4.3 Article

Agronomic evaluation and phenotypic plasticity of Camelina sativa growing in Lombardia, Italy

Journal

CROP & PASTURE SCIENCE
Volume 65, Issue 5, Pages 453-460

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/CP14025

Keywords

agronomic trait; ANOVA; biofuel feedstock; false flax

Funding

  1. 'Regione Lombardia' (Italy), agreement Regione/CNR, project 'Biological resources and innovative techniques for development of sustainable agro-food system'

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The agronomic performance of Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz (camelina or false flax) sown in autumn and spring over two consecutive years was tested in northern Italy. Seven C. sativa genotypes were tested and compared with rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). The main phenological stages and biometric traits were recorded, along with seed yield. In general, camelina showed a seed yield similar to that of rapeseed cultivated in the same locality and in the last decade in Italy. On average, the grain yields of camelina and rapeseed grown in the same location and conditions were similar to 1340 and 1625 kg ha(-1), respectively. The agronomic performance of camelina varied, with climatic events having a greater effect than sowing season or genotypes. Among the investigated genotypes, however, C. sativa accession CAM 40 was the most adaptable to unfavourable environmental conditions and CAM 172 to favourable conditions. With regard to the two sowing seasons, autumn planting allowed for better performance than spring planting during the second cultivation year. The phenotypic plasticity of camelina was estimated for the first time in the present work. Branching capability was the most plastic trait under favourable yielding conditions. Among the tested genotypes, CAM 40 showed limited yield plasticity and CAM 172 demonstrated high plasticity for the same trait, offering a greater potential for future genetic improvement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available