Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-20T23:00:51.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of seed type and plant density on variation in plant size of red beet (Beta vulgaris L.) crops

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

L. R. Benjamin  and
N. Bell
L. R. Benjamin
Affiliation:
National Vegetable Research Station, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CF35 9EF
N. Bell
Affiliation:
National Vegetable Research Station, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CF35 9EF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In each of three experiments, five seed lots, representing multigerm, monogerm, open pollinated and hybrid types, were grown at three plant densities and the time of seedling emergence, uniformity of within-row spacing, the weight of individual shoots and roots at four occasions were recorded.

Seedling emergence was more rapid in a May-sown experiment than in a March-sown experiment. The monogerm seed lot had a lower standard deviation of emergence time in the May-sown experiment and in all experiments had a more uniform within-row spacing than the other seed lots, but there was no consistent relationship between these two attributes and uniformity of root weight.

The mean weight of shoots and roots increased rapidly until 600 day °C above 6 had accumulated. The yield of shoots then remained constant at about 30 t/ha at 47 plants/ m2 and at about 40 t/ha at 188 plants/m2. The weight of roots increased throughout the experiments and yields of over 100 t/ha were achieved. The monogerm seed lot gave a ceiling shoot yield about 20% less than that of the other seed lots, whereas there were no large or consistent differences in root yield between the different seed lots. Shoot yield increased with plant density, especially at very early harvests, whereas root yield showed a variable response to density. At early harvests in all experiments, root yield increased with increasing density; at late harvests in one experiment, yield de-creased with density, but in another there was no marked response to density.

Coefficient of variation (c.v.) of root weight was only about 30% in young unthickened roots, but in older thickened roots was between 70 and 117% at 47 plants/m2, and in-creased to over 180% at 188 plants/m2. The c.v. of root weight of the monogerm seed lot was approximately 20% less than that of the other seed lots.

In a fourth experiment, plots were thinned to leave within each row either a uniform or a clumped distribution of seedlings of either uniform or variable size. Uniformity of spacing had no effect on variation in root weight 126 days after sowing, but selecting for seedlings of uniform size reduced the c.v. of root weight by approximately 20%.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 105 , Issue 3 , December 1985 , pp. 563 - 571
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

Benjamin, L. R. (1984 a). The relative importance of some sources of root-weight variation in a carrot crop. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102, 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, L. R. (1984 b). The relative importance of some different sources of plant-weight variation in drilled and transplanted leeks. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 527–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, L. R., Sutherland, R. A. & Senior, D. (1985). The influence of sowing rate and row spacing on the plant density and yield of red beet. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 104, 615–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. N. & Wilkinson, G. N. (1963). The role of time of emergence in determining the growth of individual plants in swards of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 628–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewster, J. L. & Salter, P. J. (1980). A comparison of the effects of regular versus random within-row spacing on the yield and uniformity of size of spring-sown bulb onions. Journal of Horticultural Science 55, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowker, B. D. (1978). A new approach to breeding for uniformity in competitive row crops. Biuletyn Warzywniczy 22, 161–170.Google Scholar
Ehnrot, B. (1965). Field properties of sugar-beet seed and considerations on the mechanization of the thinning. Socket 20, 19–38.Google Scholar
Finch-Savage, W. E. (1984). A comparison of seedling emergence from dry-sown and fluid-drilled carrot seeds. Journal of Horticultural Science 59, 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorham, E. (1979). Shoot height, weight and standing crop in relation to density of monospecific plant stands. Nature, London 279, 148–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, D. (1976). The effect of time to emergence on head weight and variation in head weight at maturity in lettuce (Lactuca sativa). Annals of Applied Biology 82, 569–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegarty, T. W. & Thompson, R. (1974). Red beet. Scottish Horticultural Research Institute Annual Re-port for 1973, pp. 26–27.Google Scholar
Ross, M. A. & Harper, J. L. (1972). Occupation of bio-logical space during seedling establishment. Journal of Ecology 60, 77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salter, P. J., Currah, I. E. & Fellows, J. R. (1981). Studies on some sources of variation in carrot root weight. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 96, 549–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweisguth, B. (1970). Preliminary studies for the improvement of leek Allium porrum L. Proposal for a breeding method. Annales de l'amélioration des plantes 20, 215–231.Google Scholar
Snyder, F. W. & Filban, C. (1970). Relation of sugar beet seedling emergence to fruit size. Journal of the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists 15, 703–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soetono, & Donald, C. M. (1980). Emergence, growth and dominance in drilled and square-planted barley crops. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 31, 455–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soetono, & Puckridge, D. W. (1982). The effect of density and plant arrangement on the performance of individual plants in barley and wheat crops. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 33, 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, W. R. (1965). The effect of density on the performance of individual plants in subterranean clover swards. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 16, 541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D. W., Longden, P. C. & Scott, R. K. (1977). Seed size variation; its extent, source and significance in field crops. Seed Science and Technology 5, 337–352.Google Scholar