Barley response to seeding date in central Alberta

Abstract

Juskiw, P. E. and Helm, J. H. 2003. Barley response to seeding date in central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 83: 275-281. Seeding date is an important factor influencing productivity of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). When conditions are conducive to early seeding or result in delayed seeding, producers need to know how cultivars will respond to these seeding situations. In this study, five cultivars (Abee, Harrington, Jackson, Noble and Virden) registered for western Canada were studied for 4 yr (1990 to 1993) when seeded early (late April or early May), in mid-May, in late-May, or late (mid-June) at Lacombe, AB. For all cultivars, early seeding resulted in grain yield advantages of 113 to 134% of the mean site yield, while with late seeding, grain yields were reduced to 54 to 76% of the mean site yield. The reduction in yield was least for Jackson, the earliest maturing cultivar tested. Late seeding reduced the period from sowing to emergence, vegetative period, grain-filling period, time from emergence to physiological maturity, test weight, grain yield, kernel weight, and tillers per plant; and increased plant height and percent thins. Late seeding had no significant effect on phyllochron, stand establishment, scald, lodging, protein content of the grain, kernel number per spike, and spikelet number per spike. Barley responded positively to early seeding in central Alberta, but when seeding was delayed (in this study to mid-June) the early and mid-maturing six-rowed cultivars with short phyllochrons performed better than the two-rowed and late six-rowed cultivars.Key words: Hordeum vulgare L., seeding rate, phenological development, grain quality, grain yield, components Juskiw, P. E. et Helm. 2003. Réaction de l'orge à la date des semis dans le centre de l'Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 83: 275-281. La date des semis influe considérablement sur le rendement de l'orge (Hordeum vulgare L.). Quand les conditions autorisent des semis hâtifs ou retardent ces derniers, il est essentiel de savoir comment les cultivars réagiront. Dans le cadre de cette étude, les auteurs ont examiné cinq cultivars (Abee, Harrington, Jackson, Noble et Virden) homologués pour l'ouest du Canada pendant quatre ans (de 1990 à 1993) et semés hâtivement (fin avril ou début mai), à la mi-mai, à la fin de mai ou tardivement (mi-juin) à Lacombe (Alberta). Les semis hâtifs augmentent le rendement grainier de tous les cultivars de 113 à 134 % comparativement au rendement moyen à cet endroit tandis que les semis tardifs le diminuent de 54 à 76 %. La baisse de rendement était la moins forte pour Jackson, le cultivar le plus précoce. Les semis tardifs réduisent le laps de temps entre la mise en terre et la levée, la période de croissance, la période de remplissage du grain, le laps de temps de la levée à la maturité physiologique, le poids spécifique, le rendement grainier, le poids de l'amande et le nombre de talles par plant; ils augmentent la hauteur du plant et le pourcentage d'éclaircissage. Les semis tardifs n'ont aucune incidence sensible sur le...

Pre-emergence mechanical weed control in field pea (Pisum sativum L.)

“…Similar wild oat reductions were reported in rapeseed (Brassica rapa L.) (Darwent and Smith 1985). Delayed seeding may be effective in controlling some weed species, but it normally results in lower yields for many crops, including spring wheat (Cutforth et al 1990), barley (Juskiw and Helm 2003), canaryseed (Phalaris canariensis L.) (Miller 2000), pulse crops (Gan et al 2002), and Brassica species (Brandt 1992;Kirkland and Johnson 2000).…”

Leaf development in two-row spring barley under long-day and short-day field conditions

“…Miralles et al (2001), however, found no relationship between final leaf number and the leaf number at which the phyllochron change occurred. Jedel andHelm (1993, 1994), Juskiw et al (2001) and Juskiw and Helm (2003) have previously reported little genotypic variation in the phyllochron of two-row spring barley growing on the prairies of central Alberta, although differences in six-row spring barley were found. Using a wider genetic base in this study, we conclude that variation in phyllochron of two-row spring barley can occur and that the lack of genotypic variation observed previously is related to the narrow range of flowering dates of the two-row cultivars studied.…”

“…We found under both short and long days that phyllochron of two-row barley using either linear model estimates or bilinear model estimates of the early-forming leaves were positively associated with time to awn emergence. Juskiw and Helm (2003) did however, note a positive association between phyllochron and flowering date in sixrow barley.…”

“…Field studies, however, in the long-day environment of central Alberta generally show very little genotypic difference in the phyllochron for two-row cultivars, although differences were found for six-row cultivars (Jedel and Helm 1993;Jedel and Helm 1994;Juskiw et al 2001;Juskiw and Helm 2003).…”

“…and barley from seedling emergence to the appearance of the flag leaf (Kirby et al 1982;Kirby 1985;Kirby et al 1985;Kirby and Perry 1987; Bauer et al 1988; Cao and Moss 1989;van Oosterom and Acevedo 1992;Kaveeta 1993;Jedel and Helm 1994;Slafer et al 1994;Kernich et al 1995b; Sharratt 1999;Kamali and Boyd 2000;Juskiw et al 2001;Juskiw and Helm 2003).…”