Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T11:09:57.182Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors influencing the variation in canopy light extinction coefficient (k) among pisifera parents of two oil palm origins

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2024

Cornelis J. Breure Open the ORCID record for Cornelis J. Breure [Opens in a new window]
Cornelis J. Breure*
Affiliation:
PT. ASD-Bakrie Oil Palm Seed Indonesia, Kisaran, North Sumatra, Indonesia
*
Email: breurekees@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The canopy light extinction coefficient (k) is defined as the exponential decline in the amount of light passing through the leaf layers as a function of leaf area index (LAI). This definition is standard in oil palm breeding trials and models of canopy photosynthesis, where k is sometimes assumed to have a fixed value. The present experiment aims to validate the alleged constancy of k. Therefore, k was inferred from the fractional transmission of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and LAI, as obtained from dura x pisifera test crosses of Nigeria and Ghana pisifera origins. The palms were planted at two densities (135 and 160 palms ha−1) in North Sumatra in 2010. At the age of 7.5 years after planting, the area of newly opened leaves approached a maximum. Transmission of PAR remained very low and was only weakly related to k. By contrast, LAI exerted a strong negative effect on k, which generated, under both densities, considerable differences in k between both origins and among pisifera within an origin. The assumption of applying a fixed k value for a certain genotype or palm density, as obtained during leaf expansion at closed canopy, may therefore not be realistic. The present study suggests that the relationship of k with LAI over time merits further investigation, starting just before canopy closure.

Keywords

canopy extinction coefficientpisifera parentsoil palm progeniesleaf area expansionleaf area indexleaf anglePAR transmission
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 60 , 2024 , e14
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Breure, C.J. (1988). The effect of palm age and planting density on the partitioning of assimilates in oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.). Experimental Agriculture 24, 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breure, C.J. (2010). Rate of leaf expansion: a criterion for identifying oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) types suitable for planting at higher densities. NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 57, 141–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breure, C.J. and Siregar, M.M. (2020). Selection of oil palm male parents for optimal planting density estimated from mature crown surface. Journal of Oil Palm Research 32, 191–200.Google Scholar
Breure, C.J. and Siregar, M.M. (2021). Reassessing the estimation of leaf area in oil palm (Elaeis guineeensis Jacq.) by linear regression analysis. Experimental Agriculture 57, 1–10.Google Scholar
Corley, R.H.V. (2017). Genetic base of current breeding programs. In Soh, A.C., Mayes, S. and Jeremy, R. (eds.), Oil Palm Breeding – Genetic and Genomics. London: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 397–404.Google Scholar
Corley, R.H.V. and Tinker, P.B. (2017). The Oil Palm, 5th Edn. Oxford: Willey Blackwel, pp. 674.Google Scholar
Dufrene, E. (1989). Photosynthèse, consommation en eau et modèlisation de la production chez le palmier à huile (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.). Doctorate thesis, University of Paris Sud, Orsay.Google Scholar
Dufrene, E., Ochs, R. and Saugier, B. (1990). Oil palm photosynthesis and productivity linked to climatic factors. Oléagineux 45, 345–355.Google Scholar
Duncan, W.G. (1971). Leaf angles, leaf area and canopy phtosynthesis. Crop Science 11, 482–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerritsma, W. (1988) Light Interception, Leaf Photosynthesis and Sink-Source Relations in Oil Palm. The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University.Google Scholar
Hardon, J.J., Williams, C.N. and Watson, I. (1969). Leaf area and yield in the oil palm in Malaysia. Experimental Agriculture 5, 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henson, I.E. (2007). Modelling the effects of physiological and morphological characters on oil palm growth and productivity. Oil Palm Bulletin 54, 1–26.Google Scholar
Henson, I.E. and Chang, K.C. (2000). Oil palm productivity and its component processes. In Basiron, Y., Jalani, B.S. & Chan, K.W. (eds.), Advances in Oil Palm Research. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Palm Oil Board, Vol. I, pp. 97–145.Google Scholar
Lamade, E. and Setiyo, I.E. (1996). Test of Dufrêne’s production model on two contrasting families of oil palm in North Sumatra. In Ariffin, D., Rajanaido, N. & Jalani, B.S. (eds.), Proceedings of the 1996 PORIM International Palm Oil Congress ‘Competitiveness for the 21st Century’. Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Palm Oil Research Institute of Malaysia, pp. 427–435.Google Scholar
Monsi, M. and Saeki, T. (1953). Über den Lichtfaktor in den Pflanzengesellschaften und seine Bedeutung für die Stoffproduktion. Japanese Journal of Botany 14, 22–52.Google Scholar
Monteith, J.L and Unsworth, M.H. (1990). Principles of Environmental Physics, 2nd Edn. London: Edward Arnold, pp. 291.Google Scholar
Patterson, H.D., Williams, E.R. and Hunter, E.A. (1978). Block designs for variety trials. Journal of Agricultural Science, 90, 395–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajanaidu, N. and Zakri, A.H. (1988). Breeding for physiological traits in crop plants. In Zakri, A.H. (ed.), Plant Breeding and Genetic Engineering. Malaysia: SABRAO, pp. 117–140.Google Scholar
Rosenquist, E.A., Corley, R.H.V. and de Greef, W. (1990). Improvement of tenera populations using germplasm from breeding programmes in Cameroon and Zaire. In Proceedings of Workshop ‘Progress of Oil Palm Breeding Populations. Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Palm Oil Research Institute of Malaysia, pp. 37–69.Google Scholar
Ross, J. (1981). The Radiation Regime and Archetecture of Plant Stands. The Hague: Dr. W. Junk Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saeki, T. (1960). Interrelationship between leaf amount; light distribution and total photosynthesis in a plant community. Botanical Magazine 73, 55–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, G.R. (1984). Techniques in environmental physiology of oil palm: measurement of intercepted radiation. Palm Oil Research Institute of Malaysia, Bulletin 8, 10–13.Google Scholar
Tailliez, B. and Ballo Koffi, C. (1992). A method for measuring oil palm leaf area. Oleagineux 47, 537–545.Google Scholar
Verhagen, A.M.W., Wilson, J.H. and Britten, E.J. (1963). Plant production in relation to foliage illumination. Annals of Botany 27, 622–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar