between yielcl and kernel 

weight was surprising. fhis indicated that this yield 

eornponent was not <strong>of</strong> prirnary inportance in determining yietd 

in these populations. fhe lâck <strong>of</strong> precision in measuring 

yield may also, in part, account for the rack <strong>of</strong> significant 

aseoc iation. 

Although significant when pooled, and honogeneously 

positíve over all populations, the correlation between yield 

and test weight was signifÍcant on an individual population 

basis only in c-zo-l. such assocíation may be the resur-t <strong>of</strong> 

heavåer test weight lines having plrrmper and hence larger 

kernels, whích would add to total yield" 

The negative assocíation <strong>of</strong> yield with days to heading 

indlcated early heading was advantageous and suggests that 

the post-anthesis períod nay have been the critícal yield 

determining period. fhis is further supported by the posi_ 

tíve yíe1d to days in post-anthesis correLations. However, 

sinee both kernel weight and plumpness were positlvely 

associated with days in post-anthesis, the lack <strong>of</strong> associa_ 

tÍon lretween these parameters and yíe1d casts doubt upon 

this explanation. The negative yield to heading relationship 

nay in fact be a reflection <strong>of</strong> the positive yield to <strong>height</strong> 

and negative <strong>height</strong> to heading associations. 

Furthermore, the relationship in question may have been 

lnfluenced by the growing conditions encountered during the 

188

trial period. The area in which the triars were condueted 

tended to have a hot dry period at the time the material was 

naturi.ng. lhese conditions forced earlier naturity, and the 

later heading lines had grain filling terminated prematurely. 

llence, lines which headed, and therefore f loì¡re¡ed, earl!.er, 

were subjected to less heat and moisture stress for more <strong>of</strong> 

their filLing period than lines which headed later. 

Ehe positive yÍe1d to post-anthesis association would 

be expected since post-anthesis is essentially a neasurement 

<strong>of</strong> the graín development stage, and the longer this period 

is, the more fully developed the graÍn should be. However, 

neither kernel weight nor plumpness, both positively assoc_ 

iated with days in post-anthesis, were significantly correlated 

with yield. 

Apparently the yield to post-anthesis relationship 

occurred as did the yieLd to heading association. fn fact, 

on an individual basís, only those populations showing a 

significant negative yield to heading relationship showed 

the corresponding yleld to post-anthesis assocÍation. ThÍs 

is not surprising as days to headíng is used in the calcula_ 

tion <strong>of</strong> days in post-anthesis. These results suggested that 

measurement <strong>of</strong> days to heading nay be <strong>of</strong> greatest value when 

selecting for high yieldÍng 1ines destined for prod.uction 

under conditions similar to those encountered in this study, 

particularly when large kernel sÍze is a desired eharacter. 

The posítive correlation <strong>of</strong> lodging with yíelcl occurred 

primarily because lodging was an effect rather than a cause. 

189

îhe lodgíng oecu¡red when the straw <strong>of</strong> the higher yieliling 

lines was unable to support thelr larger heavier spikes late 

in the seasonr lodging discussed in most other reports 

occurred earlier in the season and eaused lower yield by 

giving rLse to <strong>reduced</strong> kernel devel0pment (sisler and 01sen, 

1951). In the present study, lodging was also strongly and 

positively related to <strong>height</strong>, and the negative <strong>height</strong> to 

yield associations nay have been reflected fn the yield to 

lodging reìationships. 

Although this type <strong>of</strong> todging did not tead to yield 

reductions, it is tikely to result in harvest l0sses and 

inconvenience at the farm level. Breeding for resistance 

to lodging at the late stage, through <strong>height</strong> reduction, 

would therefore be a worthwhile goal. 

HÍgher yietds result fro¡n Íncreased carbohydrates in 

the grain, with consequent lowering <strong>of</strong> the n5"trogen leve1 

on a percentage basÍs. Hence, the negative associatíons 

between yield and nitrogen and two nftrogen-related quality 

parameters, soluble ar¿ino nitrogen and saccharifying activity 

are readily explained. 

Kerne]-g per spike. The negative conelatíons between 

this trait and kernel weight, plumpness and test weight 

probably resuLted fron competÍtion within the spike for 

photosynthate during grain filling. 

îhe significant positive correlations <strong>of</strong> kernels per 

spike wlth days to maturity and days ín post-anthesis were 

weak. In fact, that with rnâturity was not sÍgnificant in 

190

any specific cross. However, they did exíst, and nay have 

oceurred because the longer the grain developrnent period was, 

especially the latter part <strong>of</strong> that period, the more kernels 

per spike actually survived. In those lines in which 

maturity was forced to be earlier some kernels may not have 

completed development giving rise to fewer kernels per spike, 

since only completely developed kernels were eounted. 

The positive relationshj_p <strong>of</strong> kernels per spike wíth 

lodging occurred because those lines which lodged did so, 

at least partly, because they eouldnrt support their larger 

heads. 

The signlficant negative associations between kernels 

per spike and barley nitrogen, saceharifying activity and 

soluble amino-nitrogen are surprising. As the number <strong>of</strong> 

kernels per spike Ínereases, kernel size nornn lly decreases, 

as was the case ín this Ëtudy, and generally higher 1evels 

<strong>of</strong> these nitrogen related parameters are agsociated wíth 

smaller kernels. However, as will be discussed 1ater, the 

evidence in this study, ( partic uLarly from population 

C-7O-2), suggested that these general relatíonshlps may 

not always be as strong or consistent as is <strong>of</strong>ten presumed. 

Furthermore, kernels per spike is one <strong>of</strong> the major components 

<strong>of</strong> yield, and yield itself was sígníficantly negatively 

related to these same three quallty paraneters in this study. 

Kernel welght. The positive associatl_on <strong>of</strong> kernel 

weÍght with plurnpness is indicative <strong>of</strong> size beíng due to 

extension <strong>of</strong> kernel width rather than Length. The positive 

191

association with test weight can be partially accounted for 

in a sinilar fashion, but the main explanation cones from 

the assoeiation <strong>of</strong> kernel weight and plumpne ss, since, 

plump kernels have an increased width to length ratio, 

therefore pack more tightly and have a higher weight per 

unit volume. Since the plunper kernels in thÍs naterial 

were the heavier kernels, the association <strong>of</strong> kernel weight 

and test vreÍght would be expected. 

the correlation <strong>of</strong> kernel weight with days in post- 

anthesis probably reflects the fact that the weight <strong>of</strong> the 

kernels develops during this peri.od. The negatrve reration- 

ship wíth heading date exl_sted. because, the earller a geno_ 

type fJ.owered in a finite growing season, the longer was 

it's grain deve lopment time. 

Fhe posítLve relatÍonship between kernel weight and 

lodging was due to the type <strong>of</strong> 1odglng measured and the 

nature <strong>of</strong> the material studied. 

Negatíve associations existed between kernel weight 

and alphå-amylase and soluble amino-nitrogen Levels, in 

particular in C-?0-Ì and C-?O-2, suggesting that lines with 

heavÍer kernels become heavier via inereased carbohydrate 

deposLtion ât the expense <strong>of</strong> nitrogenous compounds. llow_ 

ever, the significant posÍtive assocíatLon between kernel 

weight and percent barley nÍtrogen in C-?O-2 indicated that, 

at least in that popul_ation, nitrogen depositíon was not 

hampered in the heavier kernel lines, sugge sting that the 

yleld to nitrogen negatj.ve relationshÍp nnay not be either 

792

as strong nor as consl-stent as is <strong>of</strong>ten suggested. 

Test wqlgbt. ï,Iith the exception <strong>of</strong> sor¡e previously 

di-scussed interrelationships the co*erations between test 

weight and most other traits measured tended to be inconsis_ 

tent. Further exception to this occumed regarding itrs 

negative associatLons with days to heading and rnaturity. 

lhe relationships with heading date Índicated that the earrier 

part <strong>of</strong> the graín development períod was more critical to 

the achieve¡nent <strong>of</strong> hígh test weight, particularly in the 

fÍnite grow5-ng season encountered in this study. 

The explanation for the association with maturity prob_ 

ably J.Íes in the fact that most later maturing lines were 

unable to complete kernel deveLopment under the growíng 

conditíons encountered.. Hence, these grain sample s tended 

to contai.n a greater percentage <strong>of</strong> smaLler, less dense 

kernels whÍch gave rise to lower test weight. 

The positÍve assocíation between test weight and lodgfng 

reflected the eorrelations between test weight and <strong>plant</strong> 

heíght, and heíght and lodgÍng. this was particularly 

evident in populatÍon C-ZO-3 where <strong>height</strong> and lodglng were 

more strongly related . 

îhe negative correlatl_ons between test weight and the 

raalting quality parameters suggested the selectÍon <strong>of</strong> high 

quality malting tines with high test weight might be dif_ 

ficult in this naterial, especialLy in population C-?O-í,. 

Plumþness. The associatÍons <strong>of</strong> this trait with heading 

date and days in post-anthesis indieated the positive ín_ 

193

fluence <strong>of</strong> the length <strong>of</strong> the grain f-Í.Iling period on pLump_ 

ness, parti_cu1arly the earlier part <strong>of</strong> the filJ-ing period. 

794 

the positÍve relaticnships <strong>of</strong> plunpness and lodging in 

C-?O-2 and C-?O-3 probably reflects the association <strong>of</strong> plunpness 

with kerner we ight and the contribution <strong>of</strong> that trait 

to the type <strong>of</strong> lodgíng which occurred. 

The selecti-on <strong>of</strong> plump seeded malting lines in this 

inateri-al, in particular C-IO-Z, ma}¡ be difficult. îhe 

posítive assoc j"ation <strong>of</strong> plumpness with barley nitrogen 

however is <strong>of</strong> ínterest since it suggests that p1u¡0p seeded 

barJ-ey with an acceptable protein lever ean be obtained. 

Thís type <strong>of</strong> barley is desireable in the feed industry. 

Days to headine. A strong positive relationship 

between this trait and days to rnaturity for populations 

C-?0-1 and C-?O-? reflected similar developmental patterns 

within genotypes i-n these crosses. The raek <strong>of</strong> significance 

in C-7O-3 may have been a reflection <strong>of</strong> the differenee in 

the rel"ationship between heading and maturity in that 

population. 

The significant negative association with days in 

post-anthesis existed. since fewer days to heading leads 

to more days in post-anthesis particularly when the range 

in days to maturity is truncated. by environmentar stress. 

lhe consistency <strong>of</strong> the relationships <strong>of</strong> heading date

with several critical agronomic parameters measured through_ 

out this study indicate the value <strong>of</strong> this trait in selecting 

barley genotypes in breeding programs. perhaps thÍs is one 

easily neasureabLe traÍt which has not been fully utitized 

Ín our breeding programs here in western canada in particular. 

Days to maturitv. This trait was also positively cor_ 

related with days in post-anthesis sl-nce inereasing d.ays to 

naturlty tends to give a longer post_anthesis period. 

l,odgine. fhe associations between lodging and alpha_ 

aroylase, saccharifying activity and soLuble amino_nitrogen 

were likely reflections <strong>of</strong> the negative assocíations <strong>of</strong> these 

traits with kerneL weight, test weÍght, and plumprêss¡ coÍì- 

bined wÍth the positive relationships between these agrononic 

traits and lodging. 

the negative correlation <strong>of</strong> loriging with barley nitrogen 

tn C-70-1 was a reflection <strong>of</strong> the positÍve yielit to loctging 

and negatlve yÍe1tt to barley nitrogen associations. 

Quality parameters. ìr¡ith the exception <strong>of</strong> the âIphå- 

anyl.ase to barley nitrogen correlatlon in C_?O-3, the 

interreLatlonships in the present study were generally 

positive. This would be expected since the traÍts are 

essentially measures <strong>of</strong> nitrogen and enzyme levels which 

are generally dependent on the nitrogen status <strong>of</strong> the <strong>plant</strong>. 

fhe negative relationship between alpha_amylase and 

barl-ey nS.trogen in C-?0-3 may have been nerely fortuitous, 

or coulC have been the resuLt <strong>of</strong> the early senescence 

characteristlc <strong>of</strong> that population. In the other populations, 

L95

the lndication was that total barley nitrogen was not 

sígnificant in determining alpha_anylase. If this reLationship 

holds one could then expect to obtain genotypes with 

high levels <strong>of</strong> aJ.pha-anylase and low protein. That 

relationshi.p is desireable for malting quality. 

overalL. With the exception <strong>of</strong> sorne <strong>of</strong> the rel_ation- 

shíps with lodging, the phenotypic correlations reported 

fron the present Btudy are in general agreement with those 

present in the literature. 

Reduced <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> did give rise to superior straw 

strength ín this material, as was the eåse in the study by 

Konishí (l.9?6). This effect may have been partially related 

to the lower yields also associated with <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>height</strong> in 

the present stu

maturity and days in post-anthesis parameters, and the other 

agrononic eharacters in this study are interesting, part_ 

ícularly as they tend not to agree with previous reports. 

Past evidence has suggested early heading j-s assoeiateil with 

early maturity and hence lower yíeld. On the other hand, it 

has been postulated that a 1ong post_fertÍlÍzation period 

should Lead to hígher yie3.ds through more kernel deve lopment. 

îhe evÍdence <strong>of</strong> thls stud.y supports the latter hypothesis. 

The results suggest that the breeder should attempt to 

select llnee which head earty but do not necessarÍly mature 

early, in an attempt to rnaxímÍz e the grãin development 

period. Obviously one must be aware <strong>of</strong> the problems associated 

with "late" rnaturity, particularly in ryestern canada, 

and lengthening the post-anthesis period by means <strong>of</strong> later 

maturity may be undesírable. One would have to arbÍtrarily 

choose an optimum maturity dåte and attempt to achieve a 

rnaxÍmurn post-anthesis period by combining that with the 

earllest heading possible . 

In view <strong>of</strong> the positive association found between days 

to heading and maturity, perhaps 'rearly,r by rtlate erosses 

would give rlse to larger numbers <strong>of</strong> lines with varior¡s 

combinations <strong>of</strong> headi.ng time and maturity, and a broad range 

<strong>of</strong> post-anthesis periods. The post-anthesis periods would 

also oceur at slÍghtly different tines <strong>of</strong> the growing season¡ 

With this type <strong>of</strong> nateriaL one could perhaps better define 

the relati.onships involved and deternine, not only the ideal 

length <strong>of</strong> the grain deveropment period, but also defíne which 

L97

part <strong>of</strong> that period is nost critical. 

From a breeeling viewpoint, this type <strong>of</strong> cross rnight be 

useful in attempting to develop genotypic combínations 

particularly suÍted to the environmental- condi*ions normally 

encountered during the barley growing season in i.festern 

Canada. this anthor feels that the post_anthesis period is 

critical, particularly in relation to the climatic pattern. 

0f this period, the first part is the most criticaL, since, 

in the area in question, heading time and the period foì-- 

lowing that are nornar fy the warmest, clríest parts <strong>of</strong> our 

growing season. fherefore a genotype which headed earlier 

could take advantage <strong>of</strong> slightly less stressfull growing 

conditions fo!. a few more days than one which headed later" 

During years when conditions are more optinum for a longer 

part, or all <strong>of</strong> the post-anthesis period, such a genotype 

should still be superior to a later heading type. It is 

also reasonable to expect that, regardless <strong>of</strong> environmental 

conditions, in terns <strong>of</strong> kernel quality such a genotype 

would be generally at an advantage. 

The preceeding discussÍon also illustrates some <strong>of</strong> the 

reservations one rnust have regarding eorrelation values, 

particularly when sample sizes are large. It is not always 

a simple task to define cause and effect rel_ationships which 

can be very complex, involvÍng the simultaneous effects <strong>of</strong> 

several traits. Such complexity was obvious in the inter_ 

pretatíon <strong>of</strong> these data; since few relatlonships, although 

significant, were strong; and j.ndiviitual parameters were 

198

significantry rerated to several others, ther*selves interrelatedr 

but these interrelatåonships were not always 

eq uipo 1lent . 

As reported by Chandler (fg6g) ín rice, Briggle and 

Vogel (1968) ín wheât and Konishi (:.:9?6) in barley, the most 

valuable effects <strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> have been increased 

lodging resistance and improved response to applied nÍtrogen 

fertilizer (N). Response to N varies with crop, envir<strong>of</strong>fnent 

and genotype, and nay or nay not affect the expression <strong>of</strong> 

each <strong>of</strong> several important agronomÍc and quality parameters. 

fhe following is a díscussion <strong>of</strong> the results <strong>of</strong> experÍ"ments 

condueted to determine the responses <strong>of</strong> seleeted semi-dwarf 

and talI barley genotypes to various levels <strong>of</strong> applÍed nit_ 

rogen under field conditions in Soùth_Central Manitoba. 

Plary! Heísht 

As applied N increased so did <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, pre sumably 

because increased nr-trogen gives ríse to increased vegetative 

growth. this was the case at atl five sites, although the 

increase was not slgnificant at the Carman and portage sites 

ín 1976, 

The very heavy weed infestation at Carman in I9?5 

indirectly gave rise to continued <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> response 

beyond N incrernent one. Carbyne, a wild oat chemical used 

L99

to control wild oats at Carman was partly responsible. 

Carbyne is known to eontroL the wÍld oats by setting them 

back and thereby decreasing their competitive ability wlth 

the crop. High fertility enhances this effect, (8.H. Stobbe, 

personal co¡nmunicatíon ) o and therefore the more fertile 

treatments in the study grew taller because they were less 

affected by the wild oats. 

?he shorter <strong>height</strong>s <strong>of</strong> all genotype s at a1l N levels at 

Carman reflected the less than ideal growing conditions, due 

to drought and weeds, and. the lower initial levels <strong>of</strong> availl - 

able N at thãt site. lhe mid and. late season drought at 

Portage in 19?6 probabry caused the snaller amount <strong>of</strong> he ight 

variatíon there' arthough there may have been other contríbuting 

faetors " 

Since there was generally no fertiLizer by genotype 

(¡ x c) interaction for <strong>height</strong> we assume thåt the shortness 

<strong>of</strong> straw, relatíve to the tall genotypes, uras maíntained as 

applied N increased. On the other hand, <strong>height</strong> increased 

with added N, meaning the heíght <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarf,s increaseir 

as well as that <strong>of</strong> the talls. This might reduce their lodging 

resístance" fhe significant intêraction at portage in L975, 

occurred beiause cz030l1 and, cla)oJ7 showed a tendency towards 

greater <strong>height</strong> íncreases as applied N increased than diil 

MLnn64-62, the other short genotype considered. fhe evidence 

leads us to conclude that it would be ,r"""""u"y to evaluate 

the lodging resístance <strong>of</strong> short strawed material despite the 

strong relationship <strong>of</strong> this trait with <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, part- 

200

icularly when nore optimum growing conditions may be 

encountered. 

YieLd 

Response to applied N was similar at al,l sites: large 

and signifícant increases with the first N incrernent, follow- 

ed by continuous but progressively snaller gains as N 1evels 

increased" The combined effects <strong>of</strong> the lower original soil 

N level and the weed ínfestations at Carman, which at the 

zero applled N level severely suppressed the growth <strong>of</strong> the 

barJ-ey; ted to significant and large yield response to N at 

that location in both years. fhj-s was particularly so in 

t}r.e L975 test, in which the wild oats and green foxtait 

l"owered yields nost severely when fertility was inadequate " 

lhese stress factors were reflected in overall lower yields 

at Carnan in both years, but particularly in 19?5 when atl 

genotypes yielded very poorly. This, in turn, gave rise to 

no signlficant yieLd dÍfferences between genotypes in that 

experinoent. 

At the other sites the two tal1 genotypes and Minn64-62 

produced the híghest yields, whíle yields <strong>of</strong> the other two 

seni-dwarfs were lower. The lower yield <strong>of</strong> these 1atter 

genotypes was responsible for the significantly lower yield 

<strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs as a group at thrèe <strong>of</strong> the four sites 

where this was the case, lhe lower yielding semí_dwarfs 

matured earlíer than Bonanza i¡rhereas the higher yielding 

Minn64-62 was later maturing, Since early rnaturity is 

20I

usual-ly associated with t ower yiefds, this may have been a 

substantial factor. ínfluencing the yield <strong>of</strong> these lines. 

The matu-rity factor and the total lack <strong>of</strong> F x G interaction 

for yield are inportant from the breederos viewpoint" 

The results indicated that early maturing, seni_dwarf barì-ey 

sel"eetions may not yield as well as standard <strong>height</strong> geno_ 

types. Furthermore, these shorter genotypes apparently wíll 

need inherently superior yielding ability, since they did 

not respond differently than the talls to applied lt, to be 

superíor in yield to the best tall genotypes" 

0n the other hand, when given adequate nutrition and 

reasonable growing conditíons, the later maturing semi_d.warf, 

M\nn64-62, performed well. Furthernore, the improved stnaw 

strength <strong>of</strong> the semi-d.warfs would nake them superior, since 

the criticaL fact is that semi-dwarfs which are equaL to 

tal1 genotypes under norüal growing conditions should yiel

would be useful to know the rerative contribution <strong>of</strong> the 

various yield components to the result. This infornation 

would be <strong>of</strong> help to the breeder in selectíng parental 

¡nateriaL and in selecting within and. among segregatj.ng 

populations. 

At all sites, as applied N increased, so did the number 

<strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area; with the initial incrernent <strong>of</strong> N 

giving the greatest response. This was partic ularly the 

case at Carman in both years, where moisture stress and weed 

cornpetÍtion had rna jor effeets. The further significant 

increase due to the upper N increnents at Carnan ín L9?5 

probably resulted from improved competition with weed.s in 

these treataents. The significant).y greater numbers <strong>of</strong> 

spikes per unit area induced by the highest N level_ at 

Sanford nay be attributed to a more adequate moÍsture supply. 

This resulted in a longer vegetative perlod whj.ch allowed. 

more tillers to be produced, survive and. produce spikes. At 

these higher N levels at both sites, kernel weight was lower, 

and at Sanford the number <strong>of</strong> kernels per head dropped, rela_ 

tive to the other N treatments. 

The genotypes al-l responded similarly to apptied N. 

However, t'Uinn64-62 and ClOj!)Z generally had more spikes per 

unit area than the ta1ls at all sites. rhis was particularly 

the case for Minn64-62. fhe result <strong>of</strong>fers some expranation 

for the relatively high yield <strong>of</strong> Minn64-62, particularly as 

conpared to the other semi-dwarfs. CZ0IO11 was consistently 

the lowest <strong>of</strong> the three in spikes per unit area exeept at 

203

Sanford, where under better growing conditions, it had a 

nurnber <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area greater than the talls and 

the sâme aÊ C?O3O3Z, With this advantage, C?O3OLI was the 

hÍghest yieläing seni-dwarf at that location. 

Minn6&-62rs large number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area was 

probabry related to itrs sl0wer early devel0pment and overall 

lateness relative to Bonanza and the other genotypes. These 

characteristics may in fact be the very reason why Minn6ll-62 

had the advantage in terns <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area. From an 

agronomic viewpoint, this association <strong>of</strong> good performance 

wíth poor early competitive ability and late maturity would 

be undeslrable, Ín Western tanada, With this in rnind the 

<strong>plant</strong> breeder atternpting to develop the best genotJæe wouLd 

have to select for what he considered to be an optimum 

number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area, rather than a maxirnum number. 

Kernels Þer SDike 

There was evídence <strong>of</strong> yield component conpensation in 

this study. fhose genotypes whieh had large numbers <strong>of</strong> 

spikes per unit area tended to have significantly fewer 

kernels per spike. 

Àdding N tended to increase spike size, and again the 

initial N increment was the most effective. All genotypes 

responded to added N in essentialJ.y the same manner. The 

Carman site was again influenced the most, probably d.ue to 

the poor gnowing conditions. 

204

Kernel Weight 

Added N had little effect on kernel weight after the 

first N incrernent, at all sites except Sanford. There, 

kernel weight became progressively lo'er with added incre_ 

ments <strong>of</strong> applied N. 

Yield cornponent compensation was again in evidenee. 

As the spíkes per unit area and kernels per spike increased 

wÍth increasing N, kernel weight was <strong>reduced</strong>. 

0n a <strong>height</strong> class basis the semi_dwarfs had inferíor 

kerne] weight, particularLy when compared to Bonanza. ![ithin 

the semi-dwarfs kernels per head appeared to have more 

effect on kernel_ weight reduction than spikes per unit area, 

since the genotype s with more kernels per head had the lowest 

kernel weight. 

lhe F x G interaction at Sanford indicateä that C?O3O3Z 

and Minn64-62 were more susceptable to loss <strong>of</strong> kernel weight 

as N increased than was the high yielding Bonanza. this 

occwred despite the fact that both these genotype s had 

lower numbers <strong>of</strong> kernels per head than Bonanza at that site, 

suggesting that kernel weight was the yield component whieh 

must be irnproved ín these lines to bring then to eonpetitive 

yield levels under these conditions. rt was ar-so a reflection 

<strong>of</strong> the larger number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area <strong>of</strong> those genotypes. 

ïn general, the specifle yÍe1d. cornponents involved in 

the yield component compensatl_on varied depending on the 

205

environnent. Àny eonclusion regarding whieh component has 

the greatest effect on any other then nay have to do with 

the potential "sink" <strong>of</strong> a given genotype or group <strong>of</strong> genotypes. 

The eonplexity <strong>of</strong> these relationships may hâve been 

compounded in the semi_dwarfs by li:rkage between kernef 

weight and the semÍ-dwarf habit. 

Yie 1"4_lÇomponent s 

0vera11 the more successful semí-dwarfs appear to be 

such because they have larger nunbers <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit 

area, wh5"eh Íncreased with added N. In conjunctÍon with 

this there was a reduction in spike size, but more seriously 

a reduction in kernel weight. Frorn an end u_se standpoint 

<strong>reduced</strong> kernel weÍght could not be tolerated and, since 

maxinum yield wirr only be achieved by an efficient balance 

anong the components, the semi_dwarfs must be aLtered to 

improve kernel weight, even at the expense <strong>of</strong> the other yield 

conponents provided that yield ean be maintarned or increased. 

f,odsinE 

îhe lodging encountered was the late season type eaused 

by the inabÍlity <strong>of</strong> the straw to support filling and/or 

filled spikes. Lodging can then be partially aecounted for 

by yield level, with the higher yieJ"ding treatnents suffering 

increased lodging. l{owever, the superíor lodging resistance 

<strong>of</strong> the shorter strawed materÍar was elearry demonstrated at 

Portage, where Minn64-62 díd. not lodge despite yielding as 

206

much as the tall genotypes. Also the F x G interaction at 

both sites in L9?5 derronstrated the superior standing 

ability <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs under high yieltiing (higher N) 

conditions" This was especía1ly noticeable at portage where 

lodging was most prominant. 

Within the <strong>height</strong> groups there was variable lodging and. 

response to N. Bonanza was stronger than C?OZOZI4 and arÂong 

the sernl-dwarfs l\{inn64-62 was more lodging resistant than 

C703011 a\d. C?O3O3Z. Tn fact C?O3O].L showed a rather high 

level <strong>of</strong> loclging at the highest N 1evel at portage, although 

not as severe as that <strong>of</strong> the tall genotypes. lhis again 

indicates the <strong>plant</strong> helght to lodging association is not 

aì.ways constant and it Ís apparent that there are nany 

factors besldes <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> which have a strong infl-uence 

on lodglng resistance. In terms <strong>of</strong> breeding methodologyr 

therefore, selection pressure for J"odging resistance must 

âccompany selection for semi-dwarfism to achíeve the poten_ 

tial j-n lodging resístance that is possible in this type <strong>of</strong> 

material. fhe effects <strong>of</strong> other factors, such as environnent 

under which the material ís grown, was evj_denced by the 

Sanford and Portage 19?6 locations in the present study. 

There, despite better growing conditions and higher yield 

levels, no lodging occwred at all, denonstrating the 

difficulty encountered when attempting to effectlvely seLect 

for lodgíng resj_stance. 

207

Te st lr¡e icht 

Being closely eorreJ.ated with kernel weight, test 

weight was âffected by N in a sinilar fashíon. The increased 

test we ight resul"ting fron providing adequate N fertility 

demonstrated that inproved fertility gives rise to improved 

physical kernel quality in barley. 

Bonanza was the superior genotype and the semí_dwarfs, 

especially cz03o11 ( larger spike size), were lowest for test 

weight, again indicating the need to ímprove the kernel type 

<strong>of</strong> these seml"-dwarfs " 

The F x G in L9?5 suggested that applying N brought all 

genotypes to a similar level for test weight, irnplying that 

the serni-dwarfs tested had a greater need for improved 

fertílity to aehieve desirable test weight" 

Days tq Heading. Days to lr{aturity aqd Days in ?ost_Anthesis 

Although there was little effect <strong>of</strong> applied N on the 

nunber <strong>of</strong> days to headÍng, inereasing N did tend to inerease 

the number <strong>of</strong> days to maturity and the length <strong>of</strong> the post_ 

anthesis period. 

At the 1925 sites the zero N treat¡nents headed slightly 

later probably becanse the lower fertility led to slower 

earLy development <strong>of</strong> the naterial in those treatnents. The 

reverse occurred at Sanford due to overall higher fertility; 

coÌnbinêd with the tirning <strong>of</strong> rainfall ( just prior to heading) 

at that site. 

208

îhe effects <strong>of</strong> N on naturity and hence post_anthesis 

were the resuLts <strong>of</strong> the growth promoting effeets <strong>of</strong> the 

applied N. Genotypic differences were notabr.e only in that 

those genotypes with the shorter post_anthesis period.s, 

namely c703011 and c?ojojz, were also those with the rowest 

kernel welghts. The F x G interactÍons in l9Z5 indieated 

that given adequate N aL1 the genotypes studied. had nearly 

equal post-anthesis periods. 

Quality Paraneters 

As was the case in the report <strong>of</strong> Reisenaur and Dickson 

Qsao) higher N tevers significantly increased the revers <strong>of</strong> 

n1-trogen, saccharlfying activity, and soluble amino_nitrogen 

<strong>of</strong> the grain. Â simllar, though non-significant, trend 

existed for levels <strong>of</strong> alpha-anylase. 

The genotypes had significantly dlfferent grain nitrogen 

leveLs at afl sÍtes, though the differences were quite small. 

The evidence frorn Carnan, 1926, further suggested that when 

N was abundant these differences were yet s¡naller. 

The variable results for each genotlæe across locations 

suggested that aLpha-amyrase Levels are subject to ¡nodlficatíon 

by the envi.ronment and that genotypes nay differ in the 

degree <strong>of</strong> environnental reaction. îhis may be <strong>of</strong> importance 

in the interpretation <strong>of</strong> alpha-amylase tests when seleeting 

for nalting quality. 

À11 genotypes, except Mínn64-62, responded to each 

increment <strong>of</strong> N for saccharifyi.ng activíty. Minn64_62 ¡ad 

209

1ow leve1s <strong>of</strong> this paraneter at both sites and díd not 

respond to increased N at portage. 

Minn64-62 was the only genotype with a nore desirable 

level <strong>of</strong> soluble anÍno-nitrogen as compareai to Bonanza. 

0n an overall basís, C?03011 aind. CZO3O3Z would appear 

to be equaì.ly suited for use in breeding prograns enphasizing 

malting qualíty. c?o3o3z may have an âdded advantage, since 

at high N levels it showed superiority in alpha_anylase and 

saccharifying activity, yet no increase in protein. The 

other semi-dwarf, Minn64-62, had serious linitations in 

terms <strong>of</strong> malting quality, particularly in its 1ow Ievels <strong>of</strong> 

alpha-amylase and saccharifying activity. 

0verview 

Exarnining this experiment as it was conducted, it would 

appear that the most serious stress factor which harnpered 

the evaluation <strong>of</strong> the seni-dwarfs studied was weed eompeti._ 

tion. îhis occurred prirnarily at Carnan, most severely in 

1975, The se¡ni-dwarfs appeared to be less cornpetitive and 

were more affected by the highty competitive weed.s, particu_ 

larly wild oats. However, the adclition <strong>of</strong> nitrogen improved 

the general growing eonditions and. arleviated much <strong>of</strong> this 

problern, so that more meaníngful genotypie performance 

comparisons could be nade. 

lhe findings diseussed ín txperiment I relative to the 

semi-dwarf type probably being most advantageous for growing 

conditj.ons conducive to lodging and high yields, comblned 

t10

with the overall results <strong>of</strong> this experinent, Iead to the 

concl-usion that semi_dwarf r¡arieties should be eìraluated 

under more optimum conditions¡ (i.e" high fertility), in 

order to identify the superior genotypes. 

îestíng under stressful conditions, like those at 

Carman in 19?5, makes meaningful deeisíons coneerning genotypie 

superíority difficult, However, since such conditions 

may be encountered at the farm level, thê author feel"s that 

new selections should be ehecked out under these situations 

prior to being released. Sinee the genotypes are tailored 

for areas with relatively optimum conditÍons, failure to 

perform under less than ideal conditions should not necessarily 

stop the release <strong>of</strong> such a cultir¡ar " ¡iowever, 

prospeetive growers should. be made aware <strong>of</strong> their intorerance 

<strong>of</strong> such stress conditions. llhus, initiaL sereening under 

optirnurn conditions would identify the inherently superior 

genotypes most useful under intensive nanagement, with 

further testing identifying stress reaetions. 

As regards the <strong>plant</strong> type and growth habÍt <strong>of</strong> the serni- 

dwarfs, the results <strong>of</strong> this experiment again indicated the 

need for a more optimum baLance among the yield components" 

0f the genotypes studied thê better performer, Mínn64-62, 

achíeved its performance prinarily through a large number 

<strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area. In so doing its kernel size was 

less than ideal. This imbalance must be Ímproved in a 

phenotype <strong>of</strong> this nature. Ihe lateness <strong>of</strong> Minn64-62 also 

contributed to -its performanee leveln lhÍs faetor is not 

217

such a major drawback under ?¡rore ideal conditions in whíeh 

the growing season is not generally terninated abruptly by 

environmental stresses¡ nevertheless, Iateness is not a 

desirable trait and one suspects the naterial would have to 

be improved for this parameter as wel1. 

The ability <strong>of</strong> a genotype such as Minn6þ_62 to respond 

to high Levels <strong>of</strong> nitrogen fertilizer obviously reste in its 

capabillty <strong>of</strong> producing a rarge rìumber <strong>of</strong> spikes under these 

more optimal growing condltions. One could then specuJ.ate 

that this factor, combined with the kernel weight inadequacy 

and the negative association between spi.ke size and kernel 

wel-ght, suggests the ideal genotype for optimum growing 

conditions might be one which bas the abÍlity to produce 

large numbers <strong>of</strong> tíllers, thereby producing a larger number 

<strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area; but these spikes shourd have fewer 

kerneLs each Ín order to naintaÍn anð./or achieve adequate 

kernel size. 

0n the other hand this type <strong>of</strong> approach may be too 

simplistlc and rather unrealistic, particularly if taken to 

the extreme. îhere has in fact been an intensive effort to 

increase the graln nur¡ber per spike in seni_dwarfs, in 

general negating the above proposal" perhaps it then might 

be wise to produce hybrids with parents which have large, 

pì-ump grain and select intensively in the segregating 

populations for the most d.esirable combinati"on <strong>of</strong> the yield 

conponents and <strong>height</strong>. 

2I2

Phenotypicaì.J_y novel gernplasm, like that <strong>of</strong> the seni_ 

dwarf, may respond differently to varLatíons Ín row spacÍng 

and./or seeding rate (Stoskopf , ]96?¡ Briggs, lrg?il. Since 

a <strong>plant</strong> breeder want s to test a genotype using procedures 

which do not llmit Ltrs performance and mask its true potential, 

these interactions are important. They are also in_ 

r¡aluable in making agronomf.c reconmendatl,ons to the producer 

about these novel types so that their potential may be fu1ly 

exploited. It was with thege considerations in mind that 

thls study <strong>of</strong> selected talL and short genotypes wã.s eonduct_ 

ed to meaeure the êffect <strong>of</strong> varíous row spac ings and seeding 

rates on several agronolnic parameters. 

Planrb HeiEht 

Since the ÍraÍn purpose <strong>of</strong> deveLoping semi-dwarfs is to 

irnprove straw strength, whlch is associated with shorter 

straw, knowledge <strong>of</strong> factors influencing the <strong>height</strong> <strong>of</strong> a 

seml" -dwarf is desirable. Therefore, the effects <strong>of</strong> various 

spacings and seeding rates on <strong>plant</strong> heíght was i.rnportant. 

Varying row spaeing and seeding rate did not alter the 

<strong>height</strong> relationship between the two genotypes. However, the 

dífferent environmental conditions encountered did. read to 

variable behaviour. A.t both Sanford and Winnipeg, under good 

growing conditj.ons, both genotypes were taller than at Carman, 

213

and the treatments which increased the number <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong>s per 

unit <strong>of</strong> row length showed j_ncreased <strong>height</strong>, with Bonanza the 

more responsive" rrt carrnan, the combined effeets <strong>of</strong> rate 

seeding, drought and early weed infe station gave the opposite 

effect, wíth both genotypes responding and the widest row 

spacing having the shortest prants. The eãrly weed infestation 

whlch rimited growth and utilized rnuch <strong>of</strong> the available 

moisture appeared to be the rnain cause <strong>of</strong> this reaction. 

The lack <strong>of</strong> sigrrificant seeding rate effects demonstra_ 

ted the ability <strong>of</strong> the rnaterial to compensate for those 

differences. However, under stress conditíons at Carman 

the semL-dwarf showêd a trend towards taller <strong>plant</strong>s at the 

highest seeding rate, while Bonanza had the g:.eatest <strong>height</strong> 

at the intermediate seed rate. Thís suggested that the 

semi-dwarf may require higher seeding rates when grown under 

stress. At Winnipeg, under very ideal conditions, Bonanza 

was tallest at the lowest seeding rate, whi.Ie Mírn64_62 

showed no <strong>height</strong> differenee across seeding rates. 

The very short stature <strong>of</strong> Minn64-62 under the stress 

condÍtions at Carman raises the question <strong>of</strong> whether such a 

heíght may be too short for. practical purposes. Such a 

very short genotype might, under adverse conditions, be less 

desirable than one <strong>of</strong> an intermedj.ate <strong>height</strong> Ín terrns <strong>of</strong> 

suitability for modern harvesting procêdures. 

Yield 

It is considered important to deternÍne whether such a 

2L4

drastícaIIy changed phenotype as the seni_dwarf requires 

ehanges in agronomic practics to maximize yield. The relative 

yielding abilities <strong>of</strong> the specific genotypes investi_ 

gated were also <strong>of</strong> interest. 

At Sanford and Winnipeg, where growing conditions were 

adequate to ideal, Minn64-62 outyielded Bonanza by 6"0 and 

1-4.0 percent over the whole <strong>of</strong> each experiment respectÍvely. 

At Carman, where late seeding, drought and weeds led to very 

poor growing conditions, Bonanza outyielded the semí-dwarf 

by sorne IJ.O percent. fhese results suggest, as did those 

<strong>of</strong> Porter et al. (fg64) with wheat, that the semi_dwarf nay 

not be suited to growth under stress conditions, partic ularly 

weed competition and drought. In the present rnaterial, this 

is probabJ.y a result <strong>of</strong> generally poor competitive ability 

due to slow and prostrate early growth and perhaps a less 

extensive root system. However, under conditions <strong>of</strong> adequate 

to good moisture and fertility, and r,rlith good weed control, 

the semi-dwarfs may have a higher potential yíeld. Such 

results are important relative to recornmendations to farmers 

regarding the production <strong>of</strong> such semi-dwarfs. 

As previously noted by others, seeding rates, particular- 

1y <strong>of</strong> the narrow range used, affected yield only when conditions 

were adverse. This was the case at Carnan, where 

increased seeding rates gave hígher yields" Â similar, 

though non-sÍgnificant, trend was shown at Sanford, but no 

differences <strong>of</strong> consequence were shown under the more ideal 

conditions at Winnipeg. 

275

Although no significant genotype by seed rate inter_ 

action waË detected, Minn64-62 tended to show more response 

than Bonanza, especially under the near ideal Winnipeg 

eonditions, where Bonanza showed a negative yield response 

to increased seed rates. tombining all three sites 

t[inn64-62 showed a 4"0 and. 8"0 pereent yield response to 

each respectrve seeding rate increase, whire Bonanza showed 

onJ-y a 1.0 and 4.O percent response to each increase. 

Cornbiníng the two genotJrpes, no significant d.ifferences 

were detected between yields at the IJ.o crn. and 10.0 cm. 

spacíngs at any site. However, at carrna¡, there was a nonsignifÍcant 

(6.8%) yield increase at the narrower row 

spacing. In âl1 the trial_s, even nnder near j_deal condítions 

at ltlinnipeg, there was a drastic yield reduction at the 

widest row spacing. 

Although no signfficant genotln)e by rov, spacÍng inter_ 

action was shown, ULru:r6b-62 díd show a posltive (tS,o/") 

response to narrower rows under the stress conditions at 

Carman, whÍle the tal1 genotype showed 1Ítt1e response. 

This was ltkely due to the semi-dwarf beíng nore able to 

compete with the weeds when <strong>plant</strong>ed at namower row spacings 

at that site. 

îhe results suggest then, that there should be some 

examination <strong>of</strong> the row widths and seeding rates used. in 

testing procedures in relation to the evaruation <strong>of</strong> material 

with a wÍ.de range <strong>of</strong> <strong>height</strong> variation. Furthermore, the 

resuLts suggest that semi-dwarfs <strong>of</strong> the Minn64_ 62 type 

276

should not be recomnended for produetion in areas with 

severe moisture stress, and that adequate weed eontrol ls 

an absolute necessity when growíng such a cultivar. 

Yield .Conponents 

The number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area and the number <strong>of</strong> 

kernels per spike were most affected by changes ín seedlng 

rates and row spas i¡gs. Tn general, as one inereased, the 

other decreased " 

Kernel weight was relatively unaffected except at 

carnan. There, due to rate seedÍng and environmentar stress, 

kernel weight was <strong>reduced</strong>. at higher seedlng rates, and. was 

partÍcularly low for ¡Uinn64-62. Tr¡ith the exception <strong>of</strong> 

Winnipeg, where the better conditions aÌlowed MÍnn6h-62 to 

complete its longer life cycle, ¡utínn6l+_62 had lighter ker_ 

neLs than Bonanza. In general, as the nurnbers <strong>of</strong> spíkes 

per unit area and,/or kernels per spike increased, the kerneL 

weight decreased. 

fhe number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area was the rnost important 

component influencing yÍeLd, as shown by the 6.0 percent 

superior yield <strong>of</strong> Míru,'ú4-62 over Bonanza at Sanford. At 

that site the two varietÍes were equal in the number <strong>of</strong> 

kernels per splke and Bonanza had higher kernel weight than 

Minn64'62, making spikes per unit area the sole reason for 

the yield advantage <strong>of</strong> tvtínn64-62. Furthermore, at Winnj.peg, 

where both its kernel number per head and its kernel weight 

were equal to those <strong>of</strong> Bonanza, Miwß4-62 outyíelded Bonanza 

277

y some 14.0 pereent. 

îhese results suggested then, that the breeder, in 

deve]-op5-ng semi-dwarf barleys, must attempt to naintain 

kerneL slze and nurnber per spike, but increase the number 

<strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area. This happens when the seeding 

rate is increased, leading to the genotype whieh can produce 

the best spikes wlth adequate kernels havlng the greatest 

yield potential. rhe breeder must obtafn an adequate 

balance anong the yieJ"d components and at the sane tinne 

maximize the yield. 

On the other hand, the results <strong>of</strong> this study provided 

a warning that under less than ideal cond.itions the ability 

to produce nore spikes per unít area nay be disadvantageous" 

The other yierd conponents may suffer too much in such srtuations, 

Ieading to decreased yields. Furthermore, even if 

total yield does not drop, kernel sÍze and weight likely 

wilL. This aLone is undesirable from a grain quality standpolnt 

in barley. 

fest Sleight and percent Barlev Nitrosen 

lhese parameters were unaffeeted by altered row spacing 

and seedÍng rate' except for sright varíations related to 

changes in kernel size. fest weíght decreased and barfey 

nltrogen increased as ker:ne 1 welght went down. Minn6þ-62rs 

hígher test weight at Winnipeg likely occlrred because this 

genotype was later rnaturing, and at that site was able to 

complete its growing cycle under the less stressful conditions. 

2L8

One <strong>of</strong> the problems which has existed with the seni- 

dwarf $¡heat in the U.S.Â" has been poor ernergence due to 

shortness <strong>of</strong> the coleoptile, shown to be associ.ated with 

<strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> (Allan e.[ ål, 1962). This can present 

a problem for the producer, particuÌarly if deep seeding is 

requfred to reach moisture " 

Despite the lack <strong>of</strong> a slgnifÍcant correlation between 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and coleoptile length for the genotypes studied 

in the present experiment, the ranking data and significant 

difference between <strong>height</strong> classes indicated that the tall 

genotypes did have longer coteoptiles. However, due to the 

strong positive relationshÍps between eoleoptÍle length and 

the kernel size parameters, and the strong positive relation- 

ships between these and. helght, the question arises as to 

whether the <strong>height</strong> to coleoptile length relationship was 

direct or l-ndirect. nhe results indicated that it was 

posslbly indírect, èaused by the short statured genotypes 

having smaller, lighter kernels. and therefore shorter 

coleoptiles. This relationship could present further prob- 

Lems as higher yÍelding serai-dwarfs are developed, since, 

as shown ln experiments discussed earlier, the kernel size 

component <strong>of</strong> yield suffered thê greatest reduction as overall 

yíeld increased. This was particularly the case for the 

higher yieldíng semi-d.warfs ín Experiment It. 

Bhe positive assocåation in thís experiment between root 

219

score and yield on a rank correlatÍon basis, hinted at the 

possibility <strong>of</strong> using thís parameter as a selection criterion. 

For this to become a reality, further and more extensive re_ 

search would have to ìre carried out in that area. 

llhe laek <strong>of</strong> association between coleoptile length and 

emergence rate index for these genotJ¡pes is encouraging. 

llowever, the method. <strong>of</strong> determination and the limited scope 

<strong>of</strong> the study involved in the calculation <strong>of</strong> emergence rate 

index, as well as the use <strong>of</strong> rank correlation procedures, 

were lnadequate to obtain conclusive results. 

One <strong>of</strong> the fears expressed by several dryland area <strong>plant</strong> 

breeders regardlng semÍ-dwarfs is that the root systems <strong>of</strong> 

these genotypes may not be adequate to withstand the drought- 

hy conditions <strong>of</strong>ten encountered. 

Al,though not statistícally significant, d.ue to the dif_ 

ficulty invoÌved in the measurement <strong>of</strong> these paraÍieters, the 

trends which developed indicated that, for these genotypes, 

the fears <strong>of</strong> the breeders may be justified. rhe semí-dwarfs 

apparentl-y had both smaller and slower-growing root systems" 

0f particular note was the tendeney <strong>of</strong> the semi-d.warfs to 

show drastically <strong>reduced</strong> root growth rates at week seven, 

whiLe the tal1s did not show this reduction until week nine. 

This rnay in part be assoclated. with the tendency for the 

speeífie semi-dwarfs studied to ripen <strong>of</strong>f quickly. 

220

The associatíon between root growth rate and <strong>plant</strong> 

<strong>height</strong> also supported the contention that the se¡ni_dwarfs 

had sì ower devel_oping root systems, However, as u/as the 

ease in Experiment IV with coleoptile length, the strong 

posítive associations <strong>of</strong> the root growth and size paraneters 

and <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> with kernel weight and plumpne ss suggested 

onee again that the relationship may be ind.irect, caused by 

the tendency <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs in question to have smarler 

kernels, giving rise to less vigorous seed.lings. 

tautl-on should be exercised in drawing conclusions 

from these results due to the large errors encountered in 

measuring these parameters under the condÍtions <strong>of</strong> the 

experiment. ft should also be noted that the root systems 

were restricted in growth by pot size¡ hence the extrapola_ 

tion <strong>of</strong> these data to field conditions may not be posslble. 

Exneriment Vf¡ Seeding Ðepth and EmerEence Ftudv 

Accornpanying the suspected coleoptile length problem <strong>of</strong> 

semi-dwarfs, researchers have voiced fears that these geno_ 

types wi1L be unable to energe from deep <strong>plant</strong>ing or that 

they wilL not energe quickly. 

lhe results <strong>of</strong> this study indicated that no differences 

existed between the tal1s and semi-dwarfs for emergence 

ablLity or rate. AI1 genotypes vrere eapabl_e <strong>of</strong> energing 

fron 7"6 cm. and al1 had equal difficulty from 1O.2 cm. ln 

fact, c703032 aîð, 6zoJo[, both semi-dwarfs, were superior 

to the other genotypes in emergence. These results suggest 

,-2L

that, despite dlfferences i_n coleoptile length, the senidwarfs 

were capable <strong>of</strong> emerging as well as the talls. 

tauti.on should be observed. Ín drawing conclusions from 

these results since the study was carrfed. out in the green- 

house under relatively i-deal conditlons, and the sample and 

replicate sizes were smatl. fhe liníted numbers <strong>of</strong> lines 

representing each heÍght class represent yet a further 

linitation. 

222

GENER¡.L DTSCUSS]ON 

Since desired changes in <strong>plant</strong> type can affect the 

attainment <strong>of</strong> other desirable goaIs, or ¡nay influence the 

methodol.gy which nust be ernproyed, to attain then in a 

breeding progran, the clarification <strong>of</strong> the interreLationships 

<strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> type with agronomic and quality paraneters is important. 

The initiat investigation reported was carried out 

to determine whether semi-dwarfisro is a phenotypÍc change 

that i.nvolve,s such effects. 

The methodology employed in the present study was inadequate 

for the estimation <strong>of</strong> genotypic r¡alues for some <strong>of</strong> 

the traits investigated. This Ínadequacy 1ay partially in 

the techníques empJ.oyed during the inve stlgation; however, 

the effects <strong>of</strong> reducêd <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> did cornplicate matters 

in some instances. 

lhe nature <strong>of</strong> the populations involved led to an ínflated 

heritability estimate for <strong>plant</strong> heíght. lhe breeding be_ 

haviour <strong>of</strong> other characterístics closely related to hefght 

was somewhat affected by this, and thelr heritabilitj,es were 

also high. The resuLts further lndieated that ínvoLvement 

<strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> in hybrict barley populations would 

not necessítate a radi.cal departure fror¿ conventíonal selec_ 

tion methods to attain desirable levels <strong>of</strong> any <strong>of</strong> the other 

223

parameters Ínvestigated. the very high herítability <strong>of</strong> 

<strong>plant</strong> heíght suggested that the selection <strong>of</strong> short statured 

genotypes should present no probJ.ems. On the other hand., 

the overall breeding proeedure may have to be somewhat 

altered to attain the usual performance objectives in 

populations ínvolving short-statured genotypes. Á,rnong the 

reasons for this are: the smal1 proportion <strong>of</strong> short tJrpes 

derived from some crossesi the 1ow competitive ability <strong>of</strong> 

semi-dwarfs relative to the tall segregates¡ and the large 

number <strong>of</strong> undesirable character associatíons with <strong>reduced</strong>. 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>. 

Uithin the scope <strong>of</strong> the sample investigated, which was 

small by <strong>plant</strong> breederrs standards, the idear conbination <strong>of</strong> 

short <strong>height</strong> and adequate levels <strong>of</strong> other important agronomic 

parameters was not found. However, consÍdering the total 

number <strong>of</strong> short strawed l"lne s ineluded in the study, the 

results were erlcouraglng. 

The snall proportion <strong>of</strong> seml_-dwarf types may have re_ 

sulted fron the adverse conditions ( salínity) encountered 

during the F4 increase Ín Californía. Several lines whieh 

were increased either were not returned or produced insufficient 

seed to be included in the study. îhis salinity 

may have particularly affected the semi-dwarfs, due to their 

inability to perform well under stress cond.itions, as was 

denonstrated throughout the study. 

Although the <strong>height</strong> di.fference bstv{een the tal1 and the 

semi-dwarf in barley is generalLy assumed. to be simply 

,.24

inheríted" observation <strong>of</strong> thÍs materíal indicated the 

i-nf luence <strong>of</strong> mod if ier gene s which led to the occ u*ence <strong>of</strong> 

stable genotypes <strong>of</strong> íntermediate <strong>height</strong> as welL as reeovery 

<strong>of</strong> the parental classes. These interrûediate <strong>height</strong> geno- 

tl¡pe s were in fact the most agronomically desirabLe group 

ín the present etudy. 

?he resuLts fro¡n alI three populations investigated, 

in particular c-lo-J, indicated. that lines with a desrrabLe 

combinatlon <strong>of</strong> performânce characteristÍcs occured wíth 

greatest frequency among genotypes ln thi_s Íntermediate 

<strong>height</strong> category. lhese lines had improve¿l straw strength 

relatlve to the talLer lines, yet also had acceptable leve1s 

<strong>of</strong> yieLd and kernel size paramete!.s and more acceptabLe 

maturity. This was exemplified by C-|O-J, in which the 

majority <strong>of</strong> derived lines fell in the intermediate <strong>height</strong> 

class. Despite this.the populati.on means and ranges for 

most <strong>of</strong> the other eharacteristics were similar to those 

obtained among lines from the other two crosses, lodging 

being an exeeption, but on the favourable side (fables g 

and 9). 

The high heritabitity <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and the lack <strong>of</strong> 

conpetitive ability <strong>of</strong> semi-d.warfs relative to ta1l genotypes, 

suggest modifícations <strong>of</strong> breeding procedures may be 

required 1n attempting to inprove and adapt semi-dwarfs by 

hybridizíng them with better performing taller genotypes 

available. fhe low incídence <strong>of</strong> true semi_d.warfs indícated 

a need for large F, poÞulations, perferably at lower <strong>plant</strong> 

225

densities, to facilitate the seleetion <strong>of</strong> sufficient numbers 

<strong>of</strong> appealing short statured types ín order to make progress 

toward improved agronomic performance. Iêrger populations 

would also be required by the breeder desiring to seLect 

intermediate <strong>height</strong> genotypes, sÍnce these were arso shown 

to occu¡ at a lower frequency than tatt segregates, 

An additional problem with the material investígated 

was the apparent linkage between shorteneai stature and late 

heading and maturity, whfch was probably partially responsible 

for the strong assocíation <strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> with re- 

duced kernel size and plumpness. lhis rateness 'n,as associated 

with an observed slow and prostrate early growth habit" The 

kernel parameters suffered in the shoz,t material, partÍc ular_ 

1y among early maturing lines and those showing high yield 

leveLs. some lines dltt not suffer these kerne f síze problerns, 

but these were most <strong>of</strong>ten lower yielders, The lower yieì.d 

resulted from the production <strong>of</strong> fewer spi.kes per unit area¡ 

the yield component by which the better yielders apparently 

achieved that yíeld" The number <strong>of</strong> kernels per spike was not 

a sígnificant problem since parentaL genotypes had adequate 

spike size" The semi-dwarf parent, Miruób_62, was below 

optínunr i.n kernel size. 

Based on the associatÍons shown, a specíal effort may 

be required to irnprove kerneL size in semi-dwarf segregates 

by intensive selection for inprovement throughout the 

segregating generations among large nunbers <strong>of</strong> semi_dwarf 

l1nes. îhe ease <strong>of</strong> visual selection for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>

indicated by this study suggests that early_generation 

selectÍon <strong>of</strong> the Larger numbers <strong>of</strong> semi-dwarfs required 

would not be diffreult. fhis intense selection could then 

be followed by the sorting out <strong>of</strong> other less heritable 

parameters in the 1ater generations <strong>of</strong> the breeding progran. 

fhe ideal genotype would have many spfkes per unit ârea, 

many kernel,s per spike, high weíght per kernel and be <strong>of</strong> the 

desÍred <strong>height</strong>. llowever, due to yÍeld cornponent compensation, 

¡naximizatÍon <strong>of</strong> a1l three conponents in a singl"e genotype 

will not be easy. From a practical standpol.nt, a reasonablê 

balance <strong>of</strong> the components is desirable. rn terms <strong>of</strong> indivldual 

components, kernel weíght must be at a certain 

level for end use acceptabíj_ity. Kernel weight ís inportant 

because heavy, pLump kernels mean l_ess fiber and more energ:y 

per pound <strong>of</strong> graÍn. fhis is important both from a feed and 

a malting viewpoint. High levels <strong>of</strong> the other eonponents 

are obviousLy desirable, but only because <strong>of</strong> their csntribution 

to yield potential, 

The evÍdence obtained suggests that adverse inter- 

charaeter reLationships shown would make the task <strong>of</strong> selecting 

for the desired character combÍnation directly from an 

initial semi-dwarf by tall cross very difficult, and perhaps 

rather impractieal. It is proposed that a more realistic 

approaeh woul-d be a step-wise one, whJ.ch rnight be more time 

consuming, but would be more certain <strong>of</strong> success. 

fhis approach involves the sinultaneous development <strong>of</strong> 

two or more short-strawed genotypes with the desired leveLs 

227

<strong>of</strong> different yield components in each, followed by inter_ 

crossing these to achieve the desired goal <strong>of</strong> high yield <strong>of</strong> 

p3.unp barley. fhese second.-stage crosses woul.d nlnimize 

some <strong>of</strong> the previously diseussed problems, since all the 

måterlal would be short statured. 

The barley project at the uni.versity <strong>of</strong> saskatchewan 

has, and is following such a procedure (Dr. B.L. llarvey, 

personal cornmunication). By selecting against lateness and 

sLow, prostrate, early growth but naíntaining good spike 

size (in the oríglna1 crosses), selections wíth acceptabLe 

levels <strong>of</strong> kernel we lght and number <strong>of</strong> kernels per spike 

were obtained. However, a lower number <strong>of</strong> spikes per unÍt 

area llníted thetr yielding ability. Short statured geno_ 

types (siniLar to those used in the present stuäy) with 

Large numbers <strong>of</strong> spikes per unit area, good spike size, but 

lacking kernel weight were obtained from the Uni"versity <strong>of</strong> 

Minnesota program' and hybridized with the saskatchewan 

lines. This procedure has ninimized the neeat for selection 

for <strong>height</strong> or sp5.ke size (both parents had desirabLe levels) 

and now at F, the breeder can coneentrate on selecting to_ 

Ìvard an optirnum balance between spikes per unít area and 

kernel weight, toward the objective <strong>of</strong> maximum yíe1d. 

Among the rnaterials in the present study were short- 

statured lines whieh embodled. the desired leve1s <strong>of</strong> indiv_ 

idual eornponents. lhese could. be intercrossed, or crossed 

to conplernentary types like those <strong>of</strong> the Saskatchewan pro- 

gram, to attain desfred levels <strong>of</strong> all components wíthin 

228

individual lines. 

It is generally considered that a minimum goal would be 

for semå-dwarfs to exceed the yield level <strong>of</strong> regionally 

âdapted tatr c urtír¡ars in trials under average conditions. 

Such an íncrease in yield require s a change in the basic 

sink <strong>of</strong> the crop and this may initiatly be hard to achieve. 

0n the other hand the high tillering seni_dwarf rnay be more 

capable <strong>of</strong> providing a larger sink under ¡nore id.eaL growing 

conditions. Even lf the sink is not Lncreased the semi_ 

dwarf stature wour-d be desÍrabre in terms <strong>of</strong> yield stability. 

Short stature eontributes strongly to lodging resistance, 

and lodging, whether <strong>of</strong> the early or late season type, 

frequently is a serious problem. IhÍs ís especÍally the 

case in regions where barley is well adapted. and therefore 

highest yields are expected. As previously discussed the 

semi-dwarf types would likeIy be most suited to and most 

useful in these highly productive areas. Development <strong>of</strong> 

semi-dwarf lines with high leveLs <strong>of</strong> lodgÍng resistance and 

achíeving a yield 1evel conparable to that <strong>of</strong> the better 

tal-l genotypes under condÍtj-ons free <strong>of</strong> lodging, would be 

a valuable achievement, and should be the initial goal in 

any breeding program attempting to develop useful short 

statured genotypes. 

The results obtained indicate the possibility <strong>of</strong> select- 

ing an adapted, short-strawed, barley genotype with acceptable 

yield. Several genotypes <strong>of</strong> intermediate and strort helght 

showed high yield levels, but they were undesirable due to 

229

educed kernel size and lack <strong>of</strong> yie.td stability, panticular]-y 

unde:. conditions <strong>of</strong> stress" A procedure for o.,¡ercoming these 

faults has been suggested above. 

the semi-d¡varfs investigâted agronornically appeared to 

require special attention to eurtural procedures to achieve 

rnaximum performance, particularly when growing under un_ 

favourable environrnental conditions" Adequate weed control 

was a necessity since the short statured. genotypes were poor 

competitors. fhe seni-dwarfs Ín question seemed to have a 

defínite minimun fertility requirement. Unfortunately, they 

did not appear to re spond to high nitrogen levels to any 

greater degree than did the tall cul-tivars. 

îhe slow early growth <strong>of</strong> the sample <strong>of</strong> semi_dwarfs 

investigated was particulârly disadvantageous under less 

than ideal conditions. This slow growth was associ-ated with 

the high spikes per unÍt area type, hence, â nore desirable 

balance <strong>of</strong> yield cornponents might be expeeted to reduce this 

problem. However, since spikes per unit area appeaned to 

be the most influential <strong>of</strong> the yield cornponents, the lack <strong>of</strong> 

competitive ability <strong>of</strong> hÍgh yielding semi-dwarfs may be dif_ 

ficult to overcome. The tillering cornponent is irnportant in 

providing a neans <strong>of</strong> response to more ideal environnents, 

particularLy to optimum r-eve1s <strong>of</strong> moisture and fertiLizer. 

Às previously stated, the greatest advantage <strong>of</strong> the 

semi-dwarfs would bê in the areas best suíted to barley 

production" In Western Canada these are the regions wbere 

straw strength is inportant, characterized by a con_ 

230

sístent suppLy <strong>of</strong> adeguate noisture. I,or the dryer areas, 

in fact, semi-dwarfs nay. be at a disadvantage Ín yield 

relative to tall cultivars, and nay aLso be undesirably 

short for modern harvesting procedures. It was observed. 

that the short statured materLal investigated performed 

relatively better under eonditions <strong>of</strong> adequate to high 

rnoisture. 

lhe trend for improved performance <strong>of</strong> the semi_dwarf 

at narrow row spacings and high seedjlg rates again refleeted 

thelr laek <strong>of</strong> conpetitíve ability. Row spacång would not 

present a serious problea to the producer since the narrovi¡est 

one in the study ís the c ommon row width used by producers. 

SeedÍng rate can be easily altered, but would raiee costs 

sLÍghtIy. 

lhe seeding rate and row spacing effeets need to be 

considered in reLation to the nitrogen responses obtained" 

rt seems probable that, had the nitrogen trÍals been carried 

out ât greater prant densitles, the semi-dwarfs would have 

shown greater response than the taLls, particularly íf 

severity <strong>of</strong> lodgÍng had been accentuåted. 

The seeding rate and row spacing results may also have 

implications regardÍng the procedures used in the er¡aluation 

<strong>of</strong> genotypes for purposes <strong>of</strong> varletal release. fhis is 

especial.J.y so when the shorter types are being evaluated slde 

by side wÍth tall genotypes as is now the general case. 

Also, for ease <strong>of</strong> handllng, several institutions use ror¡v 

spacings which rnay not alr.ow the se¡ni-dwarfs to express 

23L

their true potential. 

The general 1ateness <strong>of</strong> the higher yielding, shortstrawed 

genotypes may also be a disadvarttage, particularly 

ln the more northerty barley produclng areas. Early short 

strawed tJrpe s can be isolated ( several existed ín population 

c'7o'3), but they tend to be lower ylelders. However, the 

yierd <strong>of</strong> an ear!-y short strawed 1!ne shoutd be compared to 

that <strong>of</strong> early maturing tal} .r¡arietÍes before any decísions 

are nade. This generaL lateness <strong>of</strong> the better short tJrpe s 

wiLl necessÍtate a reconmendation <strong>of</strong> early seeding even in 

areas with a l0nger growing season, due to the latene ss <strong>of</strong> 

heading as well as lateness <strong>of</strong> maturity. 

0n the basis <strong>of</strong> limÍted research and data, lt is also 

possible that short stature in barley nay be assoeíated with 

sLower growlng and less extensive root systens. This again 

suggested these types wour-d not be suited to the areas wíth 

stress types <strong>of</strong> environment. 0n the othe¡ hand, these para_ 

meters were associated with *u,"r-r. kernel size and iraprovement 

<strong>of</strong> this conponent rnay result in the irnprovement <strong>of</strong> the root 

parameters as we l-1. 

ft appears then that short strawed barley cou1d. be a 

viab1e <strong>plant</strong> t3¡pe in the barl_ey growing areas <strong>of</strong> Western 

Canâda, particularly 1n the most productive regions where 

lodgÍng is frequently a lirniting factor. fhere witl be need 

to make producers aware <strong>of</strong> the unique field nanagement 

practices requíred to provide an environment suitable for 

these types in order to achieve maximurn performanee " fhe 

232

possibílity <strong>of</strong> iroproved input response with seni-dwarfs 

exists and future breeClng efforts will undoubtly be 

dÍreeted toward taking adrmntage <strong>of</strong> this potential.

SLIMMÀRY f.ND CONCI,US]ONS 

three popr¡lations <strong>of</strong> barley, developed from crosses 

involving one semf-dwarf parent, were grown at each <strong>of</strong> two 

locations for two years. The data were used to estÍmate 

heritabilities and variance conponents for <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> and 

several 0ther agronomic parameters as well as to define the 

ínterrelatlonships <strong>of</strong> these parameters by correlatLon pro_ 

cedures. Some malting quality traits were ÍncLuded ín the 

correlation study. 

The objective was to determine the effects <strong>of</strong> involving 

<strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> in barley on breeding procedures and on 

other parameters <strong>of</strong> concern to breeders. Further to this 

was the objective <strong>of</strong> individual genotypic evaluation. 

The introduction <strong>of</strong> <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> into the 

barley populations studied was interpreted as not appreciably 

affecting the variances and heritabilities <strong>of</strong> other agronomic 

characteristics studied. 

Plant <strong>height</strong> itself was highly herÍtable, as was kernel 

weight. Days to heading, and maturity were generaì.1y highly 

heritable, while test weíght, plumpness anit lodging were 

somewhat less heritable, yield. had the lowest heritabilÍty. 

234

Testing et one site for one year was judged to be 

sufficie¡rt to estimate genotypic r¡aiu.es foz, heigirt, kernel 

weight and lodging in the naterial stud_ted, whil-e test 

weight, piurnpne ss and kernels per spike required more than 

one years data. Heading date, naturity and days ín post- 

anthesis required d.ata from at least two r-oeations in two 

years. Yield showed evidence <strong>of</strong> a requirement <strong>of</strong> testíng 

in more than one location in more than one yearo i{ore 

replieation would have like1y improved the estimates for 

all charac"i;ers, trut would have been partic ularly benefÍcíal 

for kernels per. spíke, kernel wel-ght, maturity and lodging. 

All three populations studied contained genotypes 

superior to the control for each characterj.stic studied. 

fhe highest yielding short statured lines from these pop_ 

ulations were <strong>of</strong> intermediate <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> relative to the 

semi-dwarf lulirn64-62 and the tall control, the most commoniy 

gr own well adapted tall var.iety <strong>of</strong> the region, ',Bonar¡.zar'. 

À11 sígnificant associations with <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> 

were u.rde sirable with the exception <strong>of</strong> lodging" However, 

the correlations, despite beÍng significant, were not large, 

and it should be possì ble i;o select acceptable shorter genotypes. 

c-7o-3 was the rnost promising population studied in 

that regard, but more because <strong>of</strong> prevalence <strong>of</strong> short lines 

than because <strong>of</strong> character i¡lterre lationships " 

Reduced <strong>plant</strong> heíght had no detectable effect on the 

235

arley quality parâmeters examined.. 

236 

The greatest problens with the shorter ¡naterial studÍed 

were later headirrg and maturity, and <strong>reduced</strong> kernel size. 

Thesê problens were most severe in the higher yielding 1Ínes. 

?he i-nterre latíonshÍps among the other eharacteristics studied 

were sometimes affected indirectly by <strong>reduced</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>" 

It is suggested that a better balance among the yield 

components <strong>of</strong> the higher yielding Lines is required i-n 

order to neet the kernel size requirements <strong>of</strong> a good barley 

sample. Given the ranges <strong>of</strong> each component in the l_irnited 

sanple <strong>of</strong> short statured types studied, such a balance 

should be ultirnately attainable by <strong>plant</strong> breeders. Maturity 

characteristics <strong>of</strong> the serni-dwarfs fall into the same 

category. 

The greatest asset <strong>of</strong> the short material is its irnproved 

straw strength, which should be particularfy valuable in the 

areas most suited to barley production where high yields can 

be achieved in the absence <strong>of</strong> lodging. fhe strong, short_ 

statured genotJfpes <strong>of</strong>fer j-ncreased stability <strong>of</strong> yie1d, even 

withou-t advances in basic yie1d. 

Conconi'bant with improved straw strength <strong>of</strong> short 

statured genotypes in other cereal crops has been theÍr 

ímproved ability to responcl to higher levels <strong>of</strong> fertility. 

An experirnent was conducted over five station_years to com_ 

pare the responses <strong>of</strong> three semj,-dwarf and two standard

<strong>height</strong> genotJpes to high nitrogen leveLs. 

Nitroåen Reslgnse 

In general, at all sites and for all traits studied, 

the si"gnifieant response to applied N was rinited to the 

first increnent <strong>of</strong> N applied except where growing condítions 

were below average. This occurred at Carnan. There, signifi- 

cant response to N continued with the higher increnents. At 

afl sites response continued as applied N increased up to 

the third and fourth N level, but the responses were not 

a lways signifieant. 

Plant <strong>height</strong>, yield, spikes per unit area, kernels per 

spike, lodgingn days in post-anthesis, per.cent barrey nitro- 

gen, alpha-amylase levels, saccharifying activity and l-eveLs 

<strong>of</strong> sol"uble amino-nítrogen al1 responded positively to added 

nitrogen. 

KerneÌ and test weights tended to respond positively to 

the fírst N increnent, but then showed negative responses to 

increased levels <strong>of</strong> N. 

Days to maturity tended to increase or not to respond 

to nitrogen, while the response <strong>of</strong> days to heading depended 

on the environmental conditio.rts at each 1ocation. 

the results indicated that, for the 

competitive ín terns <strong>of</strong> yÍeLd, increased 

semi-dwarfs to be 

1evels <strong>of</strong> management 

237

inputs $rould be required, since they appeared to perform 

best under more idear growing conditions. The semi_dwarfs 

were not as able to handfe stresses åmposed by weed cornpeti_ 

tion, Ìow ferti_líty or drought. Although no fertilizer by 

genotype interactiong occwred for yield or its major compo_ 

nents, trends indicated that the short-statured naterial had 

a greater requírenent for at l_east the first increment <strong>of</strong> 

nitrogen relative to the tal1 genotypes. At the hígher 

nitrogen levels this extra response did not continue. 

fhe two semi-dwarfs whÍch performed best in this trial, 

C7o3o32 and Minn64-62, galned their yield primarily frorn 

production <strong>of</strong> more heads per unit area than the tatls. lfhey 

had fewer kernels per head and lower kernel weight at most 

sltes. Inereased N díd al"leviate some <strong>of</strong> these d.ifferentials 

when growing conditions were adequate ¡ however. kernel weight 

$ras least favourable at the hÍghest yield 1evels. 

0n the average, Minn6&_ó2 was the highest yieldång 

genotJæe. ¡iowever, its drawback was its lateness, since, 

except under good growing conditions, it was unabre to conplete 

its growing cyc1e, resur,ting ín greatry <strong>reduced</strong> kernel 

size " 

When lodging oecurred, the semi_dwarfs exhibited 

superior resistance, which continued as the fertility level 

increased. The gap between the lociging levels <strong>of</strong> the tall 

and short types increased with N level, particularly for 

mírn64-62, which showed no increase ln degree <strong>of</strong>, lodging as 

N inereased. 

238

ïn terms <strong>of</strong> the other paraîneters exanined in this 

experinent the genotypes responded. in a similar nanner 

relative to rne another. 

the senrÍ-dwarfs did lack eompetitive abitity particularly 

when grown under ad.verse conditions. This led to the con_ 

clusion that weed control would be even more åmportant when 

growíng such types thân when producing taller types. 

Changes in <strong>plant</strong> morphology can have large effects on 

the optímum <strong>plant</strong> density required to achj.eve maximum 

producti.on" To obtain info:.mation on the impact <strong>of</strong> short 

straw in this eontext, one serni_dwa¡.f and one tall genotype 

were eonpared at several- combinations <strong>of</strong> row spacings and 

seeding rates at three locations. 

Varying seeding rate and,/or row sp¿çing had littl.e or 

no practical effect on <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, kernel weight, test 

weight and protein content <strong>of</strong> either the tall or the semi- 

dwarf genotype. 

fncreased seerling rate showed: signifícantly increased. 

yield under adverse growing conclitions at Carman, a trend to 

the sane with average conditions at Sanford, and no dif_ 

ferences at Winnipeg und.er near optimal growing eonditions. 

Despite the lâck <strong>of</strong> a significant seeding rate by genotype 

interaciion, the seni-dwa!.f tended to show greater posítive 

response to seeding rate than the tall. 

239

At all sites for both genotypes the 61.O cm" row 

spaeing was inferior to the more narrow ones for yield. 

There were no significant differences between the 1J.0 

and 30.0 cn. widths at any site, although the serni_d$¡arf 

did show a trend toh,ards higher yÍelds at narrower row 

spacing under the adverse cond.itÍons at Carman. 

fn general, yiel_d improvements were brought about by 

increased nunbers <strong>of</strong> heads per unit area. fhis was accom_ 

panÍed by fewer kernels per head, and. where the compensa_ 

tion was not equal, a hígher yield resulted. 

- 

Short coleoptiles have been associated wÍth decreased 

<strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> in wheat and with a reduction in the ability 

and rate <strong>of</strong> emergence. fn the present.study a group <strong>of</strong> 

standard <strong>height</strong> and semi-dwarf barley genotl4)es, chosen to 

represent a wide range <strong>of</strong> yield levels, were checked for 

coleoptile J.ength. 

lhe results <strong>of</strong> this experinent indicated that the talf 

barleys had longer coleoptÍles than the short statured. ones. 

îhe evidence gathered suggested that the shorter coleoptiles 

<strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs may hâve been the resurt <strong>of</strong> theÍr smar.l 

kernel size. 

For the genotypes studied the short coÌeoptiles <strong>of</strong> the 

semi.-dwarfs did not affect thei.r enrergenee rate. 

240

Concern has been expressed by dryland area breeders 

about the size and extent <strong>of</strong> the root systems <strong>of</strong> the semi- 

dwarfs in wheat artd barley. Àn attempt was maale to compare 

the root systems <strong>of</strong> several semi_dwarf and ta1l genotypes. 

The semi-dwarfs studied appeared to have smaLler and 

slovrer growing root systems than the tall genotypes. This 

again rnay be related to the assoeiation <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> wlth 

kernel slze parameters. 

fhe root systems <strong>of</strong> the semi-dwarfs also stopped growing 

sooner than the tall"s. This rnay have been affected by 

restrictions ímposed by pot size. 

lhe semi-dwarf wheats do not have ability equivalent to 

the tall_ types to energe from deep <strong>plant</strong>ings. preLiminary 

research was carried out to compare these <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong> types 

in barley for this ability, 

No dífferences existed between the tall and seni_dwarf 

genotypes studied for emergence abiì-ity or rate. 

All genotypes emerged well from t:ne Z.Jl+o 5.08, and 

?,62 em, depths. All emerged equally poorly fro¡n the 10.16 

cm, depth. 

247

1" 

SUGGESÎIONS FOR FUiIIIÂE RESEARC}{ 

Selection for short statured genotype s sirould be 

carried out in large Fa populations <strong>of</strong> tall- by semi_ 

dwarf crosses sinee the numbe:" <strong>of</strong> seni_d.warf segregates 

is small". These small numbers represent a natural 

barrier to selection <strong>of</strong> a short line with the desired 

Ie¡¡el- <strong>of</strong> yield or any <strong>of</strong> íts components, The nurseries 

should also be sparsely <strong>plant</strong>ed since the shorter 

seg'egates are less competitive and- rnay be overl00ked 

under crowded e ond itions, 

Selection <strong>of</strong> a singfe shori-strav¡ed line with the 

desj-red yie1d. component balance may be possitrle, but 

the author feels a more reasonable approach might be to 

select short lines with a desired 1evel <strong>of</strong> each in- 

dividual" component and intercross these to obtain the 

desired end product. 

To improve upon the research condueied j-n the present 

study it míght be advised to use specific nunbers <strong>of</strong> 

lines (preferably isolines) fr"om each <strong>height</strong> category¡ 

tall, ínterrnediate and semi-dwarf. Ii woul-d also be 

useful to use more than one parental source for short 

242

), 

+. 

( 

6, 

7, 

Attempts should be made 

heading dates and longer 

acceptab]e nâtulîity" 

Research should be conducted 

the value <strong>of</strong> heading date as 

selectíng superior genotypes 

Further clarification is needed 

<strong>of</strong> seed size on the seedling and 

in barley" 

243 

to select genotypes with early 

post-anthesis periods, but with 

investigating and elarifying 

a seÌection tool for breeders 

in Western Canada. 

Further tests are required on a broad range <strong>of</strong> lines to 

deterrnine the irnportance <strong>of</strong> fertilj-zer and <strong>plant</strong> density 

effects on semi-dwarf and ta11 genotypes, partieula¡Ly 

in the nost prod.uctive barley growing ãreas. These 

factors should also be studied in combination with. one 

another. 

Further research should be conducted on l_arger sanples 

to determine the relationships <strong>of</strong> root parameters and 

seedling gowth with <strong>reduced</strong> pLant <strong>height</strong> Ín barl_ey. 

Concomitant with this ís the need for research into 

improved techniques to be used in the determination <strong>of</strong> 

root growth parameters j¡r cereal crops in general. 

in regard. to the effect 

root growth parameters

IIST OF RET'ERENCES 

Ada.ns, M,W. 1967. Basi6 <strong>of</strong> yield conûponent compensation in crop <strong>plant</strong> s 

Trith special "eference to the ¡,ie].d B¿arÌ, phâSéolus .triú";i;. 

Crop Sci. 7 z5}r-5,r}. 

A-ïmed, M.K. 1!J1. fnfluence <strong>of</strong> cu]-tural practices on yield and naltinp 

qualíty <strong>of</strong> barley. Diss. Abstr. :: l+l+)+B_¡: #T_SOZS. 

A1lan, n.E.,0.4, Voge]., ¡ìnd C.J. peterson, Jr. !96A. Seedllng emergence 

rate <strong>of</strong> falL-soïn ï.heat a.nd its association with ptant neiãfrt 

and coleeptíle l-ength. Agron. J. :5)+:3)+?_350. 

----------:, J.R. BurJ.eigh, ."*.". peterson J.r. Lg6f . 

Inherj.tance <strong>of</strong> coleoptíle length and its associatioo rnrith 

length in fou ninter r¿heat crosses, Crop Sci._ 1:3ZB_33A. "rl_ 

A]-lard, R.iI. 1960. plinciples <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> Breed.Íng. John l[iley and Sons, Inc. 

Anvar, A.R., and A.R. Chowdhry ? 1969. Heritability and inhe"itance <strong>of</strong> pl_ant 

heÍght, heading date and grain yield in iour sp"Íng a¡heat crosses. 

crop Sci. 9r760-.f6l. 

Atkins n R.8., c. Stanford, and L. Ðunenil. :.)5D. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> nitrogen and. 

phosphorous fertilizer on yiel_d and nalting quality <strong>of</strong> lãrley. J. 

<strong>of</strong> Agric. and Fd. Chen. 3:609_615, 

Austenson, H.M., arid E.N. Larter. 1969. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> direction <strong>of</strong> seeding on 

yields <strong>of</strong> barley and oats. Ca¡. J. <strong>plant</strong> Sci. þ: )+f t_l+eO. 

Baher, R.J.' K.fi. Tippres, anal A,B. c"m¡beIl. 19?1. Heritabir-ities <strong>of</strong> antt 

correlations a^nong quality traits in tüheat. Can. J, <strong>plant</strong> Sci. 5I: 

lil+l-h)+8. 

3al-clvin, J.H. 1963. Cl_oser drilling <strong>of</strong> cereals. Agric., lond. ?0:9:l+11+J+1?. 

Sarker, r,.N. l-961+. fieight and other <strong>plant</strong> character inreritance in barley 

crosses nade for shorter straved tlæes. Diss. Abstr. 2l+:0.#6\_ 

3909 | 3i,9jr-3906 . 

Sarriga, B.P. 197)+. Analysis <strong>of</strong> cause and effect for yield and yield 

conponents ín sprLng vheat. Agro. Sun. 2:Iz!_5 (?lant Breeding 

Abstr. þ:L:2!!l+). 

Sauer' A. r-970. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> fertilizer N rate on yield <strong>of</strong> six spring vheats. 

N. Dakota trh. Res. 272\:3-9. 

244

Beech' D.F" and M.J.T, Norman. 196g. A preliminary assessment <strong>of</strong> the 

adaptation <strong>of</strong> semi-dhrarf wheat varÍeties to the Ord River V"ff.y. 

AusË. J. flxp. Agrie. Anin. Husb. 8:349_351. 

Bendelo!¡, V,l:4,. L977, Method.s for the selection <strong>of</strong> ltralting quality ín 

Canadian barley breeding. J, An. Soc. <strong>of</strong> Brew."Chem. in pr""". 

Beutler, L.K., and irl.H. Foore. 1963. rnfruence <strong>of</strong> d.ate <strong>of</strong> seeding and. 

nitrogen rate on rnrínter hrheat varÍeties in eastern O..gãr,. -1g.orr. 

J. 55: l+-6. 

Bhatt, G.M. 1972. InheriËance <strong>of</strong> heading dare, planr heighr, and kernel 

weighr in trÀ,o spring ¡¿hea! crosses. Ciop s.i. lZ,í:SS_SS.---- 

Bockstaele, L., and K. Maddens. 1966. Seed rate for spring barley, Meiled. 

45 Onderz-en Voorl Cent. NyV Teelt., Rumbeke, pp. g. (Field Crop 

Absrr. 20:115. ) 

Borojevic' s. 1968. characreristics <strong>of</strong> some new dr¿arf and semi-dwarf wheat 

1ines. Euphyrica (Suppl. 1) :143_151. 

Borthakur, D.N., and J.M. poehlman. Ig70. HeritabílÍry and genetic ad.vance 

for kernel lreighr in barley. Crop Sci. lO:+iZ_+Sll, 

Boyd' tr{.J.R., A.G. Gordon and L.J. Lacroix. 1971. seed size, geïminaríon 

resistance and seedling vigor in barley. Can, J. plãnt Sci. 

5L:93-99 . 

Bray' D.trrl. 1963. Herirabilíties and. assocíations bet!¡een some agronomic 

characters in a trrTo and. six_ro¡¿ barley cross. Diss. AbsËr. 

24:I778. 

Briggle, L.!J. ' and o.A. vogel. 196g. Breedíng shorL sratuïe, dÍsease 

resisËanr whear Ín rhe Unired Stares. EuphyrÍca (óupplenent No. 1): 

107-130. 

BrÍggs, K,G, 7975, <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> seedíng rate and. row spacing on agronomíc 

characteristícs <strong>of</strong> GLenLea, picic 62, anð, Neepawã wheais. Can. J. 

<strong>plant</strong> Sci. 55 t363-367 . 

L974. Cornbining abíliry for kernel plumpness in a diallel cross 

<strong>of</strong> fÍve Canadian barley cultivars. Can. J,-<strong>plant</strong> Sci. S+:ig_54, 

Brown' A.R.' rl.D. Morrís, and D.D. Morey. 1961. Response <strong>of</strong> seven oat 

varíeties to dífferenct levels <strong>of</strong> fertí1iz;tion. Agron. J. 

53 2366-369 . 

Burleigh, J.R,, R.E. A1lan, and O.A, Voge1. 1964. Varieral dífferences in 

seedling emergence <strong>of</strong> winrer wheats as influenced by ;.;;;;;;".. 

and depth <strong>of</strong> planring. Agron. J. 56:195_L98. 

245

morphology and stand geomeËry in relation Éo 

ts <strong>of</strong> Crop Yield, Amer. Soc. <strong>of</strong> 

f968. Dwarf rice - a gíant in tropieal Asia. In Science for 

Better Living, U. S.D.A. yearbook, U.S. covrr prinring Officã, pp. 

252-25s . 

Chowdhry, 4.R., and R.E. Allan, 1963. Inherirance <strong>of</strong> coleoptile lengrh and 

seedling <strong>height</strong> and rheir relarion to planr <strong>height</strong> <strong>of</strong> four rnrínteï 

rrheaË crosses. Crop Sci. 3:53_5g. 

CIMMYT REVIEI,T. L976. pp. 64-67. 

CLark, R.V. 1975. Influence <strong>of</strong> rorn¡ r,¡iclth and maneb fungicide treatment on 

disease developement and grain yielcl <strong>of</strong> "...ã1". Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> 

Sci, 56:23I-236. 

Clernent, E.L. L972. Evaluation <strong>of</strong> hTheat hybríds and cultívars using a 

systematÍc Þpaeing design. Diss. Abstr. 33:5:1g92. 

clements, R.J.' R.J. cross, and p. sanclers. 1974. Effect <strong>of</strong> sor^ri-ng rate on 

groh'th and yield <strong>of</strong> standard and semÍ-dhrarf r¿heat cultivãrs. Neh, 

ZeaLand. J. <strong>of</strong> Expr. Agxíc, 2:2:L39_L44. 

Cochran, trrl.G., and G.M. Cox. 1957. ExperÍmental Design, 2nd edir., publ. 

John l,Jiley and Sons, Inc., 611 pp. 

ComsLock. R.E., and R. H. Mol1. 1963. Genotype-environment interactions. In 

llglþgllgl]qener ic s and <strong>plant</strong> Breedllå. Ed. Hanson, trrr.D. ancl 

H.Faffi 

Crook, tr¡.J., and J.M. poehlman. 1971. Ilybrid perforurance among six_ror¡ed 

hTinÈer barleys (iI. vulgare L.) varying in kernel sizJ. Crop ScÍ. 

11 : 818-821. 

Csefalvai, L. 1968. Investigations on the opt imum gror,¡íng area <strong>of</strong> rÁrheat at 

normal and close row spacíng. Agrartud. Egyet. Tud, ErË. lg:33_36. 

(Fie1d Crop Absrr. 1970. 23t3tIB46), 

cummings, R.hr., and R.iI. Gleason. 1971. The role <strong>of</strong> fertílÍzer in agrícultura1 

developemen!. In Fertilízer Technology and Usage, 2ntl edii., ecl. 

R.A. 01sen, r.J. Arny, ¡..1. ttànw"v.-ãn¿ vlJ. rlÍnàr. publ. sáit sci. 

Soc. <strong>of</strong> Amer., , Inc, 

Davis. lt.H., c.K. Middleton, and. T.T. Ilebert 1961. Inherirance <strong>of</strong> protein, 

texrure and yield in hTheat. Crop Sci. LrZ35_239. 

1959. Quantitative inheïicance stud.ies on protein, texturè and yield 

Ín segregatÍng popurations <strong>of</strong> s<strong>of</strong>t r^rinter wheat. Diss. Abstr. 20. 

L.C. Card Míe. 59-4684 2L545-!546 . 

246

Day, A.D, and R.K. Thonpson, 1970. Dares and rares <strong>of</strong> seeding fall_<strong>plant</strong>ed 

spring barley. Agron. J. 62:729_73I. 

Demirlícaknak, 4., M.L. Kaufmann, and I.p.U. Johnson. 1963, The influence 

<strong>of</strong> seed size and seedíng rate on yíe1d and yield courponents <strong>of</strong> 

barley. Can. J. <strong>of</strong> planr Science 43:330_337. 

Den Hartog, G'T. and J.!ü. Lambert. 1953. The relaLionships betraTeên certain 

agronomic and malting qualíty characters <strong>of</strong> bariey. Agron. J. 

452208-2L2. 

Diehl ' A'L. and J.R. I,Ielsh. 1g72' yield components <strong>of</strong> semi-dwarf and tarl 

sprÍng r,rheat. I{hr. Info. Servíce. 352L4_f7. 

Dubetz, S. and J.B. Bole. 1973. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> moisrure stress at 

and <strong>of</strong> N fe]rtj.]-ízer on three spring wheat culti-vars. 

Sci.53:1-5. 

!972. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> nitrogen on yíeld and protein content <strong>of</strong> Manitou 

and PitÍc wheats grown under irrigatíon. Can. J. <strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> Sci. 

52t887-890. 

Duwayrí, Yf'A' L974. rnherÍtance, variation and interïerat íonships <strong>of</strong> graín 

and s Era¡'r characteristics <strong>of</strong> six-rowed barley crosses. Diss: ebstr. 

3 4, 47 86-8 : ll7 3 -32, 1L4 . 

Dyck' P'L' and R.J. Baker. r-975. variation and covariatíon <strong>of</strong> agronomic and 

qualiËy traits ín tr,lo spring hTheat popuLations. crop i.l. ii,fAf_f6S. 

Easton, H.S. and R.J. Clements. Lg73, The interacfion <strong>of</strong> ¡¿heat genotypes wíth 

a specifÍc factor <strong>of</strong> rhe environment. J. Agric. sci. õart."à0243_52. 

El-Hêttab, 4.S., M.S. Kamel, and A.A. Abdel_GaLIL. Lg70. The effect <strong>of</strong> rhe 

rate <strong>of</strong> seeding and the number <strong>of</strong> irrigations on r,rTheat yíe1d and its 

components. (1) The effect <strong>of</strong> raËe <strong>of</strong> seeclíng on r^lheat yiefã àna its 

components. 8u11. <strong>of</strong> the Fac. <strong>of</strong> Agric., univ. <strong>of</strong> cairã, Lg t223_23g, 

(Field Crop Abst]r. 26;10?4527). 

Finlay, R.C., E. Reinbergs, and T.B. Daynard. 1971. yield 

barley to rohT-spacing and seedÍng rate. Can. J. 

533. 

Físcher, R.4., I. Aguilar M., O. Maurer, and S. Rivas A. 

row spacÍng effects on irri-gated short Ì/heats 

Agríc. Sc i. Canb. 87:!31-147. 

Fiuzal, Y. and R.E. AËkins. 1953. Genetic and environmental variability in 

segregaríng barley populatÍons. Agron. J. 45z4Lh_420. 

Folkins, L'P' and M.L. Kaufmann ' L974. yield and morphological srudies ü,ith 

oats for forage and grain production. can. J. piant sci. 54?6L7-62o. 

247 

early heading 

Can J. Plant 

response <strong>of</strong> spring 

Plant Sci. 57t527- 

1976. Density and 

at lol1r latitude. J.

Fonseca, S. and F.T,. patterson. 196g. yield componenÊ heritabilities and 

interrelationships in r^rinter lrheat. Crop Sci. gt6I4_6L7, 

Foth, H.D., L.S. Robertson, and H.M. Bror,m. 1964. Ef f ect <strong>of</strong> roraT_spacÍng 

on oat performance. Agron. J. 56170_73. 

Frey' r'J' 1962' Effecriveness <strong>of</strong> visual selection upon yiel. in oaÊ crosses. 

Crop. Scí. Z?I02_LO5. 

Frey, K.J. 1959. yíe1d components in oars. 

Agron. J.51:605_608. 

248 

II. The effecrs <strong>of</strong> N ferrilizaËion. 

-F-----_,, and T. Horner. 1955. Comparison <strong>of</strong> actual and predicted gains Ín 

barley selection experinents. Agron. J. 47:1g6_1gg, 

response <strong>of</strong> maltíng barley varieties to d.ifference fertilízer analyses. 

Agron, J.44:179_1_82. 

Furrer, 0.J. 1964. InfLu:n:1 <strong>of</strong> drill row spacíng, amount <strong>of</strong> seed and hoeing 

on gror,rTth and yield <strong>of</strong> r,7i.nter wheai var. probus. Schwein. landw. 

Forsch. 4:I:92_!e4. (Fíeld Crop AbsËr. 18:4:1690). 

and trrt. Stauffer. 1970. Influence <strong>of</strong> dri11 rolnr spacings and seed 

rare on groü7rh and^yie1d <strong>of</strong> spríng wheat. SchweízeiÍsch; La;drlrirrschafr_ 

liche Forschuns 923/4:36L_379: (Field crop Abstr. -;i;i¡,-.. 

Gardener, C.J. anil A.J. RahJen. 1975. The differenrial response <strong>of</strong> barley 

genotypes to N application in a Mediterranean _ type climate. AusL. 

J. <strong>of</strong> Agric. Res. 2622:2L9_230. 

Gardner' B'R' and E.B. Jackson. 1g76. Fertir-Ízation, nutríent conposíÈion and 

yield relarionships in irrigared spring wheat. ag.orr. .f. ãã:f:ZS_ZA. 

GlukhovÈsev, v.v. rg7r. A study <strong>of</strong> the associaÈion betrareen ínclividual 

characters in barley l,rith a viehT to improving the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> 

selecrion. Referarivnij e Zhurnal 10:55:209. (planr Breed. Abstr. 44: 

1 :84) . 

Grafíus' J'E' and L'B' okoli. 1g74. DirnensÍona1 balance arnong yield components 

and rnaximum yiel

Guitard, 4,4., J.A. Neûrnan, and p.B. Hoyt. 1961. The influence <strong>of</strong> seeding 

rate on the yield and yield components <strong>of</strong> wheat, oats and. barley. 

Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Sci. 4L:75I-75g. 

Harnblin, J, and C.M. DonaLd, 1974. The relatíonships between planr form, 

competitive abÍlity and grain yield in a barley cross. Euphytica. 

23:.535-542. 

Harringron' J.B. 1941. The effect <strong>of</strong> having ror¿s different dístances aparr 

in rod row plors <strong>of</strong> whear, oats and barley. Sci. AgrÍc. 2L;5gg_606. 

Harvey, B,L. L977. personal coÍìDunication. 

Hayter' A.M. and T.J. Riggs. 1973. Envíronmental and varietal differences in 

diastatic power and four associated characteristics <strong>of</strong> spring barley. 

J. Agric. Sci., Camb, g0:297-302. 

Hegde, 8.R., D.J. l"Iaj or, D.B. Iarilson, ancl K.K, Krogman. 1976. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> rowspacing 

and population density on grain sorghum production ín southern 

Alberra. Can. J. pfant Sci. 56,3I_37. 

Hsi' c.H. and J.trrI. Lanbert. 1954. rnter and intra-annual relationshíps <strong>of</strong> some 

agronomíc and malting quaLity characters <strong>of</strong> barley. Agron. J. 46: 

470-474. 

Hsu, P. and P.D. tr'Ia1ton. 1970. The inheritance <strong>of</strong> norphological and agronomic 

characters in spring wheat. Euphyrica !9:54_60. 

Holliday, R. 1963. The effect <strong>of</strong> row i¿íd.th on the yield <strong>of</strong> cereals. Fíeld crop 

Abstr. 16:71-81. 

Holliday' R. 1960. planr popur-arion and crop yíe1d: part r. Field crop Absrr. 

13 ! 159-253 . 

Iiealy' M. and M. tr{estmacott. 1956. Missing values in expeïiments analysed. on 

auËomaric conpurers. Applied Starísrics 5:203_206. 

Ishizurka, Y. 1,969. Engineering for higher yields. In physiological Aspecrs 

<strong>of</strong> Crop yield. Amer. Soe. <strong>of</strong> Agron., pp. 15_2S.: 

Jain, R.P. and S. Chandra. 196g. Studies on variabílÍty <strong>of</strong> sone impoïÈanr 

quanritarive characters in barley, ùtadras Agric. J. 55:5ã1_534. 

(planr Breed. Abstr. 40:5049) . 

Jogi' B.s. 1956. The heritability <strong>of</strong> agronomic and dÍsease reacLíon characreristics 

in ri,ro barley crosses. Agron. J. 4g.293_296. 

Johnson, V.4., J.I{. Sch¡nidt and I¡,I. Mekasha. 1966. Comparison <strong>of</strong> yield 

components and agrononi-c characteristics <strong>of</strong> four r,rinter r^7heat 

varieries differing in planr <strong>height</strong>. Agron J. 5gz43g_44l. 

249

250 

K.J. Biever, A. Haunold, an. J.!ü. Schridt. 1966, Inheritance 

<strong>of</strong> <strong>plant</strong> heighÈ, yield <strong>of</strong> grain, and other <strong>plant</strong> and seed characrer_ 

ístics in a cross <strong>of</strong> hard red Ìrínter \^rheat, T. aestivum. Crop Sci. 

6:336-338. 

Johnsbon, L.P.V. and R. Aksel. 1964. The inherÍtance <strong>of</strong> malflng quality and 

agronomlc charâcters in a diallel cross <strong>of</strong> barley. õ"". ¡. ä.o. 

cyr.6:178_200. 

Jones, I.T. and J.D. Iiayes. 1969. The effect <strong>of</strong> seed rate and growing season 

on four oat cultivars. II. Culm morphology and panÍc1ã .orriå"r"tiorr, 

J. Agrtc. Sci., Canb. 70:405_510. 

Joppa, L'R. and D.E. tr'Iarsh' L974. Quarity charact erisitics <strong>of</strong> talr. and semi.dwarf 

near - ísogenic lÍnes <strong>of</strong> durun wheat, Crop Sci. ä:. +iò_422. 

Kaufmann, M.L., v.M. Bendelow, and R.J. Baker. 1969. rnt eïrelat Íonships arnong 

agronomic and-quality ttaits in a spring wheat cross. Can. j. <strong>plant</strong> 

Scí. 49:581-586. 

1968. Coleoptile length and emergence ín varieties <strong>of</strong> barley, 

oats and r,rheat. Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> ScÍ. 4g?357_36I. 

Kawal. T. 1963. Mutations ín rrce ind.uced by ra¿ríation and ÈheÍr signÍficance 

in rice breeding I. Mutations by ra¿lÍophosphorous. 8u11. Nat. Inst. 

Agric. scí. (Jap.) D-l:1-76. (KànÍshi, r. Lg76. proc. Third. rnrl. 

Bar1ey cen. Symp,, Garching, pp. 1g1_1S9) 

Kfesselbach, T.4., O.S. llebster ancl K.S. QuÍsenberry. lg4}. Varietíes <strong>of</strong> 

oats, barley and sprÍng wheat in Nebraska. Neb. Agr. n"p. -Si"tio" 

Bul1 328. (Fiuzar, y. and R.E. Arkíns, Agron. J. lS, +ti_iZOl . 

Kiîby' E.J.M. L970. EvapotranspíratÍon frorn barley grown â.t trlffeïent <strong>plant</strong> 

densities. J. Agrlc. Sci., Camb. 75:445_450. 

1968. The response <strong>of</strong> some barley varletles to irrÍgation and 

N ferÈ1lizer. J. Agrtc. Sci., Canb. ll.r47_52, 

7967. The effect <strong>of</strong> planË density upon growth and yÍe1d <strong>of</strong> 

barley. J. Agric. Sci., Carrb. 6ge,3i.7_324. 

Klatt, A. 1973. Breeding for yÍeld potential, stability and âdaptation. proc. 

lfheat, Triticale and Bar1ey seminar, CIM¡4YT, pp. fO+_fOi¡. 

KnoÈt' D'R' 1974. <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> N fertilization on the yreld and protein content 

<strong>of</strong> five aprlng r^7heats. Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Sct. 54:1_7. 

Koleva, P. 1963. DetermÍnlng the effect <strong>of</strong> cross-alrlll and narrow rohT sor,ring 

<strong>of</strong> dururn r.yhear. - 

Selskosroy. 

" 

Nauba. 2/8:No. rcrlUri_lä0.-

Konishi, T. L976. The nature and characteristics <strong>of</strong> EMS induced d.warf 

murants in barley, In Barley Ge4etíc_S_III, proc. <strong>of</strong> the ihir¿ 

Inrernarional uarley ceiãEiãã1ffiããiñlãárchtng, pp. r8i_ial. 

Kronstad, W.E. L964. Combining abílity and gene action estimates and 

assocíation 

the 

<strong>of</strong> the..conponents 

. <strong>of</strong> yield in r.7inËeï r,üheat 

Dtss. Absrr. 24:O.1164_2365:3065_3ô66. 

"ro"""". 

Larter' E'N' and J. hrhitehouse. - 1g5g, A sÈudy <strong>of</strong> yield and protein response 

<strong>of</strong> nalting baïley varreties to drfferent iert*izerå. can. i. 

Planr Sci. 38 3430_439, 

Lebsock, K.L. and A. Arnaya. 1969, VarÍation and. covarÍation <strong>of</strong> agronorníc 

traits in durum wheat. Cïop Sci. 9:372_375. 

ï,eClerg, 8.L., lÎ.J. Leonard., and A.G. C1ark, 1962. Field ?lot Technique, 

2nd edÍt, Burgess publlshing Co., 373 pp. 

ï.uebs, R.E. and A.E. Laag_. 1967. Nítïogen effect on leaf area, yielcl ancl 

N uptake <strong>of</strong> barley under rnoisture stress. Agron. J. 'SXüS_ZZZ. 

Lupton' F'G'H" R.H. or.fver' F.B. El1rs, B.T. Barnes, K.R. House, p.J. rÎellbank, 

and P.J. Taylor, 1974. Root and shooÈ gror^,th <strong>of</strong> semi_drr¡arf and 

raller r,,rinrer r,rhears. Ann. <strong>of</strong> Appl. Bfology ll:LZS_|i4. 

Malik' D's' J'969. Effect <strong>of</strong> various factors on yielcl and y1e1d components 

in r¡heaÈ and soybeans. Dfss. Abstr. 30:No. I:27_âg¡. 

l'fanzj uk, v'T' and ?.N. Barsukov. Lg74. Genetlc studles <strong>of</strong> some quantitative 

characters <strong>of</strong> barley. Barley cênetícs Newsletter gz+e_i|. -- 

Maya De Leon, J.L, 1973. C_onbinlng abillty and assocíations <strong>of</strong> agronomic 

traíts Ínvolving three sources <strong>of</strong> dr¿arfism in r.r7heat. oiã". Àistr, 

B 35zll7 5-It07:3 t38B-313 98. 

McBeath, D.K., D.A. Dew, and H.A. Freisen. 1970. CompetitÍon betr,rreen barley 

and wild oaÈs as affected by N, Barban anil tine <strong>of</strong> seeding. òan. ;, 

PlanÈ Scí.50:54-55. 

McFadden, A'D. rnfluence <strong>of</strong> see.ing.datês, seedÍng rates, and fertÍrizera 

on tr^ro culÈlvars <strong>of</strong> barley. Can. ¡, <strong>plant</strong> ScÍ. -50:693_699. 

McNeal, F.H., E.P. SnÍÈh, ancl M.A. Berg. Ig74, <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, grain yleld 

and yield componeût relationships in sprlng r^rheãt. - Ãgron.".f. 66: 

57 5-578 . 

<strong>of</strong> crosses betr^7een standard 

25L 

and D,E. Baldrldge. L973. performance 

<strong>height</strong> and seml-dwarf rnrheats. Can. J.

McNeaL ' F.iI., M'4. Beïg, v.R. sterarart, and D,E. BardrÍdge. 1972. Ag ronornic 

response <strong>of</strong> three heighÈ cLasses <strong>of</strong> spring whãat, T, aestiirun L., 

comparêd at dífferent yield leve1s. Agron. ;. 64t%246tr:- 

---, P.I. Brornm, and C.F. Mcculre. Lg7I. productÍvity 

ând qualíry response <strong>of</strong> fiy:_"?I1"g wheat genorypes to nirrogen 

fert.íIízer. Agron. J. 63:9Og-Þ10. 

and M.c. Klages. 1960. Evaluatíon <strong>of</strong> semi_dr,¡arf 

selectlons frorn a spríng rn¡heat breeding program. Agron. J. 52: 

7 70-7 t2. 

1960. yield components Ín â Lenhí X Thatcher r¡heat crosg. 

Agron. J. 52:348-349, 

and D.J. Davis. L954, Effect <strong>of</strong> N fêrÈflization <strong>of</strong> yield, 

culm number ând proteín content <strong>of</strong> certaÍn sprlng rarheat vårieties, 

Agron. J.46:375-378. 

Metcalfe, D.R., S.B. Helgason, ancl F.!J. Hougen. Lg67. A 

naltÍng quality in barley varietiãs <strong>of</strong> different 

ground, Can. J. cen. Cyr. 92554_564. 

Míddleton, c.K., T.T. Heberr, and C.F. Murphy. Lg64. 

and row r,ùidth <strong>of</strong> yÍe1d and on components <strong>of</strong> 

Agron. J.56:307-308. 

genetic study <strong>of</strong> 

ancestral back- 

252 

Effect <strong>of</strong> seedíng rate 

yield in Ìrinter barley. 

Nasr, A.G.' H.L. shan¿ls, and R.A. Forsberg. rg73. correlations betrreen 

kerneJ- plunpness, lodging and oiher agronomic eharacterisÈfcs in 

sfx-ror¡ed barley crosses. Crop Sci. lZ:ggg_+OZ. 

____________. L972. Variâtion in kernel plumpness, 

lodgíng, and other characterístics Ín s lx_ro¡rzed barley "io""!". Crop 

ScÍ. I2: 159- 16 2, 

L971. Kernel plumpness, lodging and other characterÍstics Ín 

several generations <strong>of</strong> some six ror,¡ barley crosses. Otss. Abstr. 

3 z 57 6t-BzllTO-24,7 64. 

Nass, H'c' L973. DeteïmÍnãtion <strong>of</strong> characters for yield selection in spring 

wheat. Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Sci. 53:755_762. 

otBrÍen, L. f975. Unpubl. M.Sc. Thesís, Ilniversity <strong>of</strong> Melbourne. TiÈ1e: 

Some Aspects <strong>of</strong> RooÈ Gror¡th in hlheat. tB7 p¡. 

OI,7en ' ?.C. 1968. The response to rornr spacing <strong>of</strong> two tropícal ríce varíeties 

<strong>of</strong> contrasting <strong>plant</strong> type. Aust. J. Uxp. AgrÍc. Anlm. HUsb. g: 

582-586. 

PanÍgrahi, fü.R. L962. Estimates <strong>of</strong> herltabillty, dominance, and genetic advance 

in a r,Theat hybrÍd hrith a semi-dr,rrarf parenÈ. Diss. Abstr. 22z0.116!_ 

6064 2 2553 -

Pawlisch, P.E., and H.L. shandp. Lg6z, Breeding behaviour for bushel 

weight and agronomic characters in eârly generatÍons <strong>of</strong> two oat 

croases. Crop Sci. 2rL3l_237. 

Pelton, I47.L' 1969. rnfluence <strong>of</strong> 10w seeding rates on wheat yield ln southrnrest 

Saskatcher¿an. Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Scí. 49..607_614. 

Pendleton, J.Il., A.L. Lang, ancl G.II. Dungan. 1953. Response <strong>of</strong> spríng 

barley varietÍes to díffeïent iertillzer treatments and seasonal 

gror{ring condilions. Agron. J. 4S.S2g_532. 

Pepe, J.F., and R.E. Ileiner. Ig75. <strong>plant</strong> <strong>height</strong>, protein percentage and. 

yÍeld relationships in spríng r.r7heår. crop Sct. tSrlgZ_igi. -- 

Pesek, J. and R.J. Baker. Ig7l. ComparÍson <strong>of</strong> predicted and observed 

responaes to selection for yield in lrheat. Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Sci. 

51:3:187-192. 

Petr, F.C.- and K.J. Frey. fg66. Genotypic correlations, donínance and 

heritability <strong>of</strong> quantÍtatÍv" áh"r""t"r" in oatå. Crop Scí. 

6t259-262. 

7959. cenotypÍc correlat lons, 

<strong>of</strong> quantitative characters <strong>of</strong> oats. 

vlíc. 59-242L: p. 21. 

domfnance and heritabilíÈy 

Ðlss. Abstr. 202. C, Caxd 

Porter, K.8., I.M. Atkins, E.C. Gillmore, K.A. Lahr, ancl p. Scottirn 

1964, EvaluatÍon <strong>of</strong> short statúre winter Ìrheats for produàtion 

under Te:

Rohde, C.R. 1963. Effect <strong>of</strong> nitrogen feïtíllzation on yleld, componenÈs 

<strong>of</strong> yield and orher agrono;Íc characteïi"srics oi r¡iníer #;;.' 

Agron. J. 55:455_458. 

Rosíelle, A.A. I976. Inheïi.tånce, heritabílity and corïelation stud.ies on 

harvesÈ lndex and related trafts in oáts. Diss. Abstr. 36:200I_8, 

ll7 5,352 . 

Rutger' J.N., c.w. schaller, A.D. Dickson, and J.c. wí11ia¡ns. Lg67, variation 

and covariation fn âgronomlc aná rnalting quality characters tn 

barley. II. Interrelatíonships <strong>of</strong> Characteïs. Crop Sci. 7.325_326. 

L967 . VariaËion and covariation 

ín. agronémlc and rnalting qualÍty charâcters ir b".t.y. I. fferiiatiffty 

estimates. Crop Sc i. 7.231-234. 

Ruzícka, F. L972, Corrê1atíori6 betr4Teen yield cornponents in spïing barley. 

cerlerÍka a Slechtenl 8:2:81_86. (<strong>plant</strong> Breectlng Abeir. þri; tttl.l . 

sannpson' Ð'R. LgTr- AardÍtfve and non-acldÍtive genetlc varíances and genotypic 

correlatíons for yÍeld and other traits in oats, Can. J. Ceã. Cyt. 

13:4:864-87 2. 

Scha11er, C.lI. and C.I. Chin. 1969. Registration <strong>of</strong> CM67 barley. Crop Scf. 

9t521. 

Schríeber, H.A. and C.O. Stånberry. Lg6S. Barley ptoduction as influenced. 

by tirníng <strong>of</strong> soj.1 moisture antl tinLng oi ,rítrog.o .ppif..ai""". Agron. 

J.57t44z-443. 

sethi, G.s.' H'8. singh' and K.D. sharna. rg7z. varíabiliry and correlations 

on hulLed barley. Indian J. <strong>of</strong> Agric. Sci. +Z:tzZi_iO. 

shahs, A'M'S. 1967. correlatÍons <strong>of</strong> heíght hrtth yíeld, Íts components and 

protein content ln r,¡heat. N, pakistan J. Agrlc. nes. i:4:flS. 

(Fle1d Crop Abê:'r. 22.1:74). 

Sharma, D. f97O. CorrêlaÈ íon _ studies ín barley. Madras AgïÍc. J, 57:293_296. 

(Planr Breed, Abstr. 41:2902) , 

sharma, K'C'' R.D. Mlspa' and. v.p. singh. Lg70. Responses <strong>of</strong> dwarf antr ÈaII 

lrheâts Èo nirrogen and <strong>plant</strong> populatíon. Ind. J. <strong>of</strong> Agron. i5:Z: 

131-135. (r'íeld Crop Absrr. -2i2:1312). -o----' :: 

Siemens, L.B. 1963. The effect <strong>of</strong> varylng ror,r7 apacing on Èhe agronorníc and 

qualÍty characteristics <strong>of</strong> cereais and ilax.- Can. J, pi""t-S"i. 

43 : 119- 130. 

, \1,

Sisler, IÎ.IÎ, and p.J. Olsen. 1951. A sÈudy <strong>of</strong> methods <strong>of</strong> influencing 

lodging in barley and the effect àf lodging lrpon yieta anã " 

cerraín quality characreristics . Sci. Agric. 3It777_i.g6. 

Slack, A.V. I97O. Defen9=_4gg¿n9!_Ig*irr=, publ. by Doubleilay and Co., 

Inc . 

Stanberry, C.O. and M. Lowrey. 1965. Barley production under various 

nitrogen and moísture levels. Agron, J. 5723L_34. 

steel' R.c.D. and J.H. Torríe. 1960. principres and procedures <strong>of</strong> 

StatÍstics, publ. Mccrar,r-Hil1m 

Stickler, F.C. and M.A. younis. 1966, <strong>plant</strong> heíghË as a facror affecting 

responses <strong>of</strong> sorghum to row widÈh and sËand density. Agron. J. 

58t37L-373. 

and A.l,l. pau1i. J.964. Response <strong>of</strong> four vTinter wheat 

varíetj-es to nitrogen fertilization. Agron. J. 56:470_412. 

Stobbe, E.H. personal communicatÍon. 1_975. 

SÈoskopf, N.C. L967. yíe1d performance <strong>of</strong> upright leaved selections 

<strong>of</strong> winter r¿heat ín narrol,/ roÍ, spacings. Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Sci, 

47 z 597-6OI. 

and E. Reinbergs. L966. Breeding for yieLd ín spïing 

cereals, Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Scí. 46:513_519. 

subbiah, 8.v., J.c. Katyal, R.L. Narasinham, and c. Dakshinamini. Lg6g. 

Preliminary investigations on root d.istribution <strong>of</strong> high yielding 

r^rheat vârieties. Int. J, Appl. RadiatÍon and Isotopeã fí::AS_ 

390. (LupËon er a1. Ann. App1. Biotogy 77:129_744). 

Sunderman, D.I,J. 7964. Seedling emergence <strong>of</strong> r,Tinter !üheats and its 

associatíon with depth <strong>of</strong> sowing, col-eopËile length and <strong>plant</strong> 

<strong>height</strong>, under varíous conditions. Agron .t. 56:2á_25. 

Syme, J.R., J. Ifackenzíe, and lù.M. Srrong. Lg76. ComparÍson <strong>of</strong> four 

wheat cultivars for yield and protein response Ëo nitrogen 

ferrilizer. Ausr. J. Exp. Agríc. Aním. Itusb. ]:6z407_4i:ó. 

, L972. Features <strong>of</strong> high yielding r¡rheats gïowd at trÀ,o 

seeding rates and tr^ro nítrogen levels. Aust. j. Exp. Agric. 

Anín. Husb. I2:L65-I7O. 

. 1970. A high yielding Mexican semi_dwarf r^7heat ând the 

relationship <strong>of</strong> yield to harvest index and other varietal 

characteristics. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 10:350_353. 

255

Sytre, J.R, L969. A comparison <strong>of</strong> seoi-dhrarf and standard <strong>height</strong> r^rheat 

varieries ar.rhro-levels <strong>of</strong> rnTarer supply, Aust. J. E;p. 6;i". 

Anin. Husb, 9:528_551, 

L967. Gror¿th and yíeld <strong>of</strong> irrigated raTheat varieties at 

several rates <strong>of</strong> nitrogen fertílÍzer. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 

Anim. Husb. 7 2337_34L. 

SzÍrtes, J. L97O. Genetical and environmental variability in some 

c.haracËers determi"níng the quantity an¿l quality <strong>of</strong> the malt 

<strong>of</strong> !¿inter barley 1ines, Agrartudomanyi Kozleminyek 29:3:356_ 

362. (planr Breedíng Absrr. 42.4gB7). 

Takahashi, R. L946, Srudies on the classificarion and Èhe geographical 

distribution <strong>of</strong> the barley varíetíes. III Inheritance oi the 

coleoptile length and its significance for breeding. Jap. 

Crop Sci. Soc. proc. LB:44-47. (Kaufnann, M.I. 1963. Cåleoptile 

lengÊh and emergence in va¡íeties <strong>of</strong> barley, oats and !¡heat. 

Can. J. <strong>plant</strong> Scj., 4B:357_36L). 

Tuohey, c'L. 1973, The effecL <strong>of</strong> increased. soí1 nitrogen associated tith 

medíc ley on the performance <strong>of</strong> a standard anã semi-d¡,¡arf wheac 

culrivar. Aust. J. Exp, Agric, Anim. Husb. 13:63_66. 

vogel' 0.4., J.c. craddock, c.r. ¡fuir, E.H. Everson, and c.R. Rohde, 1956. 

Semi-dr,r7arf gror,rrth habit in raTinter ltrheat improvement for the 

pacífic Norrhwest. Agron. J. 4g:76_7g. 

tr{a1lace, 4.T,, c.K. Middleton, R.E. Comsrock and H.F. RobÍnson. :1954. 

Genotypic variances and eovarÍances <strong>of</strong> sÍx quanËÍtatíve 

characreristics in oats. Agron. J. 4624g4_4gg. 

tr{han ' B.R. L976. The emergenee <strong>of</strong> semi-dwarf and srandard rdheats and irs 

association with coleoptÍle length. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. 

Husb. 16:411-414. 

trIickens ' R. !967. Narror,T-roh¡ drilling or broadcasting cereal seed, 

Progress report,exp. Husb. F¡ns. êxp. Eort. SIns., N.A.A.S., 

8225-28. (Fietd Crop AbstÌ. 2L:2,16O). 

Lrrilley, R.i\t. and R. Holliday. Ig7L. planr populaÈion and shading studies 

ín barley. J. Agric. Sci., Canb. 7T445_452. 

and ------------., Ig7L. planÈ populaËion and shading and 

rhínning srudíes in barley. Agríc. Sài. , Carl,b, 77 t453_4"6I. 

tdoodward, R,If. L966. Responses <strong>of</strong> some semí-dwarf spríng wheats to 

nirrogen and phosphorous fertilizers. agron. .1. 5g:65_66. 

256

trIoodward, R.trI. 7956. The effect <strong>of</strong> rate and date <strong>of</strong> seeding <strong>of</strong> small 

grains on yield. Agron. J. 4g:L60_I62. 

llorld Crops. 1969, A high yíelding dwarf spring barley. tr{orld Crops. 

2L:22L . 

Yap, L.Î.C. and 8.T.. Harvey. Ig72. Inheïitance <strong>of</strong> yield components 

and morpho-phys iological rrairs ín barley. Crop Sci. tZ: 

3:283-286 . 

Young, R.A. and A. Bauer. Lg7L. Effect <strong>of</strong> row spacÍng, fertíLízeî raLe, 

fertj-lizer placement and seeding raÈe on pu.iorrarr"" <strong>of</strong> "priig 

r,rhea t and barley. Res. Reporr Àgric. Expt. Staríon, U.¡.ð.U,1 

No. 35. (Field Crop Absrr. 26:4:1510. 

J.L. Ozburn, A. Bauer, and E.H. Vasey. Lg67, yiel

APPENDIX

Appetrdr*' cenotvprc ìlêans fot jtsrono|nt.c and qu¡rtrv pårâi'eror6, populåtrons c-70-1, c-70-2, end c_70_3, Expertneir r, 

ßá¡1ey anylssÊ 

Nltroean (untrs) 

l,odslrre r; rá rái.- 

(l-7 ) lleád RtDe 

^nrùesld 

t{etght 

(lb.Àu.) 

KèÌÍels/ t(e¡nêt 

Sptkê Welghr (g) 

Ce¡otyÞe Plant 

No. Herghr (cn) 

/100p araln) 

/\ctivlÈy 

(unltE) 

3.33 54.8 83.ó 28.8 

3,67 55.8 85.1 29.6 

2.90 55.2 84.9 29.9 

3.67 55.7 85.5 29.8 

4.57 53.0 83,4 30.4 

1.43 60.0 86.3 26.(1 

3.77 55.2 84,I 29.r 

1.77 s7.2 A5.6 28,4 

3.43 54,1 83.0 29.6 

r.3J 53.7 S3,l 29.4 

4.33 53.5 84.4 2s,4 

2.90 5.',5 83. S 29,2 

2.57 s4.l 83,3 29.3 

,2.s7 56.0 83.5 30,! 

4.90 51.7 8t',6 3l.O 

2.90 55.0 83.5 2A.5 

3.10 57.1 86.6 30,1 

1.33 58.0 BJ.4 27.4 

l.6t 55,0 83,5 28.8 

2.5' 56.0 83.7 28.0 

4.10 54,6 84.9 30.rí 

3,l0 54.8 83.8 29.3 

2.61 56.8 85.3 zg.t 

2.57 55.4 83.8 28.4 

2.90 54.9 83.3 28.6 

3.23 54.9 83.0 28.1 

r.33 55.9 03.2 21 .3 

1.33 53.1 81,6 2A.5 

86.7 54,3 

79.3 51.9 

88.2 52.2 

75.1 5t,6 

88.6 52.1 

80.9 51,3 

81.0 5 t. J 

86.2 31.2 

84.2 53.7 

84.8 53. r 

87.t 52.4 

94.7 53.5 

93.6 52.9 

86.0 53.0 

88.5 52.0 

84.1 32.7 

8l.l 51.0 

8ó.3 52-7 

88.3 5r.3 

89.6 52,8 

81.3 53.5 

83.7 52,1 

80.8 52.9 

81.7 52,2 

85.S 5¿.0 

s,.9 6,70 

60,5 6,81 

56,8 7 -12 

58.6 6.68 

56.0 7,27 

55,0 6,66 

6t.6 6,s7 

53.0 6,62 

55,6 7.39 

58.0 6.96 

q97.t 

78.9 495.9 

74.5 523.0 

73.9 509.6 

19.9 49t.5 

59.4 39¿.8 

73.8 564,6 

59.9 477,7 

78,5 504.5 

75.0 581,4 

lg.t 525.7 

78.0 449,3 

77.9 505,6 

77,8 524.4 

79.2 447.9 

78.8 533.' 

59.3 499.1 

59.4 496.6 

64.0 442.5 

77.7 478.8 

15.6 593.4 

76.ô 543.1 

?4.5 5t2.5 

s9.2 458.6 

79.8 507.8 

79.1 498.5 

78.8 453.3 

77.1 429.s 

76.2 

0. t¿4 

0. r37 

0.130 

0.t47 

0. t40 

0.141 

0, t45 

o. t62 

0.141 

0.149 

o.t42 

0.150 

0.147 

0.149 

o.142 

0.152 

0.t4t 

0.130 

0.155 

o.117 

0. 118 

0. t37 

0. I4l 

0,148 

0.148 

0.138 

0.155 

0,ló8 

232 

179 

156 

175 

182 

2t7 

199 

221 

t69 

207 

183 

227 

t78 

208 

220 

205 

r7l 

194 

254 

188 

169 

205 

t75 

213 

233 

187 

240 

2.09 2A.9 

1.92 30.2 

2,O4 26,1 

r.94 28,4 

2.O3 27,3 

2.12 26.6 

1,90 25. û 

2.t4 29,2 

1,95 26,4 

1.97 3l .5 

1.95 27 ,2 

2.21 21-À 

2.14 21.8 

2.03 26,6 

2.00 24 -O 

2.13 26,A 

2.09 25.0 

2,O7 26,î 

2.23 29.7 

2.27 32.3 

1.97 2t,5 

1.95 25,5 

2.0t 3 t.8 

1.9¿ 28.4 

1.95 29.5 

2.t2 30,9 

1.99 30.0 

2,35 28.4 

89.2 54.O 

89.9 53.2 

56.8 1,48 

52.8 7.81 

55.2 

' ,6t 

56.2 7.14 

58.3 1,21 

57.6 7.01 

55.5 7.10 

51,3 6.t4 

53.6 6.96 

55.3 6.87 

58.1 7,31 

56.9 6.8ó 

54.5 7.Ol 

54.4 1.tt 

5r,6 6,87 

54.3 t,o7 

55.6 7.30 

56.0 7.19 

c70l00l 

002 

003 

004 

005 

006 

007 

008 

009 

010 

0l¡ 

otz 

0r3 

014 

0t5 

016 

017 

018 

019 

020 

o2l 

022 

o23 

o24 

025 

026 

o27 

o2a 

9O.2 5l.l 

N) 

\o

^ppendfn co¡tlnued. 

¡ârley anylá6è 

Nttrogen (untrs) 

_tfetsht Lodsfng 

(tb./bú.) 

rå ú 

(t-7) 

t;;rgeart 

Rtpê Ânrhast, 

Pelcent 

Plúlnpriess 

KeftelÉ/ Kêrnel 

Sptke Wetshr (s) 

P1ánt 

üetsht (cn) YteId 

(s/plot) 

l{ltropen 

(8/loop ¡¡¡1"¡ 

^ctfvltl (untts) 

No. 

0.15ó 

0.1{9 

0.1s9 

0.137 

0.155 

0.166 

0.150 

0. tt2 

o, t42 

o.132 

0. t40 

0.130 

o. t52 

o.141 

0,t7! 

0.176 

0.134 

0.155 

0,ló0 

0,150 

o.l4l 

o.132 

0.146 

0. t6l 

0,138 

0.150 

0.156 

0.130 

ta2 

199 

189 

261 

235 

22A 

2t3 

205 

226 

182 

167 

214 

222 

r83 

t9l 

208 

r66 

180 

221 

172 

167 

230 

205 

193 

l6l 

ló8 

170 

16t 

2.OO 27,5 

1.92 29.5 

2.20 32.1 

2.2O 36.3 

2.ta 29,t 

2.O9 31.7 

2.08 26,5 

2.00 27,9 

z.Ot 2â,7 

2.O2 24.A 

1.98 24,9 

1.99 2t,4 

2.12 29,6 

1,94 30,1 

2,06 31,9 

2.13 32.8 

2,t7 24.9 

1,97 21,5 

2.OO 32,O 

1.94 2t,t 

1.98 28.8 

2.O3 29.O 

1.93 26,r 

1.96 2A,A 

1.95 26.8 

2.16 25.8 

2.17 29,6 

2.O8 24.7 

29.6 

21.3 

29. t 

28.3 

3LI 

27.6 

29.9 

29,O 

29.5 

30.6 

30.3 

29.2 

28.9 

28,8 

2a.t 

28,9 

29.O 

26.6 

2A.4 

28.2 

29.6 

30.9 

30.1 

30.7 

30.1 

28.3 

10,I 

to.2 

2.90 56.1 85.5 

2.77 35,3 A2.6 

1.00 st.l A2.6 

2.0o 53.8 81.9 

4.23 53.3 84.9 

2.ft 56.5 84.1 

1.23 53. t 81.6 

2.7 t 54,8 83.6 

l.lo . 57,2 A6.4 

3.67 55,2 85.3 

2.17 53.6 8t.9 

3.10 57.0 8ó.1 

4.41 56,2 85. r 

4.90 s5.2 84.0 

2.67 55.9 84.6 

2.4t 55,3 84.1 

2.to 51.2 ¡.S.s 

1.11 sg,t 85.2 

1.43 57,5 85.9 

2.17 56.3 84.3 

6,33 t5,4 85.O 

4.23 54.3 8ô.9 

4.23 53.1 81,¿ 

2.61 54.9 85.6 

3,00 55.8 gJ.7 

3.90 5t,o 81.3 

4.61 55,0 85.1 

3,23 54,1 84.7 

5 t.5 

53.7 

54.0 

5û.6 

52.1 

52.5 

53,1 

52.9 

51,6 

51,4 

54.1 

51.5 

50.3 

51.4 

sl.2 

52.9 

50,3 

50.2 

50.6 

50.7 

5l.t 

53.5 

54. I 

93.5 

52.' 

53.1 

52.3 

5¿.O 

51.1 7.28 86.9 

56,t 6.81 82.8 

53.4 7.24 g2,o 

54. r 6,37 80.0 

54.6 1.42 9l.O 

54.9 6,92 84.7 

53,9 7.05 88.3 

54.a 7.Ol 83.3 

51.9 6,66 82.1 

56.0 t.t6 85.5 

51,4 t.o6 st,s 

51.3 6.6t 74.6 

60.0 6.59 8t.5 

58.9 6.66 75.0 

52.t 6.97 8S.8 

51.4 7,24 88.1 

s6.4 7.08 92.9 

s2.9 6.21 60.2 

55.6 6.56 0r.l 

54.9 6.63 73.1 

60.5 6.53 12.2 

56,9 7.13 a6,6 

5t.5 6,53 72.1 

55.4 t,24 86,4 

56.4 G.55 80.9 

51.8 7.08 s9.3 

56,1 6.97 85.3 

51.9 7.68 gt.g 

so4.7 

602,5 

512,9 

5lrt.l 

4AA.2 

520.3 

536.1 

491. I 

477.9 

55A.7 

513. t 

441.a 

468.6 

519.5 

493.0 

494.9 

451,4 

436.O 

4ta.8 

475.1 

555. t 

531.6 

579.8 

549.1 

559.8 

so4.7 

536.3 

503.1 

ç,7O1O29 67.7 

030 7A.3 

031 78,1 

o32 79.3 

033 t7.4 

o34 76.2 

035 7a.8 

036 7t'.6 

o37 62,0 

038 81.0 

039 80.8 

040 7t.o 

041 7l.t 

o42 A2.t 

tì43 79.6 

o44 79.5 

o45 65-h 

0¿6 58.8 

o47 6t,7 

0(8 76.4 

o49 76-(t 

050 72.6 

o5l 19.2 

o52 12.4 

o53 79.7 

ü54 79.2 

055 79.3 

056 77.6 

o\ 

O

^ppendlx conrlnue¿- 

Genotype Plánt yteld K", 

No.tlâl'l'r..iì/^,.r..l"..'"r"r.x.i.i-..Percentnjïxi.LodgtnßTo1opo¡t-ffi1ub1eenlno. 

troSen 

ztt o.ll8 

2o2 o.ltg 

191 o.l3t 

192 0,l/¡7 

zza o.l5l 

206 o.l¿8 

2Ol O.t24 

r9l 0,t52 

173 0.137 

169 o.i3l 

206 0.137 

236 o.l4o 

zz3 o,l28 

244 o, ts3 

2,08 25.4 

2.O7 22.5 

2.56 25,6 

2.12 23.t 

2.t6 26,9 

2.05 27.5 

2. Ol 2t1.2 

2,O3 21.h 

2.Ot 23,2 

1.96 27.1 

1.9, 25,9 

1.99 26,5 

t.94 25.9 

1.97 26,2 

2,06 26.7 

t.gt 24.8 

2.O9 25.2 

2.21 27,O 

2.t, 31.5 

1.96 27,5 

1.99 25.t 

2.O5 26.7 

2.O2 26t5 

2.lo 25,1 

2.O4 25.2 

2.O9 2A.t 

2.O7 23.5 

2.10 20.7 

3.23 53.3 82.7 29.6 

4.21 54.1 85.1 31.3 

t!.23 52.6 Bl.3 zs -o 

3.90 53.8 8¿.5 2A.2 

1.90 54.3 83,0 28.8 

1.77 55.1 85. I 30.0 

3.90 55.0 03.2 28.3 

7.67 55.1 85,3 30,I 

3.33 53.2 A3,9 3l.o 

5.43 54.O 84.3 30.3 

5.10 56.0 85.2 29.2 

4.77 56,1 85,5 29.2 

4.10 54.5 85.I 3l.l 

2.23 55.7 qtt.t 29.6 

3.43 57.7 84,1 31,3 

4.43 53.9 83.6 29,6 

s.67 93.5 83.3 zg,s 

4.o0 56.3 86.1 30.1 

4.00 53.4 82,t z'.g 

4.7t 53.3 a2 3 2g.l 

1.51 54.5 8s. 

t.5, 

o 3l.o 

55.6 84.0 28,5 

3.33 56,0 85,8 2s.8 

4.10 55.0 83.8 z9.g 

J.3' 56.2 83.5 21.6 

4.90 51.0 8¿.6 30,8 

2.67 54.1 03. I 2g.t 

3,90 56.1 84.8 2A.7 

9t.3 54.O 

89.2 54.0 

83,I 53.9 

89,3 51.5 

81.4 53. I 

8s.4 53.1 

84.0 54.3 

43.â 53.7 

84.2 s3.7 

80.5 51.3 

62.2 52.9 

15.9 51.2 

78.7 s3,2 

85.8 53.O 

90.0 53.6 

89.3 52.6 

86.9 St.7 

9r.4 52.0 

83.9 52.2 

88.0 51.6 

86,8 52,5 

85.9 52.7 

R2.2 32.5 

91.3 Sz.t 

88.8 sz.s 

86. ó 53, I 

82.6 52.8 

83.5 53.2 

55.4 7.39 

59.1 7.29 

55,9 6. B5 

55.0 1.1O 

58.8 6.55 

52.6 6.64 

51.9 6.82 

57.5 6.91 

56.9 6.88 

59.8 7.29 

57.s 6.69 

58.0 6.56 

ó1.3 7. to 

56.4 t,ll 

z2t o.l J6 

2t9 o. t l9 

55. I 7.31 

34.1 7.63 

56.9 6.90 

52.8 7.sn 

58.4 6.74 

54.9 7.31 

55.9 7 .O2 

9.4 6,92 

59..t 1.23 

51.6 1.39 

49.6 6.90 

56.4 7,O9 

56. t 6.84 

55.6 6.63 

15.5 561.3 

77,6 500,0 

74.5 572,8 

80.6 494.5 

7l.t 4AS,j 

1s.5 5so.7 

7I.0 546,3 

77,A 532.A 

77.3 603.8 

15,a s42,6 

80.6 491.1 

77.a 504.6 

79.4 579.5 

80.8 500.7 

76-G 507.8 

82,0 561.1 

7t.3 4ß.3 

44.2 4t5, t 

80.1 513.3 

79.5 57r.2 

70.8 592.0 

Bl.3 408.0 

186 o.lz4 

198 0.1¿l 

294 o. t 17 

187 0.141 

2zt o. ti5 

195 0.130 

228 0.1¿l 

236 o.l3s 

2O9 0,l3i 

239 0.130 

2OO O.t24 

zrs o.l28 

80.4 544,8 

81. 7 471.4 

11.1 5J5. j 

78. t Jl1.9 

73.1 560. t 

76.A 538,0 

c70lo57 

058 

059 

060 

061 

u62 

063 

064 

065 

066 

06f 

068 

069 

070 

0tt 

072 

olt 

014 

075 

o76 

077 

078 

079 

080 

08l 

o82 

083 

08¿ 

¡\) 

ts

^t¡endlr cotrtirìued. 

cenotypePlântYtc1dx*"*"¡x"Í-lliF"""""ÈË;;G: 

Áerncra/ 

Ito. Kor-'¡rr rcrccnÈ 

trcr¿t,r Gn) (shtor) sprke l¡crrhr 

ïerß;r (B) ¡i;;;;;;s (i;:7;;.) 

rggrlr¡ rã rá iåi,-" ;;;;";" ;i;i:;" '";:ir.:}li 

u_7) Feíd nrge NtrroÊèn (úììtr¡) (unrtsl 

^rìrhe!ìts 

/1008 rr.t n) 

0.tI3 

z,ra 21.2 

z.to 34.2 

2.O7 25,4 

2.ll zt.t 

2.05 24.t 

1.96 27.0 

2.14 32,2 

1.99 26,5 

2-O3 26,9 

z.o9 13. t 

2.00 29,9 

2,0o 29.1 

l-97 29,l 

2,00 30.Ê 

2.06 30.4 

2. tt 27.5 

l,96 25.6 

2,10 31.0 

2.02 32.3 

4.43 52,9 83.7 30.8 

3.43 55.6 83.2 27.6 

4.67 54.û 84.(, 30.2 

3,90 54. t- 84.6 29,s 

3.3r 54.9 ot.s 2B,A 

z.to 54,6 83.8 29.3 

2.57 53.2 A5.2 30.0 

4.22 54.8 8¿.1 30, r. 

5.10 ,.5 84.2 31.0 

3,90 55,0 82.1 27.4 

4.10 55,t s3.9 28.2 

3.23 53.O 82,6 29.1 

2,57 55,8 85,2 2.9.7 

J,33 54.8 B4,t 2s.7 

2.31 56.1 8J.4 29.3 

3.43 53.í A4.4 10.8 

tt,90 54,0 B5,l 31.3 

l.l0 54.7 82.t 27,7 

4.23 54.8 85,6 30.B 

51,5 

53.2 

52.4 

sl.9 

52. J 

59.6 7.50 89.7 

56.0 6. 88 88.8 

5s.6 i.z6 s5.5 

52.8 7.13 90.4 

54,5 7,36 88.6 

55,I 7.09 85.2 

58.7 6.98 sú.9 

60.4 6,67 71.4 

55.à 7,15 a2-¡¿ 

55.2 6.A2 81. I 

57,5 ' 7.33 88.5 

s6.1 7, t9 87.6 

57.3 7.O2 88.6 

58,9 l.OG B5.7 

58.3 6.76 û0.6 

55.6 1.47 90,4 

61.4 7,31 89.J 

60.8 6.sz tiJ.4 

5.7 -8 7.03 aA.G 

c70t 0B5 79.8 

o¡Jli 78,5 

0.15û 

0.112 

113 

2('2 

2t0 

t77 

225 

262 

232 

2U 

274 

280 

2t8 

202 

248 

1..t7 

212 

2I(' 

218 

245 

5?9.I 

5 16.6 

5l t.l 

49I.0 

525.3 

52h.6 

485.6 

47 3.3 

562.8 

593.9 

573.3 

51A.7 

4a7.1 

548.4 

532.8 

5 ¿'0.9 

526.1 

088 80.l 

0.tlt 

0.140 

0, Jl¿r 

0.1n4 

D.l û4 

o. t5l 

0.166 

091 B¿r. o 

5r.6 

53.J 

o.lttl 

0.116 

0.1¿4 

0.1t7 

0,l¿3 

0.1/'0 

0. 12I 

b. t29 

0.tt9 

53. O 

51.3 

51.3 

53.1 

53,4 

52,t 

081 77,5 

0B9 77,t) 

090 1G,Z 

092 79.7 

093 19,5 

o94 7A.3 

0r5 s0.4 

096 78.0 

097 80.6 

0rB 74.t 

otg 78.6 

100 et.z 

tot 16.9 

lù2 17.3 

103 80.3 

1,36 55.0 84.2 29.4 

56.2 7.01 s4.9 

5tt.9 

lf'xn 76.1 

2îB 

2.05 27,6 

5?.,(, 

0. t47 

¡\) 

01 

NJ

.9anul¡uor xlpuâd¡¡V 

ezro tzz ,.¿z !1..2_ e..62 i.iõ i.ii õi.c s.¿e ¡.iõ iõ.; 6.65 r.rrs 6.6t 200 

l'¡'o 

0rro Srz 6'rz 

aoz t.cz f'l !'sz l.rs 6.gr ¿2.-l ,r.at 

lf:! a.;; ö.iõ õ.öË åi.c t.¿s s¡.g 0.sç s.asÞ 0.¿9 Bzo 

çe¡'0 06r ti.zz s-9..1 s.L¿ õ.;¡ ¡.õ; ii.l 6.rs i.Ë ;.;; ii.f ¡.rs r.¡ss e.¿L tzo 

õ.õõ óô.+ g.0, s.ezs i.Zi . gzo 

É?¡'o 

6¡¡'0 z6t 

tq¿ 

e.zz 

z.sz 99:l õ.ü í.;; i.;; Ëi:l ¿.1¿ 

!t.! a.¡; ;.;; ;.;; ;å.? riè 

;.;ö 

i.iã 

iï.t e:¿s ,.0¿s t.tt szo 

8€¡'0 s¿z s'sz r9'.1 õ'i; ã'iõ ó.íi Ëi.c iõ.q 6.Ls o.see ¿.6¿ izo 

8er'0 zzz t.tz 99:l a.öt ;.Ëõ ;.;; ií..: q.ós r:iÈ i.;õ 

;.¡õ 

iË.¿ ..rs 6.6e5 0.0¿ .zo 

6t'o t'z û.tz gg..z r.o€ a.;õ õ.õ ìiT s.r6 i;.i ,.es ç.¡$ t.jt zzo 

¿sr.o ssz 6.tz 9l:g ¿.ã¿ ;.;; ;.i; ïi: ;.;ã ä,1 6.,r, ..€rs 0.s¿ rz0 

¿er'. eþz n'or g:l i.â, õ.;¡ í.i; ìä: l.õi ;.;ö ;õ.; e.z, e.Be, s.tr ozo 

fcro e6r s.sz !:!i ;.õõ 

1g..t_ a.a¿ ã.iõ i.óã ôi.z ö.i !.rc 0.6¿, ,t.e7 610 

0¿r'0 B0z t.t¿ {t:l 6.s¿ õ.iõ i.íi öi.e i.i¿ t.6s ¡.1ã 

;.;õ 

il.å e.rÉ e.óss t.si sro 

e5¡.0 szz s.tz t9:! a.õ; ;.;ö ;.õ; Ëè:l ,.a; ;å.¡ E.z, g.¡Ér e..a ¿¡0 

ec¡'o ztz o.0r g!:! ,,. i.iã 

str'o r¿ õ.;õ ;.;; il.¿ i.¿; i.ií 

i;.; o.$ e.r¿, e.t¿ er. 

etz r.sz t-t..z_ ó.ü õ.õõ 0.;; öi.r g.z; ü.i B.c¡ 8.us ..6r Ero 

r?¡'0 

¿.õ¿ !i.i e.zs t.,,L,r s.sr ?r0 

er'o s.sz 

"tz 6zz l.sz ,t9..2_ 19..2_ õ.;; ;.;s 

è.¡, 

;.;; 

,.;s 

il.¿ q.rr ;.ñ ;.¿ç, ä:l s.zs ;i.î 8.0s 0:0rs r.s¡ Gro 

tero e8¿ 6'(r Jg,1 s.ii ã.iõ ó.iõ åð.¡ ;.;õ åå.i . z¡¡q r.seÉ ..e¿ z¡0 

tc¡'o 

-6.;í 

e¡r'0 

z¿z t.sz !1..! õ.û õ.;ö ;.;; fi.¿ l:¿i öä.å ¿.ss r.¡r, ¿.0s ¡ro 

',6t e.6r ,9..! ¿.õa õ.íõ i.âi iô.e ?.ll ,.,, 

õ.iõ 

;.;; 

ö;.ö B.ss 0.0¿s e.6L o¡0 

zzt'o st¿ ,'tz fg:! t.ò; õ.;õ ;.;; öí.€ ;õ.; s.ó, z.t¡,, s.r¿ 600 

¡rr'0 00¿ o.zz s-9..1 t.6z ;.õõ i.ü ,i:: !:C, i,.¿ã i;.i . z.zs s.zlç ,.¡r e00 

6t¡'0 ezz s.tz gg:! ó.& õ.fi ;.;; iï= 9:ri ;.¡õ ;;.; e.6s ¡.eçs 8.oo ¿00 

Í.rt'o tez ç.ez ll..l i,.i õ.;õ ó.;; ìi:l g:ii ?.zs ;.0õ ;;.ô s..s ?.res t.e! e00 

ztt'o eoz s.sz 91..1 i.gz ,.is ã.;a iã..f õ.;õ ¿ï.i e.'s z.s* s.þr s00 

tt'. ezz z.sz l:f ;.is 

19.2- l.F ;.;; ö.fi ií..: ;¿.i ¡.e5 e.ezÊ s.tl ,00 

2:li õ.;; il.; e.s. ,.6¿s 0.6¿ roo 

¡r!'0 ot'z r'ez 80'z Á'62 i'râ ;'6a ii'r 

"'¿i ;.;õ iö.; r.es e.¿rî s.or ro0zo¿,

\ppendlx contlnued. 

0.112 

0.12t 

0, 9 

0.llo 

0,lJ9 

0. t4r 

0.118 

0. t28 

0.llo 

0.139 

o.l3z 

o. t?9 

233 

200 

205 

208 

216 

221 

2t3 

220 

212 

201 

206 

193 

2lÃ 

201 

190 

219 

195 

203 

245 

221 

219 

2f¡ 

212 

201 

212 

zi)o 

194 

22t 

2lo 

212 

26.9 

t8.t 

21.5 

21.9 

25.1 

21.5 

23.1 

22.6 

2t.2 

24.8 

21.6 

22. t 

24.1 

25.5 

22.9 

26.2 

22.J 

2r.3 

24.1 

26.6 

25,9 

25.3 

25.O 

2t'.1 

24.O 

ztt,5 

22.1 

24.6 

2â.6 

2ò.9 

2.OA 

t.93 

2.04 

t.9q 

2.O9 

t.94 

2.09 

2.O1 

1.89 

2.00 

2.01 

1.92 

t.99 

2.00 

2.00 

2.04 

2.O2 

2.O3 

l.9l 

L94 

l 96 

1.99 

2.00 

1.98 

1,99 

t.9t 

2.O4 

2,O1 

2.00 

1.95 

51.6 2.9o jt.4 Bl.B j0.5 

53,I 2,1' 5r.5 85.8 2A.1 

52.7 t.67 56.6 s6.2 2s.g 

52,1 2.11 55.8 05.4 29.8 

52.A 2.71 55.I t4.9 2g.8 

51.6 2.11 5t.ô 85.0 2t,z 

51.8 2.43 56,1 8ô.9 28.8 

51.4 t.90 ,t.t 85,s 2ø,a 

tJ.J 2.lo 54.6 84.1 2g.1 

52.' 3.41, 56.6 8J,J 2g.o 

s3,2 2.1r' 55.9 85.2 29,5 

52.9 2.43 56,9 85,3 2A.3 

5J.5 2.31 5t.o 85.6 2Ð,A 

51,, t.lo 54.6 84.t 30.0 

5J.7 t.G1 5r.6 86.5 2s.t 

5ô.O r.90 54,7 A2.4 28.s 

J?.8 t.l0 5a.2 A6.s zs,o 

54. t 3.61 55.8 85,4 29.6 

52.9 2,23 5ð.r 85.6 27.' 

90,8 

87.4 

89. t 

84.8 

85,4 

80.0 

88,6 

90.5 

84.5 

87. O 

89.6 

41.2 

8t.l 

08.1 

85.s 

86.1 

8t.8 

89.3 

8t. t 

86,5 

42.3 

90.6 

8t. t 

84.O 

85.l 

86.5 

8ó.l 

88.7 

88.0 

08.3 

c102029 79,A 429.G 50,9 t.o4 

0t0 80.6 Ss2.z 

olt 

ij.1 6.08 

78.2 547.5 

ot2 76.9 

ít.l ,.tl 

514.4 í¡,o 7.00 

o.l4l 

o.r¿2 

o. 9 

0. t4I 

o.l3t 

0. l13 

0.1¿o 

o.129 

0.134 

0. lô6 

o.t41 

0.1!7 

D. 134 

o. t4, 

0. D5 

o. t54 

52.1 J.4t 56.ú 84.8 21,9 

52.1 ' 3.3! 55. t 8l.6 2a.t 

53.6 2.10 53,? 84.5 3l.I 

54,I 2.41 n,, a2.t 2A.6 

5t.7 ,,9o 54.7 04.9 1o.2 

52.0 t.tt 55,6 84.8 2s.2 

52.2 l,(,, 57.1 :ß9.t 2A.6 

5t.2 2.1, 56.4 85.0 20.s 

51,0 2.6t 54.8 85.3 30.5 

52.O 2,61 56.6 84.û 28.2 

52.5 t.4t 54.0 0r.4 2c-4 

gll 76.5 

oj4 

sst,z ia.¡ 7.o0 

t6.o 5t2.o ir.e 6.66 

gls ,â.0 qs2.s ía.z t.t6 

919 9?.! srr.r ir.o .,.4i 

ojt 75.0 

o3B 

513,9 

76.6 

s6.6 

sr¡.q 

].tl 

039 tl.t 

is.c t.tz 

o4o 

526.a 

tJ.6 j41.8 li.a t¡z 

o4t t2.a ãò.¿ 6.s, 

sqz.h ii,¡ 6.91 

o42 lj.t 55r.6 íä,¡ 7,14 

043 oo.o 

014 

as3.o 

tt.3 

ii.r ,.ro 

ohs 

414.1 lí.s ,,ol 

oo. t 

0¿6 

shl.t íc.t 6.s9 

tg.a 

o47 

5s0.4 

,h.s íí.ø ,.zs 

s'¡6,2 íi.s 6.13 

91C 16.0 

ong 

6rr.8 li.g 6.oe 

12.t 

o5o ,1.4 

546.' ii.c 6.9r 

o5r 

J15.6 

71.5 iõ.o ,.4s 

osz 

sg4,l lá.t 7.13 

|t.t 

os3 

ia3.2 

11.9 là,t ;:õ¡ 

5e5.6 lí.a 6, 06 

o51 7o.j sn,J Éi.t 6.n 

9:J tr.t 

056 

sl2.t íi.t 6.80 

t6.6 sro.j ii,z ,,oo 

9:1 !s.9 621.t ió.r ,.t, 

o.llt 

o.ltí 

o5d 76.A 541.9 56.1 

'.19

^pIe¡¡¿tx conrtnued. 

Solu 

It 

lßlt 

ng 

t,adElDB 1o ro pà¡r- 

(l-7) rari.y 

Head Rlpê Arthcsls l¡lrr;sen 

w€tghr 

(lb . /bu .) 

ßêrnêl Percent 

Í¡efght (g) plußpnêss 

kêrnel6/ 

Spt&e 

Yleld 

(E/plot) 

Genotypê llant 

[o. Ìetght (cff) 

Àctlvtty 

(unlrs) 

Bmyl¡6e 

(untËsl 

o. t4l 

0. t20 

o.147 

0.16t 

o, t14 

0. t21 

0- l]0 

o.l!6 

236 

194 

24t 

241 

2t9 

t89 

r7l 

22A 

20s 

205 

2lo 

223 

221 

230 

232 

238 

222 

231 

235 

23t 

245 

234 

23A 

234 

218 

225 

229 

237 

22t 

21.4 

2t,3 

30. t 

!0.7 

25.2 

21.5 

24.5 

23. t 

20.8 

2t.6 

20,2 

26.5 

29,7 

21.4 

28.1 

21.7 

25,8 

26.6 

28.5 

26.8 

2t.7 

24.3 

24.7 

25.9 

25.2 

22.6 

21.2 

21.1 

23.7 

52.8 8ó. t ll.3 t.99 

5r.6 86.3 29.1. t.98 

59,6 86.8 27 .4 1.89 

56.9 84.9 28.O L93 

56. I 8t.2 21.6 l -n, 

56.!.86.1 30.5 1.86 

56. t 86.3 29.6 1.83 

54.6 85. t 3t,2 2.OO 

5',4 86.1 29.6 t.gt 

58.O 86. t 28.2 l.sl 

56,4 86,5 30.6 2.O5 

54.3 82.5 28.2 t. s6 

r4.4 83.6 29.1 t,g2 

53,8 8¿.6 30.8 t.95 

55.1 84.6 29.f, t.93 

56.6 84.8 2A,2 2.01 

s5.2 A4,4 29.4 1.95 

57.1 86,3 29.5 1.89 

5¿.9 84.3 29.4 z,Ot 

57.O 8ó.O 29.1 1.96 

54. 85.! 30,9 2.15 

56.6 ' 86.2 29.6 I.99 

55.4 84.3 28.9 2.06 

55.8 85.3 29.4 1.98 

51,t a6,t 29.4 1.98 

56.5 86.0 29.5 2.O2 

58.0 85,7 30.3 l.9l 

54.O A2.1 28.7 r.þ6 

55. I 85.2 lo,I 1.98 

46.2 54,2 1,.r, 

86.2 52.2 3.lo 

42.5 49.8 t.6, 

19.A 50.5 l 90 

88.5 51.8 2.t7 

t2.9 5t.9 3.90 

85.8 50.8 4,00 

92.2 52,i 3.23 

84.1 52.s l.jl 

85.t 52.5 t.tl 

9t.l 51.6 3.I0 

85.7 51.2 2.51 

9t.0 51.5 2.41 

88.7 52.2 3. to 

61.4 52. t 3.21 . 

91. o 52.2 l.0o 

18.9 50.8 3.tl 

45.2 50.7 2.17 

86. t 52.â 4.57 

83.O 52.A 2.61 

89.t 52.9 3.t3 

87.3 53,4 1,61 

89. J 52.7 2.21 

86,8 52,5 3- lo 

86.9 52.2 3,51 

86.5 52.8 4,3t 

,5.4 5t.B z.0o 

85.8 51.1 2.00 

88.3 52,4 2.67 

7. t4 

t.t5 

6.76 

6.63 

t.49 

,.t0 

6.81 

7.41 

6.10 

6.6t 

,.49 

6,85 

7.I 

7.10 

I .28 

7.51 

6.60 

6.89 

6.99 

6.16 

1,42 

1 .oo 

ó.96 

6.90 

1.21 

7.05 

6.88 

6. 15 

,.05 

5¡,1 

5s.5 

5¿.A 

61. I 

st.2 

6r.3 

60.8 

56.3 

55. f 

57,8 

58. t 

55.2 

55.3 

58.5 

54.1 

51,3 

58,7 

t7. t 

54.2 

58.6 

52.t 

55.2 

58.O 

59, I 

59.8 

60.3 

56.3 

58.6 

5t.5 

504.O 

558.1 

¿ 18.6 

585.2 

6¡4.6 

544,2 

609.3 

496,3 

519,3 

449,6 

5¿8.8 

523.2 

551.0 

51r.8 

600.5 

590.4 

510,9 

548. r 

543.O 

578.A 

465.5 

590.9 

524.5 

49X.t 

454.1 

543.9 

521.A 

5ló.5 

550.8 

c702059 13.9 

060 79.3 

06t 70.0 

lJ62 74,3 

063 78.9 

064 tí,t 

065 79.O 

066 78.0 

067 60.1 

060 59.9 

069 A2,3 

070 7t.4 

0 75.9 

ot2 r5.8 

0rl 76,1 

O1.. 78.1 

0. n5 

o.134 

0, 120 

o.143 

0. t18 

0. t3¡ 

O.IJJ 

O. U¡9 

o.l16 

o.144 

o.142 

0.t39 

0.154 

o. t12 

o. ta4 

0, 130 

0.136 

075 ts,t 

ot6 tg-t 

0.127 . 

o.154 

0. t4l 

o.ll¿ 

86.2 52,6 2.A6 5ó.1 85.6 

56,5 7.O4 

540.4 

o17 76.1 

o70 78.5 

otg 1A.7 

080 7Á.6 

o8t 76.6 

082 15.6 

083 80,o 

084 ta.4 

085 17.2 

0B6 75.O 

087 74,A 

¡lcân 76.0 

220 

25.t 

t\) 

o\

óp¡rendl!( conrlnued- 

troBeí 

eln) 

'"'i;. r".r i,iiì",¡ 'ìiiil"'ulililË'r,r nüiill:" o:r.iilj., TÍ:ii' "::. _i;. ^:*:;," it*i"" tg[:; "ïtfti:i* ';ifiil 

o.122 

0.119 

0. t40 

218 

2G1 

245 

225 

21.2 

26.o 

24.8 

2t. t 

lt.l 

3J.l 

28- l 

28.3 

25.7 

29.4 

12.0 

25.8 

tt,1 

2t., 

2Ã.O 

25.0 

24,A 

20.t 

25,4 

26.2 

24.1 

zt.4 

22.t 

21.8 

21.9 

23.9 

23.O 

2.03 

2.21 

2,09 

1.99 

l.l0 J3,9 80.7 26.8 

2,43 53,8 82.9 28.1 

t.st 54.t 79,2 25.2 

,.r3 54.1 84.1 30.1 

2.4J 56.1 80.8 26.' 

2. to 56.! 81.9 27.6 

l.6t 5J.8 80.0 26.t 

3.Á3 53.0 80,t 26,1 

2.lo 54.2 82,5 2A.t 

2.23 51.8 80.6 26.A 

2,OO 55.6 81.6 26-5 

l.2t 54,7 8t.5 27.1 

1.00 56. t 8J.0 2r.1 

t.Jt 5ô.3 79.9 25.9 

3.00 5ô.6 8t.6 2?.2 

l.Oo 56.5 82.5 26.0 

l.5t 54.9 78.2 2t.t 

2.OO t3.9 71.4 21.6 

3.41 3r,4 80.6 2r.2 

l.rt 54. t 80.t 26.6 

2.2t 54.1 80.8 26.' 

l-6, 54,0 64.9 11.2 

2.t3 5¡.6 80. t 26.3 

2.9' 54.1 80.9 26.9 

2.90 54.6 84.5 29.' 

2.13 51.6 82.3 28.8 

t,3¡ 54.9 19.1 25.5 

,. to 54.2 tt.3 21,1 

tg.s 52,t 

90.2 52.1 

86.1 Jl,J 

o.ll5 

60.5 6.88 

55, t t.2a 

5t. t 1.15 

56,2 7.31 

50.3 ,.51 

;:;;; 

0,t50 

o.ll9 

0. t54 

n.lttz 

o. tt0 

0.163 

0. t4l 

0, t65 

zrt 

251 

298 

2t9 

251 

2EO 

261 

291 

t04 

245 

221 

226 

222 

238 

300 

211 

2tt 

257 

266 

23tt 

245 

269 

25A 

1.86 

1.88 

2. t9 

t.96 

2.O5 

1,92 

1.92 

2.t1 

I.9l 

2.01 

1.94 

2.tG 

1.99 

2.tt 

z.o5 

2.n 

2.O2 

2,25 

2.17 

1.95 

l.9t 

2. tt 

2.07 

86. t 53,5 

90.ú j3.t 

7t.6 51.0 

17.9 tl.tt 

80,2 5t.4 

87.4 51.9 

,9.A 52.1 

ll.5 52,O 

81.2 5t.6 

69.2 50.t 

80.6 52.9 

87.8 32.4 

1t.4 32.9 

76.' 50.4 

42.1 5J,I 

85.4 51,9 

89,5 51.8 

85. t 52.7 

94.A 51. t 

90.2 55.2 

87.6 5t.9 

03,3 52.ô 

05,9 52,2 

85,ó 51.2 

ag.t 51.O 

t6.3 6.74 

55.6 6.50 

54.1 t.l0 

94,5 1.19 

56.9 6.68 

59.6 6.4C 

54.8 1.06 

55,4 6,t¡ 

51.A 6.91 

56.6 t.48 

53.1 6,48 

52.9 ?,o3 

58.8 6,76 

5J.0 6.98 

50,8 ,.tt 

5t,9 6,64 

53.2 1.95 

52.9 1.Ot 

5 t.5 t.l I 

58.6 6.t5 

55.8 6.90 

94.i ,,56 

68.1 459.t 

69.2 502.4 

61.4 509.9 

73.4 531.1 

,2.8 499.6 

72.1 5t!s,9 

to.1 511.9 

,1.2 SSt.l 

t0.5 5r6.J 

fq.6 582.9 

66. t 512.6 

11.2 s21.q 

57.1 512.2 

o.lt7 

68.7 549,0 

71.8 515.1 

6t.9 500. t 

0, t26 

o.l17 

0.14t 

0.123 

c703001 

oo2 

o03 

o04 

005 

006 

oo7 

008 

o09 

olo 

0lt 

ot2 

0tl 

0t4 

015 

ol6 

017 

0t8 

019 

o20 

ozt 

022 

927 

o24 

o25 

026 

oz7 

028 

66. I jo7. f 

o.lt9 

0.142 

0. t12 

o.l4l 

o.1t2 

o.129 

0. 140 

o. t 

o.142 

s2.l 7,2l 

99. t 53t.8 

1t.5 638.4 

72.t 498.9 

12.O stZ,A 

69.1 519.3 

70.8 54q.3 

ti.g 585. r 

tt.6 594.3 

11.6 602.1 

6J. t 492.0 

t2.o 569.8 

N) 

o\ 

Oì

¿\tÎen¿lr conÈtnu€d, 

.,¡ÃE ,e¡anc rs, pru¡,pÍesd (rb./bú.) ('_r)_ x!¿,d .r* îiñL* iiiiil, iüiili "ijlTl:í (ullåãï;i"r") 

.*::r* 

:lî*- , . Ii*1 - reftèt6.r ie;;;r. percenr 

\_n"1er,. t.o isipi".¡ ^ãiüi"'"liäil'r,r 

"iffi:::" (l;:ili., 1ï:lî' ,,:i, ,il^ --'".^- il;;i}' äii:;. "i: 

0.15t 

o.l19 

0, t50 

o.162 

0.141 

0.I l0 

0.1¿5 

O.l3¿r 

0.t30 

0. t¿0 

o. t47 

0. t41 

o,t4t 

290 

25A 

290 

270 

275 

2ßA 

279 

261 

241 

261 

201 

291 

256 

23.t 2.16 zt.a 

10.0 1.97 24.A 

27.1 r.96 26.5 

28.4 2.Ot 2s-1 

24.2 1.9, 28.8 

26.9 2.O4 24.2 

zt.4 2,OO 21.3 

28.9 t.9, 21.J 

28,3 1.96 24,2 

26.5 z.o4 26.1 

26.8 2.20 24.t 

21.A 2,21 27.5 

r0. t 1.97 25.3 

58.9 A2.l 

51.9 A4.2 

51.6 80.6 

55.1 83,8 

55.6 8t.0 

55,I ûr.8 

5t,3 80.6 

5t.6 az.5 

55.1 8t,3 

55.6 81.0 

51.4 01.2 

51. t ?8. t 

5t1.2 84., 

q.!6 14.3 52.0 l. ¡tl 

!.!, 9o.0 5l.o 2.6t 

,.2G 84.6 52.5 z.oD 

!.84 rt.J 51.3 r.eo 

q.35 ,s.2 4s.4 l. to 

l.9r a2.6 5t,2 1.6t 

7.18 81,6 5t.9 2.go 

6-.?1 8t.e 5t. I 2.5' 

r.96 80.0 ,2.3 2.s1 

l.ll 00,I 53.4 r,76 

7.8! 86.2 52.O 2.1, 

q.q 8l.r 51.8 r.¿! 

1.24 08.2 jj. f 2.43 

6.99 8r.6 52.5 z.on 

46.A 

54.6 

53.4 

48.A 

4' .l 

50.1 

s6,t 

55.5 

51.9 

!9,6 

52.6 

51.5 

5ô-O 

c701029 52.' 417.4 

oto ,t.t 559.2 

o3l 68,1 55t.O 

o32 57.8 sst.6 

013 55.O 509.8 

014 58.9 507.3 

o35 70.6 559. g 

036 60, t stt,s 

017 69.4 6lr.l 

o38 62.t 441.8 

o39 69.7 ¿51.3 

o40 64,0 464,8 

04t 76,7 s23.1 

tleán 68.4 ii2.O i6,G 

o.14l 

261 

54.3 8l.t 2f.t 2.O4 25.8 

0. t13 

0. 160 

o. r42 

0. t57 

1.97 58,2 86.t 28,5 2.o2 22.f 2t2 

!.f! 54.6 83.o 28.t 2.o1 2r,o 2rt2 

?.o! 5t.r 78.9 25,2 2.ts 26,1 27s 

4.r0 53.6 83.2 29.6 2.16 30., zti 

5t.o 

51.5 

49,8 

50.8 

tltnr64-62 61,5 4ó4.0 

Borãnzd 79.4 

55.t 6.60 8r.5 

sjz.2 sr.s 

¡16705-55 65.J 

t.m 

400.3 

s;.i 

cod{uast 

sz.t 

8o.5 

;:;õ 

4s3.2 j5.0 ;;.; 

7. to ði:i 

.:iËüi.:- :l*i: füïi:¡ïl; ÍhÏiifií iiititrli;,. 

l.J 

o\ 

!

Effects of reduced plant height on breeding requirements and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?