Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T10:35:46.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Relationships between the responses of spring wheat genotypes to temperature and photoperiodic treatments and their performance in the field

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Margaret A. Ford
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge
R. B. Austin
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge
W. J. Angus
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge
G. C. M. Sage
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge

Summary

Thirty-eight spring wheat genotypes of north temperate or low latitude origin, all reasonably well adapted to the English environment, were grown in controlled environments providing the four combinations of 10 and 14 h photoperiods and temperatures of 8 and 16 °C for 6 weeks. They were then transferred to a glasshouse to assess their responses to these treatments. In separate experiments the responses of the genotypes to vernalization for 2 and 4 weeks at 2 and 8 °C were compared with unvernalized controls. The genotypes were also compared in field experiments from early, intermediate or late sowing over 3 years.

Both high temperatures and long days hastened ear emergence. At the higher temperature more leaves and spikelets were produced on the main stem while in long days the plants had fewer leaves and spikelets.

Most genotypes of north temperate and low latitude origin were responsive to photoperiod but not to the vernalization treatments. As a group, the low latitude ones were as responsive as the north temperate group. Five genotypes of north temperate origin were responsive to vernalization but not to photoperiod and were designated as ‘winter’ ones. Pitic 62 and Hork, from low latitudes, were responsive to vernalization and Hork was unique in also being responsive to photoperiod. The main difference between the north temperate and low latitude genotypes was in time to ear emergence and it is suggested that these differences were due to the effects of earliness genes as distinct from those determining photoperiodic response.

Taking all genotypes individually there were no correlations between yield or its sensitivity to sowing date and any of the attributes measured in controlled environments. However, considering class means, the winter genotypes were the latest to reach ear emergence in the field, and their yields, while greatest from the earliest sowings, were proportionally more depressed by late sowing than the others of the north temperate origin. Thus, it may be unwise for plant breeders to incorporate a vernalization response in spring wheat varieties unless genes for ‘earliness’ are also included. The low latitude class gave only slightly lower yields than the north temperate class.

It is concluded that genes other than those controlling responses to photoperiod, temperature and vernalization were more important determinants of the differences in yield among this set of genotypes.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Austin, R. B. & Blackwell, R. D. (1980). Edge and neighbour effects in cereal yield trials. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 731773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finlay, K. W. & Wilkinson, G. N. (1963). The analysis of adaptation in a plant-breeding programme. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 742— 754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halloran, G. M. (1976). Genes for vernalization response in homoeologous group 5 of Triticum aestivum. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 18, 211216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halloran, G. M. & Boydell, C. W. (1967 a). Wheat chromosomes with genes for photoperiodic response. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 9, 394398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halloran, G. M. & Boydell, C. W. (1967 b). Wheat chromosomes with genes for vernalization response. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 9, 632639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halse, N. J. & Weir, R. N. (1970). Effeots of vernalization, photoperiod and temperature on phenologioal development and spikelet number of Australian wheat. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 21, 383393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, C. N., Sutka, J. & Worland, A. J. (1978). A genetic study of daylength response in wheat. Heredity 41, 185191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, C. N., Worland, A. J. & Giorgi, B. (1976). The genetio oontrol of ear-emergence time by chromosomes 5A and 5D of wheat. Heredity 36, 4958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahman, M. S. & Wilson, J. H. (1977). Determination of spikelet number in wheat. I. Effect of varying photoperiod on ear development. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 28, 565574.Google Scholar
Wall, P. C. & Cartwright, P. M. (1974). Effects of photoperiod, temperature and vernalization on the phenology and spikelet numbers of spring wheats. Annals of Applied Biology 76, 299309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar