Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bvgqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T12:02:52.604Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and yield of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) crops in response to CO2 and temperature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

T. R. Wheeler ,
G. R. Batts ,
R. H. Ellis ,
P. Hadley  and
J. I. L. Morison
T. R. Wheeler
Affiliation:
Departments of AgricultureThe University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK MeteorologyThe University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK Horticulture, The University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK
G. R. Batts
Affiliation:
Departments of AgricultureThe University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK MeteorologyThe University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK Horticulture, The University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK
R. H. Ellis
Affiliation:
Departments of AgricultureThe University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK
P. Hadley
Affiliation:
Horticulture, The University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK
J. I. L. Morison
Affiliation:
MeteorologyThe University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Crops of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L. cv. Hereward) were grown within temperature gradient tunnels at a range of temperatures at either c. 350 or 700 μmol mol−1 CO2 in 1991/92 and 1992/93 at Reading, UK. At terminal spikelet stage, leaf area was 45% greater at elevated CO2 in the first year due to more tillers, and was 30% greater in the second year due to larger leaf areas on the primary tillers. At harvest maturity, total crop biomass was negatively related to mean seasonal temperature within each year and CO2 treatment, due principally to shorter crop durations at the warmer temperatures. Biomass was 6–31% greater at elevated compared with normal CO2 and was also affected by a positive interaction between temperature and CO2 in the first year only. Seed yield per unit area was greater at cooler temperatures and at elevated CO2 concentrations. A 7–44% greater seed dry weight at elevated CO2 in the first year was due to more ears per unit area and heavier grains. In the following year, mean seed dry weight was increased by > 72% at elevated CO2, because grain numbers per ear did not decline with an increase in temperature at elevated CO2. Grain numbers were reduced by temperatures > 31 °C immediately before anthesis at normal atmospheric CO2 in 1992/93, and at both CO2 concentrations in 1991/92. To quantify the impact of future climates of elevated CO2 concentrations and warmer temperatures on wheat yields, consideration of both interactions between CO2 and mean seasonal temperature, and possible effects of instantaneous temperatures on yield components at different CO2 concentrations are required. Nevertheless, the results obtained suggest that the benefits to winter wheat grain yield from CO2 doubling are offset by an increase in mean seasonal temperature of only 1·0 °C to 1·8 °C in the UK.

Information

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 127 , Issue 1 , August 1996 , pp. 37 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Al-Khatib, K. & Paulsen, G. M. (1984). Mode of high temperature injury to wheat during grain development. Physiologia Plantarum 61, 363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashenden, T. W., Baxter, R. & Rafarel, C. R. (1992). An inexpensive system for exposing plants in the field to elevated concentrations of CO2. Plant, Cell and Environment 15, 365–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batts, G. R., Wheeler, T. R., Morison, J. I. L., Ellis, R. H. & Hadley, P. (1996). Developmental and tillering responses of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) crops to CO2 and temperature. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 127, 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowes, G. (1993). Facing the inevitable: plants and increasing atmospheric CO2. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology 44, 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifford, S. C., Stronach, I. M., Mohamed, A. D., Azam-Ali, S. N. & Crout, N. M. J. (1993). The effects of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide and water stress on light interception, dry matter production and yield in stands of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Experimental Botany 44, 1763–1770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gifford, R. M. (1992). Interaction of carbon dioxide and growth-limiting environmental factors in vegetation productivity: implications for the global carbon cycle. Advances in Bioclimatology 1, 24–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gifford, R. M. & Rawson, H. M. (1993). Investigation of wild and domesticated vegetation in CO2 enriched glasshouses. In Design and Execution of Experiments on CO2 Enrichment (Eds Schulze, E.-D. & Mooney, H. A.), pp. 147–165, Ecosystems Research Report Series No. 6, Commission of the EC, Brussels.Google Scholar
Goudriaan, J. & de Ruiter, H. E. (1983). Plant growth in response to CO2 enrichment, at two levels of nitrogen and phosphorus supply. 1. Dry matter, leaf area and development. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 31, 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goudriaan, J. & Unsworth, M. H. (1990) Implications of increasing carbon dioxide and climate change for agricultural productivity and water resources. In Impact of Carbon Dioxide, Trace Gases, and Climate Change on Global Agriculture. Special Publication No. 53. (Eds Kimball, B. A., Rosenberg, N. J. & Allen, L. H.), pp. 111–130. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Hadley, P., Batts, G. R., Ellis, R. H., Morison, J. I. L., Pearson, S. & Wheeler, T. R. (1995). Temperature gradient chambers for research on global environment change. II. A twin-wall tunnel system for low-stature, field-grown crops using a split heat pump. Plant, Cell and Environment 18, 1055–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havelka, U. D., Wittenbach, V. A. & Boyle, M. G. (1984). CO2-enrichment effects on wheat yield and physiology. Crop Science 24, 1163–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houghton, J. T., Callander, B. A. & Varney, S. K. (1992). Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Idso, K. E. & Idso, S. B. (1994). Plant responses to atmospheric CO2 enrichment in the face of environmental constraints: a review of the past 10 years' research. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 69, 153–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idso, S. B., Kimball, B. A., Anderson, M. G. & Mauney, J. R. (1987). Effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on plant growth: the interactive role of air temperature. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 20, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Seed Testing Association (1993 a). International rules for seed testing. Rules 1993. Seed Science and Technology 21, Supplement, 1–75.Google Scholar
International Seed Testing Association (1993 b). International rules for seed testing. Annex 1993. Seed Science and Technology 21, Supplement, 77–288.Google Scholar
Kimball, B. A. (1983). Carbon dioxide and agricultural yield: an assemblage and analysis of 430 prior observations. Agronomy Journal 75, 779–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirschbaum, M. U. F. (1994). The sensitivity of C3 photosynthesis to increasing CO2 concentration: a theoretical analysis of its dependence on temperature and background CO2 concentration. Plant, Cell and Environment 17, 747–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krenzer, E. G. Jr, & Moss, D. N. (1975). Carbon dioxide enrichment effects upon yield and yield components in wheat. Crop Science 15, 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, S. P. (1991). Modification of the response of photosynthetic productivity to rising temperature by atmospheric CO2 concentrations: Has its importance been underestimated? Plant, Cell and Environment 14, 729–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mauney, J. R., Kimball, B. A., Pinter, P. J. Jr, Lamorte, R. L., Lewin, K. F., Nagy, J. & Hendrey, G. R. (1994). Growth and yield of cotton in response to a free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE) environment. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 70, 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milton, E. J. (1987). Principles of field spectroscopy. International Journal of Remote Sensing 8, 1807–1827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R. A. C., Mitchell, V. J., Driscoll, S. P., Franklin, J. & Lawlor, D. W. (1993). Effects of increased CO2 concentration and temperature on growth and yield of winter wheat at two levels of nitrogen application. Plant, Cell and Environment 16, 521–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morison, J. I. L. & Gifford, R. M. (1984). Plant growth and water use with limited water supply in high CO2 concentrations. II. Plant dry weight, partitioning and water use efficiency. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 11, 375–384.Google Scholar
Parry, M. L. (1990). Climate Change and World Agriculture. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Pearcy, R. W. & Björkman, O. (1983). Physiological effects. In CO2 and Plants, the Response of Plants to Rising Levels of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (Ed. Lemon, E. R.), pp. 65–105. Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Rawson, H. M. (1992). Plant responses to temperature under conditions of elevated CO2. Australian Journal of Botany 40, 473–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slonit, N., Mortensen, D. A., Strain, B. R. & Hellmers, H. (1981). Growth response of wheat to CO2 enrichment and different levels of mineral nutrition. Agronomy Journal 73, 1023–1027.Google Scholar
Slafer, G. A. & Rawson, H. M. (1994). Sensitivity of wheat phasic development to major environmental factors: a reexamination of some assumptions made by physiologists and modellers. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 21, 393–426.Google Scholar
Smart, D. R., Chatterton, N. J. & Bugbee, B. (1994). The influence of elevated CO2 on non-structural carbohydrate distribution and fructan accumulation in wheat canopies. Plant, Cell and Environment 17, 435–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steven, M. D., Biscoe, P. V. & Jaggard, K. W. (1983). Estimation of sugar beet productivity from reflection in the red and infrared spectral bands. International Journal of Remote Sensing 4, 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tashiro, T. & Wardlaw, I. F. (1990). The response to high temperature shock and humidity changes prior to and during the early stages of grain development in wheat. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 17, 551–561.Google Scholar
Teramura, A. H., Sullivan, J. H. & Ziska, L. H. (1990). Interaction of elevated ultraviolet-B radiation and CO2 on productivity and photosynthetic characteristics in wheat, rice, and soybean. Plant Physiology 94, 470–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, G. B. & Woodward, F. I. (1994). Some influences of CO2 enrichment, nitrogen nutrition and competition on grain yield and quality in spring wheat and barley. Journal of Experimental Botany 45, 937–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorne, G. N. & Wood, D. W. (1987). Effects of radiation and temperature on tiller survival, grain number and grain yield in winter wheat. Annals of Botany 59, 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardlaw, I. F., Dawson, I. A., Munibi, P. & Fewster, R. (1989 a). The tolerance of wheat to high temperatures during reproductive growth. I. Survey procedures and general response patterns. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 40, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardlaw, I. F., Dawson, I. A. & Munibi, P. (1989 b). The tolerance of wheat to high temperatures during reproductive growth. II. Grain development. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 40, 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, T. R., Morison, J. I. L., Ellis, R. H. & Hadley, P. (1994). Effects of CO2, temperature and their interaction on the growth and yield of carrot (Daucus carota L.). Plant, Cell and Environment 17, 1275–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, T. R., Ellis, R. H., Hadley, P. & Morison, J. I. L. (1995). Effects of CO2, temperature and their interaction on the growth, development and yield of cauliflower (Brassica oleracea L. botrytis). Scientia Horticulturae 60, 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar