1967
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2494.1967.tb00511.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Grass Growth in Midsummer and Light Interception and Growth Rate of a Perennial Ryegrass Sward

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

1968
1968
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Net pasture production was not related to allowance in either year. This supports other New Zealand (Tainton 1974;Marsh 1978) and overseas data (Anslow 1965;Anslow & Back 1967;Jackson 1974) showing that initial yield or leaf area index does not greatly aIter subsequent growth; but contrasts with some other New Zealand workers (Brougham 1956;Brougham & Glenday 1967;Jagusch & Rattray 1977) who found a positive relationship between pasture production and initial yield. Longer term effects…”
Section: Immediate Effectssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Net pasture production was not related to allowance in either year. This supports other New Zealand (Tainton 1974;Marsh 1978) and overseas data (Anslow 1965;Anslow & Back 1967;Jackson 1974) showing that initial yield or leaf area index does not greatly aIter subsequent growth; but contrasts with some other New Zealand workers (Brougham 1956;Brougham & Glenday 1967;Jagusch & Rattray 1977) who found a positive relationship between pasture production and initial yield. Longer term effects…”
Section: Immediate Effectssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…When the increase in cut herbage in fertilized swards is plotted against interception, initial rates of increase are seen to be considerable at a time when overall top growth is negative. This exaggerated growth in the early stages is the result of a physical transfer of material from below to above the cutting horizon, a situation also noted by Anslow & Back (1967). Consideration of cut herbage only thus tends to produce a degree of flattening in the curve of production against time, and could lead in some circumstances to the impression that growth was linear in character.…”
Section: Crop Growth Rate and Light Interceptionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…To get an accurate estimate of dwjdt one must either fit a cosmetic smoothing curve (Putter, Yaron & Bielorai, 1966) to the raw data or use massive samples. The controversy between Anslow and Back (1967) and Brougham & Glenday (1967), shows that the estimates of growth analysis parameters which are drawn from the use of a smoothing equation depend as much on the initial choice and testing of the equation as on the actual growth of the crop. Estimates from our data have shown that with peas, to have a 95 % chance of estimating NAR with an accuracy of 1 g/m a /day would, with a sample of twenty plants from hand-planted plots, require at least thirty replicates.…”
Section: Lw = Asvfi (Equationmentioning
confidence: 99%