Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-5jtmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-03T21:03:30.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of changing plant density on floral initiation and development of barley (cv. Sultan)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. R. B. Leakey
R. R. B. Leakey
Affiliation:
School of Plant Biology, University College of North Wales, Bangor, Caerns.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Barley plants were grown at low, high, increasing and decreasing densities in an attempt to manipulate the environment. The effects on tiller production and development were measured.

Increasing density with time had less effect than decreasing it. Tiller number was the most plastic character, tiller production being earlier in those plants which emerged into low density, being delayed or inhibited in other treatments. The number of spikelets/ear and the length of the inflorescence were found to be less stable characters than the stage of ear development. Percentage spikelet survival showed a downward trend, with increasing density stress.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , August 1971 , pp. 135 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aspinall, D. (1961). The control of tillering in the barley plant. 1. The pattern of tillering and its relation to nutrient supply. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 14, 493–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, D. & Paleg, L. G. (1963). Effects of day length and light on growth of barley. 1. Growth and development of the apex with a fluorescent light source. Bot. Qaz. 124, 429–37.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, J. L. (1961). Approaches to the study of plant competition. In Mechanisms in Biological Competition, ed. Milthorpe, F. L.. Symp. Soc. exp. Biol. no. 15, pp. 1–39.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Faris, D. G. (1970). Plant population induced growth correlations in the barley plant main shoot and possible hormonal mechanisms. J. exp. Bot. 21, 787–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Large, E. C. & Dillon-Weston, W. A. R. (1951). Ear distortion in barley and other cereals caused by spraying with MCPA and 2,4-D. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 41, 338–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, A. C. (1949). The control of tillering in grasses by auxin. Am. J. Bot. 36, 437–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholls, P. B. & May, L. H. (1963). Studies on the growth of the barley apex. 1. Interrelationships between primordia formation, apex length and spikelet development. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 16, 561–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nösberger, J. & Thorne, G. N. (1965). The effect of removing florets on shading the ear of barley on production and distribution of dry matter. Ann. Bot. (N.S.) 29, 635–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paleg, L. G. & Aspinall, D. (1958). Inhibition of the development of the barley spike by gibberellic acid. Nature, Lond. 181 (4625), 1743–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinlan, J. D. & Sagar, G. R. (1965). Grain yield in two contrasting varieties of spring wheat. Ann. Bot. (N.S.) 29, 683–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorne, G. N., Ford, M. A. & Watson, D. J. (1968). Growth, development and yield of spring wheat in artificial climates. Ann. Bot. (N.S.), 32, 425–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardell, W. L. & Skoog, F. (1969). Flower formation in excised tobacco stem segments. 1. Methodology and effects of plant hormones. Pl. Physiol., Lancaster 44, 1402–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wynn Parry, D. (1956). The effects of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, 2,3,5-tri-lodobenzoic acid and thiourea on the vegetative and reproductive growth of Avena sativa. J. exp. Bot. 7, 381–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar