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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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

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) indicated 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
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: the effect of seed
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 and 120:
latlê 28. Nltrogen ¡'ertlllrer Ap
Page 121 and 122:
Sanford â.nd Carnan, 1926, Since N
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?