Breeding for quality in cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.)

Dijk, G. E. Van

doi:10.1007/bf00022089

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Improving forage quality has been a major breeding objective in cocksfoot since the 1960s (van Dijk 1959). The correlation of forage yield with neutral detergent fiber (NDF) concentration was positive and, consequently, with in vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) was negative (Stratton et al 1979) but the situation is not always clear-cut (see Casler et al 2002).…”

Section: Specific Goals In Current Breedingmentioning

confidence: 96%

Cocksfoot

Yukitoshi¹,

Gras²,

Santen³

2010

Fodder Crops and Amenity Grasses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Specific Goals In Current Breedingmentioning

confidence: 96%

Cocksfoot

Yukitoshi¹,

Gras²,

Santen³

2010

Fodder Crops and Amenity Grasses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Trichomes also may provide grasses with a specific defense mechanism against excessive grazing by ruminants (Levin, 1973). Orchardgrass genotypes are known to possess various degrees of siliceous dentation along their leaf blade margins (Van Dijk, 1959), but the role of these dentations in the evolution of orchardgrass has not been studied. Reed canarygrass genotypes without alkaloids and orchardgrass genotypes without silicious dentations have not yet been discovered or developed, and plants with extremely low levels of these traits are very rare (Marten, 1973;Van Dijk, 1959).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Orchardgrass genotypes are known to possess various degrees of siliceous dentation along their leaf blade margins (Van Dijk, 1959), but the role of these dentations in the evolution of orchardgrass has not been studied. Reed canarygrass genotypes without alkaloids and orchardgrass genotypes without silicious dentations have not yet been discovered or developed, and plants with extremely low levels of these traits are very rare (Marten, 1973;Van Dijk, 1959). Palatability of alkaloid-free reed canarygrass genotypes and siliceous dentation-free orchardgrass genotypes may be so high that these genotypes were unfit to reproduce in grazed grasslands, either sexually or asexually, and they were lost or reduced to extremely low frequencies in natural populations prior to the advent of germplasm collection and plant breeding.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Germplasm and Cultivar Development

Casler

Pedersen

Eizenga

et al. 2015

Cool-Season Forage Grasses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cool-season forage grasses have evolved, and continue to evolve, in natural ecosystems subject to environmental factors both in the presence and absence of human influences. The literature often lacks facts describing the evolution and domestication of forage grasses. Furthermore, the literature on this subject mainly deals with evolution of species in the broad scope, i.e., on a scale of hundreds of thousands or millions or years. Thus, some of our conclusions are necessarily speculative and are highly subject to the nature of the research that has been reported. We describe the forces of selection that act upon cool-season forage grasses and attempt to place each in historical perspective and in relation to each other. Because most economically important cool-season forage grasses are perennial, our principal focus will be on perennial species. There has been very little effort to quantify economic values of selection criteria or to empirically compare different breeding procedures in cool-season forage grasses. We attempt to summarize and compare some of the more important and thoroughly reported approaches used since the advent of formal breeding strategies in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These selection criteria and breeding procedures are as varied as the individual researchers who developed them. Examples are cited to illustrate principles and phenomena of historical or practical importance. More details of the agriculturally important species are discussed in the later chapters of this book. Space limitations prevent 1 Common names for plants have been used throughout the chapter. Refer to the appendix for the scientific name.

show abstract

“…There are no reports of the presence of animal toxins in cocksfoot, but it is lesi nutritious and palatable than phalaris or ryegrass (Van Dijk 1959;Cooper et al 1962;Axelson & Morley 1968;Orarn 1991 ), and it appears to lose feed value more rapidly than other species if it is allowed to mature without being grazed in spring (Bland & Dent 1964). Davies (1976) noted that the in vitro digestibility of cocksfoot was about 10% lower than that of perennial ryegrass.…”

Section: Forage Valuementioning

confidence: 99%