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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$il\VOLVEMENT OF RETII\OIC ACID II{ - MSpace at the University of ...$

fable 29. Nltrogen tr'ertl-lizer Appllcatlon SÈudy, Means for Tesr Weight (kg./hl.) Environments 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 Bonanza 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) Semi-dwarfs (SD) 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
Page 1 and 2:
University of Mani
Page 3 and 4:
ACKNOWI,EDGMENTS It has been a grea
Page 5 and 6:
ÎABI,E OF TONTENTS av írÞâ dô
Page 7 and 8:
Þâ o-â r Days to l'{aturity ....
Page 9 and 10:
vaal ËÞe rro Days to Heading . ".
Page 11 and 12:
SUGGÊSTIONSFORFIIIURSRESEÀRCH ,.,
Page 13 and 14:
11. Nitrogen Fertil-izer Applicatio
Page 15 and 16:
TABT-,8 42, 43, I+4, r+5. 46. 48. 4
Page 17 and 18:
74. 75" ?6, 77, 78,. 79, 80. 81" 82
Page 19 and 20:
xvii i occurred for yield, but the
Page 21 and 22:
I]TERATURE REVIEW Semi-dwarf Growth
Page 23 and 24:
In the United States the barley bre
Page 25 and 26:
Tabl-e 1. Broad Sense Ileritability
Page 27 and 28:
Table 2. Broad Sense Heritability E
Page 29 and 30:
wíth yield. fhis group discussed t
Page 31 and 32:
ship in common wheat. 0n the other
Page 33 and 34:
c onpared 'r . Two other important
Page 35 and 36:
eported a non-significant positive
Page 37 and 38:
majority of studie
Page 39 and 40:
correfation between diastatic power
Page 41 and 42:
extent. Frey et al-. (1951) indicat
Page 43 and 44:
seni-dwarf wheats to nitrogen ferti
Page 45 and 46:
number of spíkes
Page 47 and 48:
Stanberry and Lowrey (L965) reporte
Page 49 and 50:
Íright be of grea
Page 51 and 52:
from varyíng seeding rates in barl
Page 53 and 54:
Reports on the effect of</s
Page 55 and 56:
the effect of seed
Page 57 and 58:
l,upton et 41. (7974) pointed out t
Page 59 and 60:
Table 3. Pedigrees of</stro
Page 61 and 62:
(4) 200 Kernel weight * record.ed i
Page 63 and 64:
population, using individual line m
Page 65 and 66:
Site Sanford 19?6 Clay Cawnan 19?6
Page 67 and 68:
Orthogonal single degree of
Page 69 and 70: Experiment lV: _-.t0qlepptite lenet
Page 71 and 72: ferences between genotype s which w
Page 73 and 74: and plant
Page 75 and 76: Table 7. con¡tonêlts of</
Page 77 and 78: was significant" fhe only case in w
Page 79 and 80: (28 to 5B/"), as reported by nost o
Page 81 and 82: Table 8. Continued Range Lor{est Li
Page 83 and 84: the Highest Yielding l,ines within
Page 85 and 86: Phenot:'¡pic Corre-Lations Sinpl-e
Page 87 and 88: Table 10. (Cortínued) Châracteris
Page 89 and 90: did Syme (f972), Fonseca and patter
Page 91 and 92: significant negative correlation wi
Page 93 and 94: elãted negative association betwee
Page 95 and 96: Aglononie ChArae'qeri s! ic s Pl"an
Page 97 and 98: Table 12. N1Ërogen FertLlizer Àpp
Page 99 and 100: Teble 14. NltrogeÍ FertLlLzêr ApP
Page 101 and 102: Table 15. NíËrogen ¡'ertil,izer
Page 103 and 104: lable 16. Nltrogen Fertlllzer Appll
Page 105 and 106: freedom comparison indicated lqínn
Page 107 and 108: lab1e 19. Nftrogen trertÍlizer Áp
Page 109 and 110: Tâble 20, Nltrogei¡ FeltLltzêr A
Page 111 and 112: TabIe 22, Nltrogen Fertillzer Appli
Page 113 and 114: Table 23. Nitrogen Fertilizer Appl
Page 115 and 116: TabLe 25. Nltrogen Fefttlizef Appll
Page 117 and 118: itable 26. Nitrogen Fertfllzer Appl
Page 119: latlê 28. Nltrogen ¡'ertlllrer Ap
Page 123 and 124: Tabl-e 31 . Nítrogen Fertilizer Ap
Page 125 and 126: Îable33. Nítrogen Fertllizer Appl
Page 127 and 128: Table 34. Nitrogen Fertilfzer Appli
Page 129 and 130: îab1ê 36. NLtrogeî Fertl,LLzer A
Page 131 and 132: Table 38. Nitrogen Fertllizer Appli
Page 133 and 134: lab1e 39,. NLtrogen Fertllf¿er App
Page 135 and 136: Table 41. Nitïogen Iertillzer Appl
Page 137 and 138: Table 42. Nitrogen Fertllizer Appli
Page 139 and 140: 'IabLe 44. Nítrogen ¡'ertilizer A
Page 141 and 142: Q UAT,TTY Cltq.RÀcTER rsrf ts Q ua
Page 143 and 144: lable 47. Nitrogen ¡'ertilLzer App
Page 145 and 146: Table 49. Nltrogen ferrlllzer AppLl
Page 147 and 148: îhe F x G i.nteraction at portage
Page 149 and 150: fable 52, Nltrogen Fertfllze¡ Appl
Page 151 and 152: 'labLe 54- Seedlng Råte - Row Spac
Page 153 and 154: Table 55. Seeding Rate - Ror'7 Spac
Page 155 and 156: Table 57. Seeding Rate - Roúr Spac
Page 157 and 158: while the tall sho\^/ed virtually n
Page 159 and 160: Table 59. Seedlûg Rate - Row Spacl
Page 161 and 162: Table 60. Seedlng Rate - Row Spacin
Page 163 and 164: Table 61. Seedlng Rate - RotT Spaci
Page 165 and 166: Table 62, SeedLng Rate - Rorar Spac
Page 167 and 168: ?áble 64. Seedlng Rare - Ror.r Spa
Page 169 and 170: Table 65. SeedÍng Rate - Row Spaci
Page 171 and 172:
Table 67. Seedfng Rate - Row Spací
Page 173 and 174:
Table 68. AN0VA for Coleoptile Leng
Page 175 and 176:
'Iable 72. Means for Experíment IV
Page 177 and 178:
Table 73. (Continued ) B Variables
Page 179 and 180:
'IabLe 74' Ranks of</strong
Page 181 and 182:
Table 76. cenotype Means for Root D
Page 183 and 184:
fabTe ?6 Cid not indicate this diff
Page 185 and 186:
Table 79. Ranks of
Page 187 and 188:
Tabl"e 81. ANOVA for Number <strong
Page 189 and 190:
the second v¡as not significant (f
Page 191 and 192:
Table 85. Mean Numbers of</
Page 193 and 194:
of two locations f
Page 195 and 196:
have increased the precision <stron
Page 197 and 198:
showed no environmental interaction
Page 199 and 200:
yield testlng experiments. Furtherm
Page 201 and 202:
could in part account for the poor
Page 203 and 204:
signlficant, the correl_ations were
Page 205 and 206:
height and the qua
Page 207 and 208:
trial period. The area in which the
Page 209 and 210:
any specific cross. However, they d
Page 211 and 212:
as strong nor as consl-stent as is
Page 213 and 214:
with several critical agronomic par
Page 215 and 216:
maturity and days in post-anthesis
Page 217 and 218:
significantry rerated to several ot
Page 219 and 220:
icularly when nore optimum growing
Page 221 and 222:
would be useful to know the rerativ
Page 223 and 224:
Kernel Weight Added N had little ef
Page 225 and 226:
much as the tall genotypes. Also th
Page 227 and 228:
îhe effects of N
Page 229 and 230:
with the overall results of
Page 231 and 232:
Phenotypicaì.J_y novel gernplasm,
Page 233 and 234:
drastícaIIy changed phenotype as t
Page 235 and 236:
should not be recomnended for produ
Page 237 and 238:
One of the problem
Page 239 and 240:
The associatíon between root growt
Page 241 and 242:
GENER¡.L DTSCUSS]ON Since desired
Page 243 and 244:
inheríted" observation of<
Page 245 and 246:
indicated by this study suggests th
Page 247 and 248:
individual lines. It is generally c
Page 249 and 250:
sístent suppLy of
Page 251 and 252:
possibílity of ir
Page 253 and 254:
Testing et one site for one year wa
Page 255 and 256:
height genotJpes t
Page 257 and 258:
ïn terms of the o
Page 259 and 260:
Concern has been expressed by dryla
Page 261 and 262:
), +. ( 6, 7, Attempts should be ma
Page 263 and 264:
Beech' D.F" and M.J.T, Norman. 196g
Page 265 and 266:
Day, A.D, and R.K. Thonpson, 1970.
Page 267 and 268:
Guitard, 4,4., J.A. Neûrnan, and p
Page 269 and 270:
Konishi, T. L976. The nature and ch
Page 271 and 272:
Pawlisch, P.E., and H.L. shandp. Lg
Page 273 and 274:
Sisler, I^I.I^I, and p.J. Olsen. 19
Page 275 and 276:
trIoodward, R.trI. 7956. The effect
Page 277 and 278:
Appetrdr*' cenotvprc ìlêans fot j
Page 279 and 280:
^ppendlx conrlnue¿- Genotype Plán
Page 281 and 282:
.9anul¡uor xlpuâd¡¡V ezro tzz ,
Page 283 and 284:
^pIe¡¡¿tx conrtnued. Solu It lß
Page 285:
¿\tÎen¿lr conÈtnu€d, .,¡ÃE
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?